GRIEVANCE DEBATE
Dr HAINES (Indi) (12:32): Almost two years ago, I stood in this place and delivered something of an integrity scorecard—an assessment of the Albanese government's performance in its first term of government. Today, I'd like to provide an update. With a couple of years and an election in between, how would I rate the government now?
In 2024, I called out the government's inaction on whistleblower reforms. At that time, it had been five years since the Prime Minister, as then opposition leader, highlighted the need for a culture of disclosure and to expand whistleblower protections. Well, it's now been seven years, and we're still waiting for comprehensive whistleblower reforms.
It seemed like we were getting somewhere in the second half of last year when the government released an exposure draft of amendments to the Public Interest Disclosure Act. The draft legislation was promising, with positive developments including the establishment of a whistleblower ombudsman and the introduction of a 'no wrong door' approach. Of course, there were a few missed opportunities.
Many people and organisations did a lot of work to provide detailed, actionable feedback in an almost unworkably short three-week consultation period. And then, suddenly, just as it appeared, the draft legislation seemed to disappear in a puff of smoke. It's not clear whether it will be introduced, or when, or even whether the government has considered the feedback it urgently sought out.
I know the Treasury is currently consulting on whistleblower protections under tax and corporations law, but it's not clear how that ties into the kind of comprehensive, system-wide reform that's so sorely needed. And, if there's any doubt about that need, just take a look at the recent revelations about KPMG. The anonymous employee who bravely spoke up about the misuse of confidential material has said that they would not have made a disclosure if they had understood the inadequacy of legal protections for whistleblowers.
It took a senator using parliamentary privilege for the allegations to even come to light. What a shameful indictment on our system. In 2024, I gave the government credit for strengthening the Commonwealth grants framework but said I had continuing concerns about non-transparent election commitment funding and whether it would address pork-barrelling.
I was right to be concerned. The government has not acted to end pork-barrelling. In fact, the government continues to rely on invitation-only noncompetitive grants to fund pre-election sweeteners in selected seats.
These include the $350 million Investing in Our Communities program, the $1 billion Priority Community Infrastructure program and, most recently, the $561 million Major and Local Community Infrastructure Program. These pork-barrelled handouts are unfair, and, frankly, they're bad value. They create winners and losers along arbitrary electoral boundaries, and they create a system where resources are distributed on political strategy rather than need, merit or taxpayer benefit.
Perhaps the most concerning development since I last spoke is the government's ill-conceived, indefensible Freedom of Information Amendment Bill. The FOI system does need amendment, to make it simpler, faster and easier to use. But, instead, the government sought to entrench secrecy by making it harder to access information and easier to hide it.
It was a disgraceful attack on transparency that the government eventually conceded was completely and utterly friendless. With the bill having been withdrawn, it's easy to think we're out of the woods. But a recent audit of FOI administration by the Australian National Audit Office identified a range of shortcomings inconsistent with a pro-disclosure regime.
Of the more than 25,000 FOI decisions reviewed by the ANAO, 79 per cent refused access to information in part or in full. Decision-making is inconsistent and departments are not meeting their obligations, and the government has signalled—or perhaps warned—that FOI legislation isn't off the table for good. At the time I spoke in 2024, the government had been sitting on Lynelle Briggs's review of public sector board appointments for a year.
The 'jobs for mates' report was finally released in December alongside a new appointments framework that fell well short of what was recommended. To be fair, the Briggs report made clear that handing out jobs as favours or rewards is an entrenched issue not unique to any government or side of politics. I give praise to the Albanese government; they deserve recognition for implementing a transparent, merit based selection process for appointments to the Administrative Review Tribunal.
It goes to show it can be done. It needs to be done consistently. The ANAO is absolutely crucial as part of our integrity landscape.
But it's getting by on a shoestring. The ANAO has operated in a continuous deficit for eight years, with both the Joint Committee on Public Accounts and Audit and the Auditor-General herself warning that its financial situation is unsustainable. The government failed to provide adequate resourcing in the most recent budget, but, to be honest, a funding boost from year to year is only a temporary solution to the underlying structural problem.
Our central integrity body should not have to go cap in hand to the very executive it seeks to scrutinise. Finally, I need to touch on the National Anti-Corruption Commission, but this time with some cautious optimism. The establishment of the NACC was a watershed development.
Like many Australians, I had high hopes and great expectations of our federal integrity body, and I've spoken at length about my disappointment where I've seen it falling short. With the resignation of the commissioner and a deputy commissioner, the NACC is at a critical juncture. I see this as an opportunity for a reset, and I'm pleased that the Attorney-General agrees.
Yesterday's announcement about the process to fill the vacancies was a welcome step in the right direction. There's more to be done, but I'm encouraged by the Attorney-General's approach and her engagement with me so far. The Parliamentary Joint Committee on the NACC is currently undertaking an inquiry that I hope will deliver constructive, evidence based recommendations to facilitate a reset and to strengthen the NACC's performance of its functions; watch this space on that one.
So what's the conclusion on my report card? Well, to be honest, it's probably not a passing grade. There have been a few bright spots but, really, many letdowns.
It's particularly disappointing at a time of declining trust in politics, because trust and integrity go hand in hand. The public have a sharp nose for what they think is shifty, whether it's inaction on gambling advertising, failure to protect whistleblowers, electoral stitch-ups or pork barrelling. Our integrity mechanisms should strengthen people's trust in political institutions, and at the moment I'm worried that they're doing the opposite.
Last year's McKinnon index revealed that, while Australians still have faith in democracy, they're increasingly dissatisfied with how they see it working in practice. Regional Australians in particular had lower trust in government, were less satisfied with public services and were less likely to think that the political system allows them to have a say. Australians will not put blind faith in our political institutions, and trust is an end-to-end proposition.
I don't believe people have given up on democracy, but they're certainly making a loud demand for it to work better. Grievance never feels particularly great to me as a standalone, because problems have solutions, even if they're hard to identify and harder to implement. I'm committed to doing the work of finding those solutions and putting them forward.
That's why I developed a gold-standard design for the National Anti-Corruption Commission. It's why I put forward reforms to end pork barrelling and protect whistleblowers. It's why I stood up against FOI amendments that would have protected government secrecy and punished those seeking answers.
I'll keep doing that work, and I'll work together with anyone in this place who wants to join me. I may have given the government a failing grade, but the term isn't over. There's still time to turn things around.
Back whistleblowers, end pork barrelling, and restore trust in our institutions and in our processes. Integrity is a choice, and it's a choice for the government to make.