The NACC deputy commissioner explains the two "key" reasons why they didn't make the hearings into Morrison etc public
1) "Public hearings could prejudice any later criminal proceedings"
2) "It could cause unfair harm to the reputation, privacy, safety or wellbeing of individuals involved"
the guardian should stop functioning as a confession booth for guilty labor backbenchers imo
Jeremy's reaction is a good measure of how this failure will be received among the wider public, not only as it concerns the NACC, but what it suggests about the broader ability of Australian institutions to hold anyone of significant power or influence to account for anything in future.
"we don't believe a politician would act deceptively because it isn't in their best interests to do so"
"That sign can't stop me because I can't read" Arthur meme
Morrison, Campbell & Musolino cleared of corruption in what can only be described as the "D.W. defence"
Given Ms Campbell’s delegation to Ms Golightly of management responsibility for OCI; Ms Campbell’s lack of involvement in drafting the NPP once the PAYG Clean Up proposal had been approved for development; Ms Campbell’s belief that no substantive change was made to the proposal after it was approved for development (as was reflected in the fact that once approved for development, the projected savings did not alter); Ms Campbell’s belief, and the fact, that legislative compliance was the responsibility of DSS and, therefore, something about which she need not be concerned; Ms Campbell’s focus on costings; the sheer volume of NPPs with which Ms Campbell had to deal within a short time; and the speed with which she must have had to deal with each one, I do not find it ‘implausible’ that the changes or their significance did not register with her. It presents to me as well within the bounds of reasonable possibility they did not.
NACC disagrees with the Royal Commission that Campbell deliberately misled the ERC. The Morrison defence is again wheeled out to clear the Department Secretary: she was simply too busy and stupid to participate in corruption
Secondly, if Mr Morrison had suspected the NPP was misleading, I think it probable that the last thing he would have done was refrain from speaking up in the hope of OCI being adopted without further delay or investigation. For, as a member of parliament and minister of many years standing, he would almost certainly have foreseen that, were he to do so, there would be a high chance of the deception soon being discovered and of his and his government’s subjection to the inevitably adverse political consequences that would follow. Rather than being a reason to suspect a dishonest failure to inquire, the fact that Mr Morrison did not make further inquiries appears more probably consistent with him not having perceived there was a need to do so.
"We don't believe Morrison would act dishonestly, because he was a member of parliament for many years" is a very funny argument. I'll give them that
accuracy of advice provided to the Cabinet under their names. Those were and are requirements of the principle of Cabinet solidarity. But that does not mean that the presenting and portfolio ministers were (or presumably are) expected to examine or interrogate each proposal they brought to Cabinet with the time, skill and insight of the departmental experts whose role it was to ensure that the NPP complied in all respects with Cabinet requirements. If the department failed to ensure that an NPP was compliant, the presenting minister and to a greater or lesser extent the portfolio minister were ultimately responsible; but not necessarily, if at all, because of any personal failing on the part of those ministers to do what was to be expected of a competent minister in the presenting or portfolio minister’s position. Neither presenting ministers nor portfolio ministers had or presumably have the time, or in most cases ability, to reinterpret or re-examine matters covered in the checklist; especially the question of whether legislation is required. Ministers were, and presumably still are, expected to and did rely on the warranty of the secretaries of the departments who had signed off on their Cabinet submissions.
NACC lets Morrison off the hook, believing Ministers shouldn't be expected to "examine or interrogate" new proposals like Robodebt. They say Ministers also don't have the time or ability (??) to ensure programs are compliant with the law.
What...do they think we're paying these people to do?
Thirdly, it is necessary to bear in mind that Mr Morrison, like many other ministers, was not a lawyer, and therefore did not have, nor could be expected to have, an informed comprehension of how a once-perceived need for legislative amendment had resolved, without fundamental change to the structure of OCI, to the view that legislative amendment was not required.1555 It was enough, and it was necessary for the proper efficient processes of government, for Mr Morrison, as with other like ministers, to be assured by the NPP and checklist that the subject matter experts within each department were agreed that legislative amendment was not required
"Thirdly, as a dumbass who doesn't know stuff - and never bothered to learn - Mr Morrison can hardly be held accountable"
In the present context, however, of an investigation into allegations of corrupt conduct, we are not so much concerned with Diceyan theory of ministerial accountability and Cabinet solidarity as with personal obligations of honesty and good faith. Thus, although Mr Morrison may have been responsible to Cabinet for the failings of DSS – in particular for DSS’ failings in not preventing the shortcomings of the NPP and checklist – it by no means necessarily follows that Mr Morrison was personally at fault for not detecting the failings of DSS or that he set out to act dishonestly or in bad faith. The question of any personal shortcoming requires consideration of the system and circumstances of ERC’s operation at the time of its adoption of the NPP.
