Victorian parliamentary inquiry hands down Red Shirts rorts findings

A Victorian parliamentary inquiry has handed down its findings into Labor’s “Red Shirts’’ rorts.

Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews.

A Victorian parliamentary inquiry has excoriated former Victorian Treasurer John Lenders in a report into Labor’s “Red Shirts’’ rorts, which has found the senior Labor figure acted with deliberate disregard for parliamentary rules and has dented the reputation of parliament.

As Victoria Police continues a criminal investigation into Labor’s misuse of parliamentary allowances in the lead up to the 2014 state election, the state’s upper house Privileges Committee has denied MPs involved in the scheme acted in contempt of parliament.

The bi-partisan committee with equal numbers of Coalition and Labor members, and one Green and one independent, has recommended electorate officer rules and guidelines to be overhauled, as well as improvements to clear up ambiguity in the Members’ Guide.

But crucially, it found that no Victorian Labor MPs acted in contempt of Parliament, even though in some cases their conduct did not meet the standard expected of MPs.

“We find that the conduct of the Members in question does not constitute a contempt of Parliament, even though in some cases the conduct was not up to the standard expected from Members of Parliament,” chair and independent MP James Purcell said.

The report caps off more than three years of years uncertainty for Premier Daniel Andrews, who has been dogged since 2015 by accusations senior MPs and Cabinet members committed fraud during the 2014 election campaign.

The upper house probe focused on current and former Labor MPs who took part in the so-called “Red Shirts Rort’’ in which the party used the staff allowances of some MPs to pay for staff who were working full-time as campaigners on the November 2014 election trail.

The Victorian Ombudsman in March found the scheme “crossed a line” and went against the intent of parliamentary rules, which stipulate that MP staff allowances are to be used for official, rather than party political activities.

The Ombudsman also found that the scheme, designed by Mr Lenders, operated as an “artifice” which beefed up funds to pay for election campaigners.

John Lenders speaks at the inquiry at Parliament in Melbourne. Picture: Tony Gough

In a series of findings, the committee found that MPs should have asked Mr Lenders for more information on the scheme.

The committee also found that Mr Lenders acted with “deliberate disregard” for rules outlined in the parliamentary Members’ Guide, and has subsequently “adversely affected the reputation of parliament.”

But they were unable to find he acted in contempt of parliament, because they could not find proof his actions were “wilful”, which meant they fell short of the threshhold of contempt.

“There is no evidence to suggest that the Members or their actions, directly or indirectly, committed any breach of privilege or otherwise obstructed the House in undertaking its core functions,” the report read.

“Therefore, their actions do not satisfy the criteria for general contempt of Parliament.”

The bipartisan committee found parliament needs to overhaul rules around the employment of electorate officers to clear up any uncertainty.

Minority reports lodged by the Opposition and the Greens reiterated that just because MPs involved in the scheme were found not to have acted in contempt of parliament, this doesn’t mean they didn’t do anything wrong.

Opposition members recommended the police investigation as the appropriate path forward.

They also found that Mr Andrews was “aware of the Red Shirts scheme and had concerns about the scheme raised with him by at least one Member of Parliament,” even though the broader report does not reach this conclusion.

Greens MP Nina Springle also called for urgent reform of the Department of Parliamentary Services, which said still has many “grey areas” around its processes which offer some parties benefits over others

More to come