If the government introduced its so-called Commonwealth Integrity Commission, a body supposed to be its answer to a New South Wales-style Independent Commission Against Corruption, we may know even less about the alleged misuse of taxpayer funds by Assistant Treasurer Michael Sukkar than we do now.
Why? Because as Crikey has noted several times over the past year, Prime Minister Scott Morrison and former attorney-general Christian Porter created a commission that is not just a toothless tiger but a dangerous shield for the politically corrupt.
It was the same damning point made by former federal judge Michael Barker QC in last night’s 60 Minutes investigation that revealed allegations Sukkar was well aware of taxpayers’ dollars being used to pay his friend, younger brother and factional supporters for Liberal Party purposes.
When asked if the government’s proposed integrity commission would shield federal MPs from being investigated over allegations such as those levelled at Sukkar, Barker did not mince his words: “That is the way it has been designed.”
It’s a blistering indictment of where we now stand: a government unashamedly proposing to introduce a body that would allow corrupt MPs to sweep their own rotten conduct under the rug, all under the guise of a “corruption watchdog”.
How could Morrison’s proposed commission be misused in the case of the Sukkar allegations?
Under the CIC bill, the only person who has the legal power to refer an allegation is that member of Parliament. So Sukkar — someone who made “strong representations” to block the release of a Finance Department report into his own conduct — would have to dob himself in. The CIC has no powers to institute an investigation; not even the attorney-general can step in and refer a matter.
But let’s say that Sukkar did just that. Even then, the body would be required to investigate the conduct only if it believed the MP was committing an actual criminal offence. Mere corruption is not enough to warrant an inquiry, in direct contrast to state integrity commissions. Even then, the proposed commission would investigate everything behind closed doors and without any requirement to produce a final report.
But Barker’s point shows that Morrison’s CIC is not just a laughable toothless tiger. It is a dangerous weapon for the corrupt.
As Crikey wrote more than a year ago, an MP accused of the same conduct as Sukkar could use the CIC to their benefit to evade scrutiny. In this scenario, the MP would refer themselves to the CIC but control exactly what was referred and how it was done, potentially restricting an inquiry to exactly what they want it confined to.
The latest federal government scandal not only boosts the case for a federal integrity commission, it shines a light on just how dangerous the government’s proposed body would be. Even if it’s never introduced, we should be asking how it came to be created.
Elsewhere in today’s Crikey is an article about Albanese not making enough noise. Corruption is surely the perfect issue here. Yes of course the Coalition would respond with “What about” and “They do it too”.
To which Albanese should say “Not any more. An appropriately tasked and funded Integrity Commission established by Labor will look at all parties on both sides and the cross benches. Here is what we are proposing. It has been backed by the Independents. It’s time for Australia to Sack Sleazy Scotty.”
I’d like Albanese to do that, but describing it as an ‘ideal’ issue for Labor is a big stretch. Telling the electorate “We’ll tackle corruption seriously, even though we have often been guilty of it, because the Coalition is a lot worse, really it is. And please trust Labor to be good from now on, we’ve changed, honestly we have,” is the sort of message that easily fails to be clear and convincing, and would need a lot of luck to get by without being derailed by some badly timed Labor scandal erupting, even if it does not sink under the predictable cynical and mendacious attacks from the Coalition, its media friends and all the vested interests who agree corruption is just what they want to make the wheels go round.
Vaguely remember something about power corrupting. The current feds are”Gold Standard” with a sash
Democracy has a self-cleaning function, which it no longer employs, to weed out the corrupt and display that it has done so. This renews the strength of a democracy. When that no longer happens, public trust in the system erodes. To me Labor looks a lot closer to re-establishing democracy’s self-cleansing mechanisms than the LNP.
Commonwealth Integrity Commission (CIC) Bill.
Amendment: delete “Commonwealth Integrity Commission (CIC)”, insert “Corruption Facilitation Agency (CFA)”
Back in the day, when Mike Carlton did his excoriatingly excellent skits on 2GB, he created the Crime Marketing Board.
“Gold Standard” protection for the guilty with a big dip into the public purse to help the rorters stay in control.
Oh for an ICAC with all the medical conditions such as no teeth. no heart, no stomach, and no balls removed from its terms of reference.
I have called all the Libs who are for a ICAC investigation.
Of course it will be as phoney as a $3 bill, It would be limited to what it can investigate and would be disallowed to investigate dirty dealings within Parliament.
That conga line of corrupt Pollies would snake it’s way all around Australia ( Federal and State)
It would probably take years just to investigate Morrison alone.
That is why it would be a toothless tiger, a useless waste of taxpayer money ( which this Goveenmentis good at)
How exactly are the government selling this “refer yourself” system of oversight? What possible reason could there be for self-reportage to be the only referral system? Our dear Deputy Prime Minister Joyce has often reminded the citizenry that we would be foolish to trust politicians – why on earth should we trust them with this.
Sounds as useful as the AFL’s self-reporting illicit drugs regime – but with far more dire consequences. I’m also reminded of the police investigating the police in the ill-fated OPI… surely we have learned this doesn’t work? We need the separation of powers to be just that – especially when it comes to the clearly rampant corruption at work in east-coast politics.
I do not like to quote the evil and the ignorant when looking for solutions but it really is time to drain the cesspit. Maybe a minority government with more independents would be less corrupted by vested interest and fossil fuel lobby groups who seem to run the decision-making in Canberra.
It’s hardly surprising, and the AFL example shows, how far radical right libertarian ideology has seeped into Australian politics, business and society, look after number one.
We are the ‘new Americans’ (with British) where the conservative side of politics is helping to implement radical right libertarian policies i.e. no or fewer (self) regulatory constraints on business and MPs, marketed by media as societal or democratic ‘freedom & liberty’.
I noticed Morrison on the news saying he didnt want an ICAC on the NSW model. I can see why. It actually holds pollies to account. The last thing he wants. Same with his caucus of crims. The SA pollies, of both colours are similarly shy of accountability and watered down their ICAC. Being a South Australian I am now considering my vote in relation to the incumbant.
Well, well – Morrison for once telling the truth, wonders will never cease. Yes, seeing Berejeklian being required in public and on the record to answer questions under oath will have reinforced the determination of many federal politicians to resist to the death any form of federal commission with such powers. Just as it will will have reinforced the belief that such a commission is absolutely necessary among all who want some semblance of accountability for federal politicians.