NSW ICAC considers ruling out the old pork barrel

The NSW corruption watchdog is to consider whether pork-­barrelling is lawful or constitutes corrupt conduct under the state’s anti-corruption legislation.

NSW ICAC Chief Commissioner Peter Hall. Picture: AAP

The NSW corruption watchdog is to consider whether pork-­barrelling is lawful or constitutes corrupt conduct under the state’s anti-corruption legislation, as the newly elected Albanese government looks set to make the practice a key target of its promised federal integrity commission.

In an unprecedented move, the Independent Commission Against Corruption announced it would hold a public forum this week – hosted by Chief Commissioner Peter Hall QC – to consider the legality of pork-barrelling, including whether ministers have unlimited power to hand out grants or are subject to legal ­constraints.

The panel – to be moderated by former ABC journalist Kerry O’Brien – will also canvass whether grants should be regulated to ensure public money is spent only on legitimate public purposes, and whether safeguards “to prevent breaches of public trust” should be legislated.

ICAC will then issue a report setting out its views on pork-­barrelling, “including whether and how it relates to corrupt ­conduct”.

The announcement comes as the anti-corruption watchdog is due to release the findings of its four-year investigation into allegations against former NSW premier Gladys Berejiklian and her ex-lover, disgraced MP Daryl Maguire. Some parties had been given until May 9 to provide confidential submissions.

Last month, a NSW government review into grant funding recommended against making pork-barrelling an offence, arguing there were “existing legally enforceable measures” to deal with it.

Instead, ministers should give written reasons for approving ­taxpayer-funded grants, according to NSW Productivity Commissioner Peter Achterstraat and head of Department of Premier and Cabinet Michael Coutts-Trotter in a report triggered by Ms Berejiklian’s comments on pork-barrelling at the inquiry.

The review concluded that updating the ICAC definition to include pork-barrelling was not appropriate because the watchdog’s act already included an “extensive definition of what constituted ‘corrupt conduct’ ”.

It said the commission had jurisdiction under the ICAC Act to investigate corrupt conduct associated with pork-barrelling.

ICAC has not previously regarded pork-barrelling as inherently corrupt conduct. In hearings before the commission, Ms Berejiklian cited the practice to defend funding projects in Mr Maguire’s Wagga Wagga electorate.

The commission was played phone taps in which the then-premier promised Mr Maguire she would “throw money” at Wagga to win a by-election.

Ms Berejiklian told the inquiry: “I don’t think it would be a surprise to anybody that we throw money at seats to keep them. At the end of the day, whether we like it or not, that’s democracy.

“During a by-election … political parties will make announcements based on what they think is going to curry favour with the community. So it doesn’t follow the normal process that otherwise would.”

Dominic Perrottet is yet to respond to the Achterstraat/Coutts-Trotter report but he has previously expressed support for ICAC in the wake of criticism for its treatment of Ms Berejiklian, and distanced himself from her views on pork-barrelling.

ICAC’s move to consider the legality of pork-barrelling comes as the Albanese government faces pressure to give its promised new integrity watchdog the power to investigate the practice at a nat­ional level. Days before the election, 31 former judges signed an open letter calling for a federal integrity watchdog with the power to investigate pork-barrelling.