Outgoing ICAC Bruce Lander reveals South Australian MPs are being investigated for potential criminal conduct
Outgoing ICAC Bruce Lander has confirmed SA MPs are being investigated for potential criminal conduct, placing the Premier under more pressure to ensure his MPs assist the inquiry.
SA News
Don't miss out on the headlines from SA News. Followed categories will be added to My News.
- Inaugural ICAC Bruce Lander’s biggest hits and misses
- Follow all of the travel expenses scandal coverage here
- Check out these subscriber-only specials, giveaways and prizes
Premier Steven Marshall is facing growing pressure to stop his MPs using the shield of parliamentary privilege to block a corruption investigation into their travel allowances.
Independent Commissioner Against Corruption Bruce Lander had previously revealed that he had been investigating the payments, but said he had been stymied by some MPs as they claimed that special rules for politicians meant they did not need to turn over information.
Mr Lander has now confirmed that the travel allowance claims are being treated as possible corruption, rather than just maladministration, as he leaves office after seven years in the role.
Corruption is treated as a criminal matter.
However, maladministration alone would not lead to charges.
Opposition Leader Peter Malinauskas on Monday told The Advertiser he would use parliament’s resumption from the winter break next week to try to stop an abuse of privilege by denying the currently unknown MPs from using it as an excuse not to fully co-operate with ICAC.
Mr Malinauskas said he had expert advice that the MPs must actively ask for parliament’s approval to claim privilege.
He said Labor would reject it, and Mr Marshall must, too.
“Our advice is that those MPs who have claimed parliamentary privilege during the course of a criminal investigation of corruption have an obligation to declare it to the parliament, so as to review whether that privilege can apply,” Mr Malinauskas said.
“Privilege is not there so as to impede a criminal investigation into the corruption of members of parliament.”
SA Parliament sits again next Tuesday, and will also have to appoint a new speaker following the promotion of Emergency Services Minister Vincent Tarzia to cabinet.
Two former ministers, Stephan Knoll and Tim Whetstone, resigned amid the expenses affair. Parliamentary privilege is a complex set of unique powers granted to politicians, which mostly ensure freedom of speech without the threat of defamation, and are based on tradition.
Official papers published by the Federal Parliament describe it as existing “for the purpose of enabling the houses of the parliament to carry out effectively their functions”.
“The primary functions of the houses are to inquire, to debate and to legislate, and parliamentary privilege assists and protects these functions,” a discussion paper states.
However, some insiders have argued that can extend to release of documents and sources.
In 2015, Treasurer Rob Lucas told parliament he had politely told ICAC investigators to “get nicked” when asked to out sources behind revelations he made about the former government.
Mr Malinauskas said Labor would look at “all options” if the MPs under investigation over expenses did not out themselves immediately when parliament returned next week.
Mr Marshall said the use of privilege was a “matter for the parliament”.
“I’m quite sure it is something that will be debated,” Mr Marshall said. “We don’t have any motion that has been put forward yet.”
Last week, Mr Marshall said: “I expect all of my members to comply with the ICAC Act”.
In a report published on Monday by InDaily, Mr Lander said the inquiry covered more than one MP and “we’re investigating corruption, and corruption is criminal conduct”.
Mr Lander will be followed as ICAC Commissioner by former judge Ann Vanstone, who will have to decide whether to continue the investigation.
In August, Mr Lander released a statement saying: “Members (of parliament) and their staff have asked me to delay my request for documents and information until parliament has determined whether or not a claim for parliamentary privilege is to be made. I do not think that the documents or information sought would be protected by parliamentary privilege. However, the privilege is that of parliament,” Mr Lander said.
“Although I am continuing to seek evidence and information from other persons and sources, the potential for a claim for parliamentary privilege has had the effect of delaying the investigation because I have not been able to examine documents and other evidence in the custody of the members and their staff, relevant to the matters under investigation.
“Also I have not been able to interview or examine the members or their staff.”
Mr Lander has refused repeated interview requests from The Advertiser in recent weeks, leading up to his retirement on Tuesday.
ICAC criminal inquiry places spotlight on Premier
Analysis – Daniel Wills
Dodgy double standards in politics sends the average voter crazy.
It is the fury at the centre of the perks and expenses scandals that have already seen off three of Premier Steven Marshall’s ministers, and will be inflamed again in parliament next week.
There is a very high-level legal argument looming about what parliamentary privilege is for, and whether MPs are allowed to use it to slow down or stop an investigation into expenses.
Ten lawyers would probably give you 100 different opinions. But outgoing Independent Commissioner Against Corruption Bruce Lander, a former federal court judge, could not have been clearer in a statement a fortnight ago when he said he didn’t think it should be.
The court of public opinion does not accept that just being a politician means, in any way, that you have the privilege to be shielded from a corruption investigation over public money.
Mr Marshall will be put in the spotlight next week if MPs on his side of the House continue these legal tactics. It would be seen simply as a political cover-up.
Labor insists none of its number would be allowed to claim those protections, and is seeking to shift this from an issue about country Liberal MPs to the character of their leader.
Mr Marshall risks running foul of any MPs who are claiming privilege if he were to help in taking it from them. With numbers now tight in parliament, and two former Liberals sitting as independents after their own legal troubles, there’s a tough call to make.
But he will be forced to publicly make one, a distinctly unprivileged position to be in.
