I'm Ruby Jones, and you're listening to seven AM. The National Anti Corruption Commission has over two hundred employees, an annual budget of sixty million dollars, and has received more than five thousand referrals. It also hasn't made a single major finding in the two years it's been operating, and
adding to questions around performance and credibility. It was recently revealed that the NAC's chief Commissioner, Paul Brereton, has been consulting for the Defense Force while leading the Federal Watchdog, which has oversight of the df. Today journalist Nick Fake on the missteps and mismanagement of the NAC and whether it has any hope of regaining public trust. It's Monday, October twenty seven, So Nick, let's begin by going back
to when the NAC was first established. Was of course one of the Albanese government's first acts when they took power, and it was promised because of this widespread distrust at the time in political processes and in politicians themselves. So take me back to that moment and to why the KNACK was needed.
Yeah, Ruby, voters anticipated the KNACK would bring much needed integrity and oversight to public affairs in Australia. They expected that would bring scrutiny to allegations around you know, for example, the sports lots affair, and there were a whole bunch of discretionary grants schemes under the Coalition government. There was the Eastern Australia Agriculture eighty million dollar water sales to the Commonwealth that was the subject of controversy.
Barnaby Joyce is embroiled in a controversial eighty million dollar water buyback that he oversaw in twenty seventeen from a Cayman Islands based company co founded by the now Energy Minister.
There was a web of unusual financially interactions around Liberal Minister Stuart Robert and Synergy three sixty.
A former employee of the Synergy three to sixty lobbying firm has made explosive written allegations to a Parliamentary inquiry about dealings involving Stuart Robert and the company. An arrangement was designed to facilitate the flow of funds through United Marketing and Onwood to Stuart Robert.
There were a whole bunch of allegations around home affairs, huge offshore detention contracts and corruption allegations around those.
Opposition later Pizza Dutton was Home Affairs Minister at the time some of these contracts being awarded, but Home Affairs Department Secretary Michael Pizzullo told Senate Estimates in twenty twenty one that these contracts had nothing to do with the minister.
There was the government's thirty million dollar acquisition of land near Western Sydney Airport that was valued at three million dollars a year earlier, and then there was a raft of scandals related to defense contracts. But theseus I think probably the tip of the iceberg. The KNACK hasn't made a dent in any of them.
When the KNACK was set up, there was all of these questions and serious concern around the decision that was made at the time to not have public hearings embedded into the way the NAC functions unless it was decided that there was quote exceptional circumstances. So, now that we are more than two years into the NAC's operation, tell me how that has played out.
Well, there's been no hearings so far, no public hearings at all, and I think the ongoing lack of transparency which was built into the design of the Knack by the Albanese government, it's become a running sore. So Jason Katsukis was a reporter who wrote in the Saturvey paper recently that Albanesi had personally overruled a push by the then Attorney General Mark Dreyfus to give the Knack wider discretion to hold public hearings, but Albanesi reportedly insisted that
hearings be held in private unless exceptional circumstances existed. But so far apparently there are no exceptional circumstances that there haven't been any public hearings, and I think it's been to the detriment of the organization's reputation.
And what do we know about what it's actually investigated.
Well, very little.
Actually, they've got five thousand referrals, They've done a bunch of investigations. They say that they've got thirty eight corruption investigations underway, including twelve joint investigations. They've finalized ten investigations. It become clear in nine of them that corrupt conduct
wouldn't be found. So essentially we have an organization that has over two hundred employees and an annual budget of over sixty million dollars, but it's yet to initiate and land a single major corruption finding.
So far, it's landed.
On one low level bribe case involving a Western Sydney Airport procurement manager. So I don't think anyone could say it's been a strong start the integrity watchdog.
And one of the strongest criticisms of the KNACK was around its decision to not take on the Robodet scandal when it was referred to it the commissioner, Paul Bereton. He was found to have engaged in officer misconduct in relation to this perceived conflict of interest around that decision, and as it stands now, the NAC is looking into robodebt. Another person has been brought on to investigate whether anyone
acted coruptly or not. So if you look at that episode, which happened very early on in the history of the NAC, how damaging do you think it's been for the reputation.
I'd say that the Robodet investigation has been both the highest profile of the next cases and the highest profile failure. It's been thoroughly mismanaged. I think it continues to cost them dearly, Like both financially and in terms of its reputation. So there were revelations of previous Defense Force links between Commissioner Brereton and the former DHS Secretary Katherine Campbell, and that this had undermined the nax's initial decision not to
take on the ROBODAD investigation. But apparently even the damage caused by that perceived conflict had failed to convince Breton to sort out his Defense relationship. And so we've learned recently that Brereton hadn't even informed the nac CEO that he was doing ongoing consulting work. Breton stayed on as a ranking officer with the ADF in order to keep consulting with the ADF, and it appears he hasn't been keeping the nac CEO informed of his own consulting with
the ADF. This puts him in a completely conflicted situation.
Proceedings and resume with the National Anti Corruption Commission. I believe we have an opening statement.
So there was the Senate Estimates hearing recently where the nac CEO, Philip Reed, attempted to exonerate Breton by explaining that it was unpaid consulting work.
Will provide the advice on a needs basis.
That's a role.
That's work. Providing advice is work, mister.
Reed, Well, you know each of us will have different words to describe this work.
Now.
The Green Senator David Shubridge raised the obvious criticisms, How could Breton be both a senior officer of the ADF and the head of the organization task with investigating it?
Being part of providing high level support to ministers defense and external government agencies is a significant thing, isn't it. Well, he's providing high level support to Minister's Defense and External Goverment Agency.
Senator, he's providing advice to the igad D.
Which they are in turn, that's providing to Minister Defense and external government agencies. That is a significant body of work.
