Source : the age
Victoria’s peak integrity body has welcomed the government’s promise to give it follow-the-money powers but will push to make greater use of public hearings to investigate and deter corruption.
Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption commissioner Victoria Elliott, in her first public comments since the Allan government revealed its reform plans for the state’s anti-corruption framework, said the proposed changes would enable her agency to investigate for the first time misuse of taxpayer money and abuse of public office that did not constitute a crime.
She said the alleged conduct would need to be serious and other stringent safeguards would still apply in deciding whether to employ invasive, coercive investigative tools at IBAC’s disposal, such as telephone intercepts. She said there was no reason for Victoria to have a higher threshold than others to investigate suspected corruption.
Under the narrow definition of corrupt conduct that has restricted IBAC’s reach since its establishment in 2012, it can only investigate behaviour that constitutes a serious criminal offence.
“IBAC’s threshold is the highest threshold in the country,” Elliott told this masthead. “Conduct that can be investigated by the Commonwealth or in NSW, we can’t look at here.
“It [IBAC] should be able to investigate serious breaches of public trust or abuse of power, misuse of information that is gained in public in their public office without hitting a relevant offence that is punishable by five years’ imprisonment.
“It’s not what the Victorians expect. It’s not what is occurring around the rest of the country.”
Premier Jacinta Allan has promised to consider broadening this definition if Labor is re-elected in November. Opposition Leader Jess Wilson, having initially not supported the change, on Thursday opened the door to including a broader definition in IBAC legislation she has vowed to introduce in the first week of a Coalition government.
“An incoming Wilson Liberal and Nationals government will seriously consider any recommendation to change the definition of corruption,” Wilson told this masthead. “If so, it will be included in our December legislation to give IBAC follow-the-money powers and lower the threshold for IBAC to hold public hearings.”
IBAC was established with a dual purpose to investigate and prevent corruption across the Victorian public sector and misconduct by Victoria Police. Elliott said that as a guide, the proposed broadening of IBAC’s remit would deal with behaviour still serious enough for public officials to lose their jobs.
“This is a significant step forward, a significant step to improving integrity in Victoria and building and strengthening trust in not just IBAC, but the police and public sector,” Elliott said. “But this is now the beginning.”
Under the government’s timeline for the changes, an expert reference group including representatives from IBAC, the Victorian Ombudsman and Victoria Police will make recommendations by May next year to inform legislation to be introduced before the end of 2027.
Wilson described this timeline as unacceptable and demanded it be shortened. “Should we be elected, we expect the expert reference group under way to bring forward its reporting date and have advice in the blue books for us to consider immediately,” she said.
While changing the definition of corrupt conduct is IBAC’s priority, the most contentious reform issue is the agency’s use of public hearings to interrogate witnesses, including members of parliament.
Victoria’s last Coalition government, which established IBAC shortly after Barry O’Farrell quit as NSW premier after misleading ICAC over a gifted bottle of wine, limited its capacity to hold public hearings to “exceptional circumstances”. After Labor was returned to power, it legislated to make it even more difficult for IBAC to hold public examinations. Former premier Daniel Andrews was subsequently examined by IBAC behind closed doors in relation to four separate corruption probes.
Former opposition leader John Pesutto in 2023 supported calls by successive IBAC commissioners for IBAC to have greater licence to hold public hearings and follow-the-dollar powers.
In its submission to the parliament’s integrity oversight committee 2025 review of its legislative framework, IBAC described public hearings as a critical tool to expose corruption and called for the “exceptional circumstances” requirement to removed.
IBAC chief executive Alison Byrne said that under its proposed model, IBAC would still have to demonstrate it was in the public interest to hold a public examination, that this could be done without causing unreasonable damage to the reputation or safety of a witness and that the investigation related to either serious or systemic conduct.
“It won’t just be public hearings everywhere, willy-nilly,” Byrne said. “We’ll balance those competing interests.”
The integrity oversight committee was spilt on the question of public hearings. Its recommendations, which the government responded to at the start of the week, called for IBAC to be permitted to conduct public examinations for educative and preventive purposes but made mention of the “exceptional circumstances” provision.
The Commonwealth NACC and IBAC are the only two integrity agencies in Australia required to demonstrate exceptional circumstances to hold public examinations. South Australia’s ICAC has no provision to examine witnesses in public.
The government accepted 21 of the integrity oversight committee’s recommendations, including providing IBAC follow-the-money powers similar to those exercised by the Victorian Auditor General, authority to make and publish findings of corrupt conduct and greater scope to publish its reports.
The government also accepted that IBAC would need additional resources if its jurisdiction were broadened. This is expected to produce an increased number of direct complaints from the public and referrals by other agencies.
Byrne said that while the government’s commitment was welcomed, IBAC needed additional resources ahead of any change in its legislation to deal with the backlog of complaints it is already facing.
When pressed on why an IBAC reform bill could not be drafted and introduced before the election, Elliott said the proposed law changes were complex and would impact on Victoria’s broader integrity and law enforcement system.
“We appreciate that there is a lot to do,” she said. “We will just work as hard as we can to get it done as soon as possible.”
Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.
Chip Le Grand leads our state politics reporting team. He previously served as the paper’s chief reporter and is a journalist of 30 years’ experience.Connect via email.
