Graft buster faces Senate battle

The Coalition faces a difficult task of getting its proposed federal corruption watchdog through the upper house.

‘This is a weak, secretive and totally compromised model ­clearly designed to sweep corruption under the carpet’: Opposition legal affairs spokesman Mark Dreyfus. Picture: Kym Smith

The Coalition faces a battle to get its proposed federal corruption watchdog through the Senate, with Labor, the Greens and crossbenchers poking holes in the draft legislation and accusing the government of producing a “toothless tiger”.

Opposition legal affairs spokesman Mark Dreyfus slammed the government’s proposed commonwealth integrity commission, declaring it failed to improve on a proposal put forward by the Coalition two years ago.

“This is a weak, secretive and totally compromised model ­clearly designed to sweep corruption under the carpet and ensure the Morrison government is never held accountable for its multiple scandals,” Mr Dreyfus said.

Independent MP Helen ­Haines, who last week introduced her own federal integrity bill to parliament, said the proposed body was a victory for public scrutiny and accountability.

However, while she is yet to review the legislation, Ms Haines said she was “deeply alarmed” by the legislation’s shortcomings, namely that the proposed watchdog cannot hold public hearings for the majority of the public sector. “It is clearly misleading for the Attorney-General (Christian Porter) to claim the CIC has “more powers than a royal commission”, she said. “It would also only be able to investigate behaviour that constitutes a criminal offence, meaning it would have no jurisdiction over cases of non-criminal corruption.”

Centre Alliance senator Stirling Griff said an ICAC that can’t instigate its own investigations, nor come to its own conclusions, was merely a “toothless tiger”.

“There is merit in much of what has been proposed, but it will require significant review and consultation before we lock in a final position,” he said. “It is out for six months’ consultation, so it won’t see the light of day until next year at the earliest and, given it has taken two years to get to this stage, I doubt it will even be introduced this side of the next election.”

Independent senator Jacqui Lambie said the proposal could have done “with a bit more time in the oven” and was “worse than nothing” in its current form.

“Politicians shouldn’t be able to get out of fronting up to a public hearing like anyone else who’s ­accused of doing something wrong, and the public should be able to make tip-offs if they know something’s up.”

She said that while Australians wanted an anti-corruption watchdog with teeth, they had been given a lapdog with dentures.

Independent crossbencher Rex Patrick said the legislation needed scrutiny.

“Six months’ consultation means the bill won’t be enacted till at least mid-2021, probably later,” he tweeted shortly after the announcement. “Prosecutions are very unlikely before the election.”

He later told The Australian that if a complaint was made against a parliamentarian and the commission reached a certain threshold to confirm suspicions of that corruption then politicians should have to attend a hearing.

A spokesman for One Nation said the party would consider the proposals but had not seen the draft legislation.

The Coalition needs the support of three of five crossbenchers to secure the passage of a bill through the upper house.

Greens leader Adam Bandt ­accused the Morrison government of running a “protection racket for corrupt politicians”.