The eventual departure (in six weeks’ time) of Paul Brereton from the position of Commissioner of the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) provides the Albanese Government with the opportunity to review and reform a body that has failed to live up to the expectations of most people who wanted the Federal Government to establish the Commission. It is unlikely to do so, not least because the Government did not share the aspirations for the NACC of most of those who urged its creation. David Solomon reports.

While the NACC has substantial investigative powers and staffing resources, it has operated essentially as a crime commission, rather than an anti-corruption commission.

Because it was limited in its ability to hold public inquiries - unlike its NSW counterpart, ICAC, the Independent Commission Against Corruption - its work has largely failed to generate public attention or interest.

A bias against holding public hearings - its legislation required all its hearings should be held in private unless the Commissioner was satisfied that ‘exceptional circumstances’ justified them being in public and doing so was in the public interest - meant most of its work went unpublicised. Mr Brereton said he always looked to see if those ‘exceptional circumstances’ existed and would justify a public hearing. But he found none.

The headlines it attracted were all about its failures, and particularly those of Brereton himself, its initial chairman, who while declaring a conflict of interest........

© Pearls and Irritations