Officials from the Attorney General’s Department at the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC). L to R: Joanna Virtue, Assistant Secretary, Fraud Prevention and Anti-Corruption Branch, Sarah Chidgey Deputy Secretary, Integrity and Security Group, and Sara Samios, First Assistant Secretary, Integrity and Criminal Law Division.
The Albanese government will not reveal who will select the next leaders of the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), nor publicly seek nominations for the independent member of the appointment panel, prompting fresh criticism over transparency.
The decision emerged during a parliamentary inquiry into the commission’s operations , where government officials defended a closed appointment process despite mounting scrutiny of the NACC following the resignation of former Commissioner Paul Brereton and the departure of Assistant Commissioner Nicole Rose.
Sarah Chidgey, a deputy secretary at the Attorney General’s Department, told the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the NACC that an “open, merit-based, and competitive process” would be followed to appoint new commissioners.
However, she confirmed that the identities of the three- or four-member panel responsible for recommending candidates would not be made public.
Nor would their be a public expression-of-interest process for the “eminent independent person” who will sit on the panel, typically a senior lawyer or former judge.
Related Stories
Greens Senator David Shoebridge accused the government of failing to meet its own standards of transparency and accountability.
“You won’t even tell the public who’s going to be the eminent person on a recruitment panel,” he said.
No Plans for Reform
He questioned whether public confidence in an anti-corruption body could be maintained if Australians were expected to accept decisions “on faith” rather than being able to see how corruption issues were being addressed.
“I don’t think it’s one or the other,” Chidgey replied. “I think it is about making decisions in the NACC about appropriate levels of transparency and confidentiality.”
Chidgey said the department’s view remained that the legislation was working as intended and no reforms were being considered.
Independent MP Helen Haines also questioned the secrecy surrounding the appointment process, arguing that suitably qualified independent appointees were capable of managing lobbying or external pressure.
Haines further asked whether any review had been undertaken of the legislation governing the NACC’s powers and operations, particularly around holding public hearings.
“No,” Chidgey replied.
Nationals MP Pat Conaghan challenged the decision not to publicly seek expressions of interest for the independent appointment panel member, arguing that restricting consideration to candidates already known to government risked undermining public confidence.
“Because it would seem that the process that you’re undertaking now accesses a limited pool of professionals, and from an outsider’s perspective, would erode the trust in terms of the transparency and integrity of the process,” he said.
Chidgey responded that the approach reflected standard practice across a broad range of statutory appointments.
“But this is just one person, the independent person,” Conaghan pointed out, but Chidgey said it would be “unprecedented” to look outside the list of people held by the government, from which all such appointments are made.
Asked directly by Conaghan whether the process risked eroding public trust, Chidgey replied, “No.”