Mister Reid.
Shuebridge pointed to the fact that there'd been one hundred and twenty active referrals to the NAC on defense related matters. I mean, defense procurement are the largest, some of the largest contracts that governments ever get into, and we have a Chief Commissioner who should be recusing himself from all of them.
What have the KNACS said about how they handle this?
The NAC CEO. He told Estimates that Breton will recuse himself.
That he will then refuse himself from if those matters come forward, if matters come forward from those areas, those units.
We know that Brereton recused himself from at least six of these, but you know what about the other one hundred and fourteen And who's choosing which ones he recused from? Is that him choosing? So you know, just a reminder to listeners. As an example, there's a forty six billion dollar naval frigate deal. It's been referred to the KNACK for investigation. Is Breton overseeing this or not? We literally don't know, Huebridge said to the nac CEO at Senate Estimates.
He said, you took it on notice and you didn't advise of his work with the ADF And because of him failing to tell you that, you've misled the committee and you've misled Parliament. So I suddenly you have a situation where the nac CEO is misleading Parliament because he's been misinformed by the Chief Commissioner of the.
NAK when the question was asked and when the response was provided, I was unaware.
Yes, because the commissioner puts you in that situation by not telling you. And again, I don't put the fault at your feet, mister Reid. I put the fault at the feet of the commissioner of the National Anti Corruption Commission who wasn't being transparent with you.
Senator David Pocock he joined in. He had similar criticisms.
Like, why not to we allow a commissioner who's on eight hundred thousand dollars a year to aging things which potentially mean that we're going to have to get up someone else to do the job that he's been paid so much. It's just you've got to understand mystery, this this is this is bonkers. If you're out there in the public and I'm it's it's it's hugely frustrating.
We're going to have to get someone else to look at what the what the Commission is supposed to be doing.
It's crazy.
Coming up why some whistle blowers are regretting even contacting the KNACK. You've been speaking to whistle blowers, to people who have taken concerns that they might have around potential corruption to the Knacks. So can you tell me a bit about their experiences and what they're telling you about how seriously their complaints are being taken, and their impressions of how well the KNACK is functioning at the moment.
Yeah. I've spoken to several whistle blower in recent months who remain in the dark about information they provided to the KNACK. So they contacted the KNACK wanting to spill the beans on allegations of wrongdoing. They don't know where their allegations are, whether they're being investigated, whether they're even being taken seriously. So many still they feel unsafe having put this information to this commission and not knowing what's
happened with it. And they're not the only ones, transparency experts. A growing number of politicians, including those who initially supported the formation of the KNACK, have become quite outspoken in recent months in their dismay about what's not happening.
And can we just come back to robodat because that is, obviously, I think the most important and highest profile case that the KNACK has been involved in. Where is that investigation up to now? And do we know do we have any sense of how that might play out?
Yeah, SOAK rebooted its investigation after the inspector the NAC inspector Gail Ferness said, look, it's been mismanaged.
We want you to relook at it.
The KNACK brought on Jeffrey Nettle to relook at it, and then they rebooted the investigation and they said, look, we will.
Look into it. And it's been running.
This new investigation has been running since at least July, but we're none the wiser. So other than that it's cost over a million dollars and that it'll run into next year at least, we really don't know where it is. And this is a problem for the NAC generally. There's such a lack of transparency around what they're doing on all fronts.
And Nick, I mean, there is really only the political will to set something like this up a corruption watchdog very rarely. I mean it took multiple scandals, pressure from Independence trying to enter the political system. It was a real moment in time that I think meant that we
got a federal Anti Corruption Commission in the first place. So, given what you're saying about the ways in which it's failing at the very kind of first hurdle of transparency, what do you think this means for public trust?
Well, I think a lot of people agree that the nacts yet to prove itself in any way, and it appears hamstrung by its own processes, by its own missteps, its own commitment to secrecy, and you know, I think it's incumbent on both the alb and Easy government and Brariton to restore its reputation in whatever way they can.
What would it take at this point in time to restore any public faith.
Well, personally, I think it just needs to show that it can take on high profile cases and that it can deliver results. It needs to show that it's above politics, that it can make uncomfortable findings. I don't think people are interested in low level misdemeanors or slap on the risk, and I think so far all the public scene are these endless discussions about how the commissioners a conflicted or unwilling to speak about their investigations. I mean, how's that
supposed to assure the public. The whole point of an anti corruption commission is to bring transparency, and on that front it's completely failed. I'm not sure the NAK can regain trust unless it produces results like really soon, and personally, I'm not sure that will.
Happen under the leadership of Paul Burton.
Yeah, I think the public will need to see results or resignations.
Well, Nick, thank you so much for your time.
Thanks Ruby.
Also in the news today, Prime Minister Anthony Alberanezi is in Malaysia for the Asian Meeting of World Leaders before he heads to South Korea for the Pacific Economic Forum. Ahead of the meetings, which focus on regional security and trade, the Prime Minister alluded to an ongoing campaign to have
the United States remove tariffs on Australian goods. Prime Minister Abenezi failed to secure an exemption on US import taxes of ten percent on most of its goods and fifty percent for aluminium and steel, but he says he will engage the US President at the meetings, whose attendance is an unusual move that signals the United States rising interest
in the region. And National Senator Mat Canavan will present details of his report into net zero to the party today, but will not include economic modeling of the cost of dumping the target. National's Deputy leader and outspoken NET zero opponent, Mat Canavan led the review with his Senate colleague Ross Cadell, but has flagged the Discussions over the party's position were likely to be ongoing, and it could take time for the.
Matter to be settled.
I'm Ruby Jones. This is seven am.
Thanks for listening
And