Wednesday, 17 August 2022

Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission Amendment (Restoration of Powers) Bill 2022

Statement of compatibility

Mr DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan—Leader of the Opposition) (10:10): I lay on the table the statement of compatibility with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006:

In accordance with section 28 of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (the Charter), I make this statement of compatibility with respect to the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission Amendment (Restoration of Powers) Bill 2022 (the Bill).

In my opinion, the Bill, as introduced to the Legislative Council, is compatible with the human rights protected by the Charter.

I note that this Bill, the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission Amendment (Restoration of Powers) Bill 2022, restores powers to the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission that were removed by the Parliament in 2019. To the extent that these restored powers mirror precisely powers that were removed, I would argue that the Bill and its impact on Charter rights is consistent with the earlier arrangements that were accepted by the Parliament.

It is my view that sufficient protections exist to protect Charter rights consistent with the objectives of the IBAC in rooting out corruption and ensuring clean government and that public money is not wasted or squandered through corrupt practices.

The IBAC has been shown to exercise its powers responsibly and with an awareness of the relevant rights.

David Davis MP

17 August 2022

Second reading

Mr DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan—Leader of the Opposition) (10:10): I move:

That the bill be now read a second time.

The Andrews Labor government is embroiled in a series of corruption and maladministration crises: the red shirts rorts, the corrupt behaviour of transport agencies and the crooked issues with multicultural grants being squandered on factional and party-political objectives.

This bill restores certain critical examination powers to the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission stripped from the agency by Daniel Andrews and the Andrews Labor government in 2019.

It has become clear that stripping the commission of key powers to hold public hearings was a defensive move by Daniel Andrews and his government to close down future or forthcoming examination of Andrews Labor government ministers by IBAC.

The litany of corrupt activity is long.

This bill, in essence, restores the power of the commission to hold public hearings. Clause 4 of the bill repeals sections 117(1)(c) and (d). This has the effect of repealing from the principal act the requirement for an IBAC examination not to be open to the public unless the IBAC considers on reasonable grounds a public examination can be held without causing unreasonable damage to a person’s reputation, safety or wellbeing; the conduct that is the subject of an investigation may constitute serious corrupt conduct; or systemic corrupt conduct; or serious police personnel misconduct; or systemic police personnel misconduct.

Section 117(3A)(a) of the principal act is also repealed. This has the effect of repealing the requirement that, if the IBAC holds an examination in public, the IBAC may hold any part of the examination in private on application by a person attending the examination in accordance with a witness summons or a person authorised by the IBAC under section 119A to appear at the public examination. Also repealed is section 117(3B), the requirement that in deciding whether or not to hold any part of the examination in private, the IBAC may have regard to whether it is in the public interest to keep that part of the examination open to the public, and whether holding the examination in private is necessary to prevent unreasonable damage to a person’s reputation, safety or wellbeing.

Also repealed is the section 117(4) requirement, the factors the IBAC may take into account in determining whether or not it is in the public interest to hold a public examination or part of an examination open to the public, as applicable.

Also repealed is the section 117(5A) requirement that the IBAC must not make a public announcement of its intention to hold a public examination for the purposes of an investigation unless the IBAC has notified the inspectorate of its intention to do so.

Clause 5 repeals section 162A of the principal act. This has the effect of repealing the requirement that, if the IBAC proposes to transmit a report to Parliament under section 162, the IBAC must give an advance copy of the report to the minister and the Secretary to the Department of Premier and Cabinet at least one business day before the report is due to be transmitted to the Parliament.

With respect to persons who receive reports or information prior to publication, clause 6 of the bill omits the provision of an advanced copy of a report under section 162(A).

Section 166(2)(ca) of the principal act is repealed. This has the effect of repealing the ability of the Secretary to the Department of Premier and Cabinet to disclose an advance copy of an IBAC report to relevant officers of the Department of Premier and Cabinet.

The community expects IBAC to be able to undertake its work without being unnecessarily impeded or hindered, and it has become clear that the recent changes preventing open hearings, or at a minimum making open hearings much more difficult, has had the effect of weakening IBAC and protecting certain wrongdoers.

The Premier has become a frequent flyer at IBAC, appearing twice, perhaps three times, in the recent period. It is not known whether the Premier’s visits and questioning at IBAC are as a mere witness or as a person of specific and targeted interest.

What has become clear is that in other jurisdictions many hearings held in public would be held in private in Victoria. This has had the effect of diminishing public scrutiny of IBAC hearings and processes. It was always understood one of the key functions of IBAC hearings was an educative function and a transparency function.

With these changes IBAC will retain the ability to hold hearings in private where this is appropriate. This restoration of powers bill corrects a weakening of IBAC, driven by the Andrews Labor government’s desire to shield itself from hearings and public scrutiny.

I commend the bill to the house.

Mr TARLAMIS (South Eastern Metropolitan) (10:15): I move:

That debate on this bill be adjourned for two weeks.

Motion agreed to and debate adjourned for two weeks.