Holding Government Accountable: The New ‘National Anti-Corruption Commission’

By Elinor Bickerstaff-Westbrook

What is the National Anti-Corruption Commission?

The Labor government recently introduced the bill for a National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), which will investigate corruption within and affecting the federal public sector. It comes after mounting public pressure for a federal anti-corruption body, especially since every State (except the Northern Territory) already has their own, such as New South Wales’ Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC).

A federal anti-corruption commission was one of Labor’s biggest promises during the 2022 election, and their quick work starkly contrasts the previous Coalition government’s heel-dragging hesitation to do the same. While the Coalition outlined an anti-corruption body in 2020, it was widely criticized as shallow and ineffective, and was never introduced to Parliament. The Coalition’s failure only stoked calls for a substantial and transparent federal anti-corruption body.

Powers of the NACC

Overall, the NACC will investigate the conduct of ministers, parliament officials and staff, government entities and their employees, and importantly, third parties. The NACC will be able to investigate any conduct which ‘adversely affects, or could adversely affect’ the transparent and unbiased use of power by public officials.

One of the NACC’s notable aspects is its retrospective powers, meaning it can investigate corrupt conduct which occurred before the NACC was created. Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus stated that this allows the NACC to investigate recent scandals under the Coalition government, including the sports rorts scandal and Scott Morrison’s multiple ministerial portfolios.

Further, the NACC can start investigations on its own accord and through referral or requests. The NACC can also force production of information, gain warrants to search premises, intercept telecommunications (phone-tapping), and will have some power to arrest people for failing to attend hearings.

Criticisms of the NACC

A prominent concern against the NACC bill is the high and subjective standard for public hearings. The bill states public hearings will occur only in ‘exceptional circumstances’, but exactly what ‘exceptional’ includes is unclear. It will likely consider reputational damage to individuals being investigated, benefit to the public, and the seriousness of an investigation. Ultimately, it will be for the commissioner to decide, but this creates an unpredictability and imbalance in what is publicly disclosed.

Many expected the NACC to mimic NSW’s ICAC, whose hearings can be made public if deemed of ‘public interest’. This lower standard has led to highly publicized investigations, such as those against former NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian for failing to disclose personal conflicts. While some have pushed against public hearings in fear of unnecessary reputational damage, public hearings arguably ensure one of the body’s key principles: transparency. However, the NACC’s high standard for public hearings is likely to ensure bi-partisan support as even opposition leader Peter Dutton has voiced support for the bill.

With Parliament set to debate the bill soon, many Australians will be relieved to finally have a national-level independent body overseeing government, especially at a time of such widespread distrust of government and politicians. However, only time will tell if the NACC can bring back faith in our political system.