Regulatory Reform Omnibus Bill 2026

Senator GALLAGHER (Australian Capital Territory—Minister for Finance, Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Women, Minister for Government Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate) (12:58): Look, potentially—that's why we think the discretion for the president to manage those issues remains important. But the mandatory requirement—this person is otherwise none the wiser and doesn't need to take any action or, indeed, take any legal advice or be apprised of any other aspect of the matter.

The discretion sits with the commission. The advice from the commission is that it spends approximately 450 hours per year administering adverse-allegation notifications. It also argues that mandatory notification to a person who is the subject of an adverse allegation can cause unnecessary concern and, in some cases, psychological harm to those recipients who are not respondents and may have no further involvement in the complaints process.

This may go to the cost and effort of obtaining advice, when they are subject to no liabilities arising from the complaint. In some cases, mandatory notification to persons who are the subject of an adverse allegation may also discourage complainants and respondents from engaging fulsomely with the commission's complaints response. I believe there have been some cases where complainants have found out that individuals they have named will be advised and complaints have been withdrawn.