Crossbench dismay as catch-all clause to future-proof corruption watchdog is dropped

There are concerns an Anti-Corruption Commission would not have the power to target misuse of public money.
A last-minute deletion from the Albanese governmentâs signature anti-corruption bill has prompted a warning that misconduct like Scott Morrisonâs secret assumption of ministerial powers wonât be investigated.
Crossbench MPs also expressed concerns on Wednesday that the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) would not be given adequate powers to investigate the use of public money for partisan purposes, or pork barrelling.
Before Wednesdayâs debate, the government removed a âcatch-allâ clause from the bill, which would have allowed investigation of âany kindâ of corruption not explicitly outlined in the legislation.
âNew ways to betray the public interestâ
The Greens justice spokesman Senator David Shoebridge told The New Daily the clause was needed because developments such as the Morrison secret ministry affair showed the political class âkeeps coming up with new ways to betray the public interestâ.
âThis section is designed to future-proof the NACCâs jurisdiction to catch changing and emerging activities that corrupt the federal government,â Senator Shoebridge said.
âThe argument against keeping the provision is that itâs too broad.
âThis misses the point that to be captured under this provision the conduct must be serious or systemic corruption, and thatâs a pretty clear set of boundaries most people outside of Parliament can understand.
âIf you told someone 12 months ago that the prime minister would grant himself a bunch of secret powers and ministries, they would have laughed. But politics keeps surprising us in new and novel ways and we need the NACC to have the jurisdiction to keep on top of this.â
The removal of the clause was recommended by a joint parliamentary committee composed of 12 senators and MPs, including Senator Shoebridge.
But the committeeâs report noted that both he and independent MP Dr Helen Haines argued that there was âreal meritâ in keeping the clause in the legislation.
âSenator Shoebridge and Dr Haines considered that there should be no ambiguity that the NACC will have the power to investigate the allocation of public funds and resources to targeted electors or electorates for partisan purposes where it meets the threshold of serious or systemic corruption,â the report states.
Transparency International Australia CEO Clancy Moore also raised concerns about the governmentâs move to limit the definition of corruption in the bill, saying the decision should be reviewed in the Senate.
âItâs critically important for the commission to have a broad scope and definition of corruption to adequately investigate, prevent and stop corruption,â he told The New Daily.
According to a report published by the joint parliamentary committee, the Attorney-Generalâs Department could not provide any examples of conduct which would constitute âcorruption of any other kindâ not already set out in the legislation.
âDeafeningâ silence on pork barrelling
Other crossbench MPs have expressed concerns about an âexceptional circumstancesâ test that would limit the holding of public hearings and the absence of a clause explicitly targeting pork barrelling.
Dr Haines has moved an amendment to ensure the NACC has jurisdiction to investigate the partisan misuse of public money when it meets the threshold of serious and systemic corrupt conduct.
âThe major partiesâ silence when it comes to pork barrelling is deafening,â the Member for Indi told Parliament on Tuesday.
âGiven the level of public concern regarding the alleged misuse of billions of dollars of public grant funds, there should be no ambiguity regarding the NACCâs ability to investigate this questionable practice.â
Fellow crossbencher Zoe Daniel said she would support the bill, but joined calls for an explicit pork barrelling test as the bill was debated in parliament on Wednesday.
âWhat it comes down to is using public money to benefit oneself or oneâs party politically,â she said.
âThis fails the integrity test and should also come under the gamut of the commission,â Ms Daniel said.
âEven many journalists have become desensitised to this. It is so ubiquitous that it attracts little more than a shrug and an eye roll in many quarters.â
Cross bench MPs are moving a raft of amendments including to introduce an independent whistleblower commissioner.
The shadow attorney-general Julian Leeser has argued that the definition of corruption needs greater clarity.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese told Parliament on Wednesday that the bill had received wide-ranging input from experts and MPs across the parliament.
âIâve been asked a range of times, âWould your National Anti-Corruption Commission investigate A, B or C?â,â he said.
âThat question misses the point. An independent body decides what theyâll investigate. Thatâs the whole point. That is what we have ensured can occur.â
Want to see more stories from The New Daily in your Google search results?
- Click here to set The New Daily as a preferred source.
- Tick the box next to "The New Daily". That's it.








