The ACT's proposed anti-corruption commission should be able to investigate matters that have previously been examined by the auditor-general, despite the Barr government's attempts to limit its ability to do so, an inquiry has recommended.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
A select committee examining the government's exposure draft and an Opposition bill to create the commission handed down its final report on Wednesday.
Committee chairman Shane Rattenbury said the committee recommended using the government's draft as a more complete model for the laws, but the final legislation should also include some Opposition measures.
The committee has also given government a strict timeframe to draft the final bill, so it can be introduced and passed in the final sitting week of the year in November.
Among the committee's recommendations were also that the territory's judiciary should come under the commission's remit, despite concerns it could impinge the separation of powers, and that the bill should be "neutral" on public hearings, leaving such decisions to a public interest test and the commissioner's decision.
The report has also urged the government to make changes to ensure that just because a matter has been investigated by another body, such as the ACT ombudsman or ACT auditor-general, it should not preclude such matters being examined by the commission.
Chief Minister Andrew Barr had previously argued against such a clause, arguing it should have a limited ability to investigate retrospective matters, particularly if those issues had been examined by another statutory body.
Mr Barr had also raised concerns about how such investigations would relate to memorandums of understanding between other investigative bodies, but the committee rejected that argument.
But Mr Rattenbury said on Tuesday the committee believed the commission should be able to investigate such issues, given other bodies did not include corruption investigations in their scope.
The issue has been a contentious one, after given the Opposition and the Greens have said the audit controversial Dickson land swap warranted referral to the commission, with Mr Rattenbury saying it was a "prime candidate" for referral.
The committee has also recommended third party government contractors be included in the commission's scope, alongside public servants, and politicians, but has recommended the government consider whether to include those licensed by the government to perform functions, after the Opposition bill proposed building certifiers be included.
It has also recommended a new Assembly committee be set up to oversee the commission's work, and a review of the Public Interest Disclosure Act be completed and changes made by 2020.
While the government had proposed only a former judge be allowed to be appointed as the commissioner, the committee has also recommended a second option - of a respected legal mind with at least 10 years' experience - be allowed, given concerns about a limited supply of former judges that would be willing to take the role.
The committee has also recommended a number of changes to ensure the commission's work does not impede on the work of official assembly officers, as well as some technical aspects of who should provide mandatory reports about potential corrupt conduct.
It also recommended a draft bill be circulated by the government in two weeks' time, with a further week for meetings to discuss the bill ahead of introduction to the Assembly by November 27, and has left the option open for an extra sitting day to get it passed this year.
