CCC boss Bruce Barbour calls for retrospective laws after High Court Carne ruling

Queenslanders should be given access to existing but yet-to-be released corruption investigation reports, according to the head of the CCC.

Crime and Corruption Commission boss Bruce Barbour. Picture: Dan Peled

Queenslanders should be given access to existing but yet-to-be released corruption investigation reports, with the state’s powerful watchdog calling for urgent law changes to be retrospective.

Crime and Corruption Commission boss Bruce Barbour has also urged the parliamentary committee overseeing the watchdog to “seek advice” on whether the report at the centre of a landmark High Court ruling can be released another way.

The High Court of Australia this week ruled the contents of a Crime and Corruption Commission report into former public trustee Peter Carne detailing allegations of misconduct should not be published.

Former Queensland public trustee Peter Carne. Picture: Martin Ollman

According to the CCC the precedent-setting decision meant it had “no such power” to make vital reports public — nullifying abilities the watchdog had believed and relied on to do its job for the last 25 years.

It also prevents the CCC from publishing its investigation report into whether former deputy Premier Jackie Trad improperly intervened in the appointment of a senior Treasury official.

Mr Barbour, appearing at a regular Parliamentary Crime and Corruption Commission hearing, reaffirmed the CCC’s calls for the state government to make urgent but “well considered” law changes to unshackle the watchdog.

And the CCC would be pushing for the laws to be retrospective, with Mr Barbour saying this would allow them to release the two high-profile reports alongside “other elements” the watchdog wants to make public but can’t.

While he declined to give a preferred timeline on how quickly the state government to act, Mr Barbour pointed out there were recommended changes to laws governing the CCC that were still languishing a decade on.

“I would be pressing that amendments to deal with these issues would not fall into the same timeline processes that we’re seeing in relation to other legislative amendments,” he said.

“It’s a question on whether or not everybody agrees that firstly, transparency is important.

“Secondly, it’s an important element of our work to be able to report publicly. If those two things are agreed to I think the process of developing amendments will be much easier.”

Mr Barbour also signalled the PCCC might have the option of publish the Carne report despite the High Court ruling, saying the committee — which has possession of the document — should get independent advice.

But Mr Barbour affirmed he wasn’t “suggesting by any means” the PCCC act outside of the High Court’s decision, only that “what the committee does with those documents was not the subject of deliberation by the High Court”.

“And that’s something the committee could obviously seek its own independent advice … my preference, and I can’t state more clearly, is that we develop appropriate amendments to the legislation,” he said.

Attorney-General Yvette D’Ath. Picture: Steve Pohlner

Mr Barbour said he had not yet met with Attorney-General Yvette D’Ath on the issue after writing to her late on Wednesday.

Mr Carne resigned as public trustee in July 2020 after being issued a show-cause notice by Ms D’Ath over allegations of misconduct.

The CCC investigated the claims but did not pursue criminal charges against Mr Carne, and instead compiled a report for the Parliamentary Crime and Corruption Commission Committee.

But Mr Carne intervened to stop the report being tabled in parliament, arguing it would breach his human rights and that he had been denied procedural fairness.

The Queensland Court of Appeal last year ruled in Mr Carne’s favour as the CCC had misconceived its functions and the report was beyond its power to report.

The CCC appealed to the High Court but their arguments were dismissed, with costs, in a unanimous decision.

The High Court rejected the CCC’s arguments, finding that the preparation and presentation of the report were not carried out within the scope of Legislative Assembly proceedings and that the report was beyond the CCC’s powers to publish.