NACC boss defends controversial involvement in Robodebt decision, denies ‘widespread disquiet’ at watchdog

A record 700 complaints in three days was the trigger for the corruption watchdog’s inspector to investigate why the body controversially chose not to investigate referrals from the Robodebt royal commission, a decision which is now being reconsidered due to “apprehended bias”. National Anti-Corruption Committee’s independent inspector Gail Furness said it was clear she had to investigate the processes around the decision, due to the number of complaints received. “There would be no way I could write to 700 people saying there was nothing to see here without me looking to see if there was anything to see,” she told an inquiry into the watchdog on Friday. “I don’t think I’ve ever received or heard of that number of complaints being received about the same matter in a way that they were not automatically generated, so it was not a difficult decision.” The resulting report would go on to find that NACC chair Paul Brereton should have entirely excluded himself from the decision-making process, after he declared he had a close association with one of the referred individuals. Instead, the report – which led to calls for the former Supreme Court judge’s resignation – found his involvement was “comprehensive," and said the decision should be reconsidered by an “eminent, independent person”. Defending his decision Mr Brereton said that while he “accepted” his judgment was “found to be mistaken through the prism of the law relating to apprehended bias,” he believed his absence would have created “very significant resource implications for the commission”. He also said that while he “personally” disagreed with the report findings, he accepted them. “Because I am used to accepting processes, including being found to being wrong”. Mr Brereton told the inquiry he had to “strike a balance between my responsibility as a leader” and “avoiding the perception that my prior professional relationship could affect the decision”. “Considered that it would have been irresponsible and negligent for me, as a leader of the organisation, to abandon any involvement in them, provide no guidance, walk away, say it was not my problem and leave everyone else to their own devices,” he said. Under tough questioning from Greens senator David Shoebridge, Mr Brereton denied there was “widespread disquiet” around how the NACC had handled the Robodebt scandal. “I accept that there is disquiet in some areas. I’m not prepared to accept that it’s widespread,” Mr Brereton said. The NACC’s decision not to further investigate the Robodebt referrals was also in part due to the “resources required” for the investigation which would be similar to what was required of the royal commission. “If we investigated Robodebt, that would likely be a large investigation that would use and require the dedication of a significant part of our resources,” he said. Assistant commissioner Nicole Rose added that the NACC didn’t want to duplicate the investigation which had been undertaken by the resource-intensive probe. “We knew how much time, money and effort, of course, the Royal Commission had put into it, and … there’d be many things that would have duplicated what the royal had done and done very well,” she said. Previously, Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus said the government had planned to table and publish sealed section of the final report into the Robodebt Royal Commission, which contained the names of six individuals recommended for further criminal and civil action. However, the decision by the NACC to review its decision whether or not it would investigate had delayed the release of the names. “The government will now seek advice from the NACC decision maker, once appointed, on whether the tabling of the confidential additional chapter would prejudice any current or future decision of the NACC,” Mr Dreyfuss said earlier this month. The NACC has received more than 4200 referrals and is currently undertaking 35 preliminary investigations and 29 corruption investigations. Of those, six relate for former or current parliamentarians, three relate to former or current parliamentary staffers, five relate to contractors or consultants, and 11 to senior executive officials. However, Mr Brereton said it was “important to remember that most corruption investigations do not result in the finding of corrupt conduct”.