The passages clearing Morrison of fault are extraordinary
NACC says Morrison is technically "responsible" as cabinet Minister, but not "personally at fault"
If responsibility exists without consequence...then what does "ministerial accountability" even mean anymore?
Hearings 62. Private hearings were held pursuant to section 62 of the NACC Act extending over 35 sitting days between 5 August and 3 October 2025. During those private hearings, each of the 6 referred persons and a further 33 witnesses were called to give evidence. See Witnesses. 63. The Deputy Commissioner considered the use of public hearings and applied the statutory test established under the NACC Act. The statutory threshold for public hearings in this investigation was not met. For more
NACC decided it wasn't in the public interest to make its corruption hearings with Morrison, Campbell, Mussolino etc public
I would conservatively estimate that 90% of Australians would disagree
Recommendations and outcomes The investigation made findings of serious corrupt conduct against 2 individuals. It also concluded that there was insufficient admissible evidence to establish the alleged offences against either Mr Withnell or Ms Wilson beyond reasonable doubt. Key admissions and statements made during this investigation are not admissible in criminal proceedings. It is therefore not appropriate to refer either to the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions. The NACC Act invests the Commission with corruption prevention and education functions and the power to make recommendations as part of the Commission’s investigation reports aimed at preventing corrupt conduct from occurring again. In this case, however, the Royal Commission made a number of recommendations to improve the budget process and agency responses to the Commonwealth Ombudsman, and they have since been implemented.
NACC clears Morrison, Campbell, Musolino, & Halbert of corrupt conduct.
Withnell & Wilson were found guilty of "serious corrupt conduct", but aren't referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions because statements they made to NACC "are not admissible in criminal proceedings"
The system works!
You can read NACC's investigation into the Robodebt Six here. I'll post some "highlights" in this thread www.nacc.gov.au/sites/defaul...
Morrison one of the six referred to anti-corruption commission Sarah Basford Canales Sarah Basford Canales Former prime minister, Scott Morrison, was one of the six people robodebt royal commissioner, Catherine Holmes, referred to the National Anti-Corruption Commission. The final report, released this morning, found two officials – Mark Withnell and Serena Wilson – had engaged in serious corrupt conduct. The report found the other four, however, did not. The other four names referred to the Nacc included Morrison, Kathryn Campbell, Annette Musolino and Catherine Halbert. Morrison’s failure to realise the bureaucratic advice was misleading, the report found, was due to both the social services and human services departments failing to advise him and other ministers that new laws were needed. Campbell was one of two named by the Australia Public Service Commission in 2024 after it found 12 public servants, including Campbell and former department head Renée Leon, breached the code of conduct 97 times during their involvement in the robodebt program.
NACC's new report finds that two of the Robodebt Six engaged in serious corrupt conduct www.theguardian.com/australia-ne...
smh, you're on board a vessel doing war crimes, and you can't even put it on your resume
Anthony Albanese has confirmed that three Australians were on a US submarine that sank an Iranian warship, after the Labor government earlier refused to comment on reports that emerged on Thursday. The prime minister said the Australian defence force personnel were on the submarine as part of an Aukus training program. But he maintained that Australian forces were in compliance with international law, and said: “No Australian personnel have participated in any offensive action against Iran.”
we are ONLY doing work experience (war for the dole). we are not doing real work
📣 Reportedly only 140,000 out of the 480,000 Robodebt class action members have registered to receive additional compensation in the proposed settlement.
If you're eligible, you have until 4pm tomorrow to register with Gordon Legal:
robodebtsettlement.com.au
didn't even know they were doing call-blocking. happy to chat more over message if you like
This was the Workforce Australia line?
Tested the line this morning - on hold for 90 minutes and the auto-script is directing me to hang up and consult the website to resolve my issues
I've gone to the website and, welp - it's down
Owned! Labor has dumped its dreadful FOI Bill, because "it does not have the support of the Senate"
TCF mentioned
albo's got a speechwriter job waiting for him
keeping an eye on a volatile situation spiraling toward international consequences: the possibility of a kyle sandilands post-cancellation podcast
naturally, DEWR are trucking in labour hire to deal with the contact centre staffing crisis www.theguardian.com/australia-ne...
Workforce Australia Contact Issues On hold with Workforce Australia because they require me to book a training course and say you need to call them if there is a session you can't attend to. I have an emergency dentist appointment tomorrow and need to miss the afternoon part of the session. Om hold for an hour, they're saying up to 4 hours longer and that I may not get through today. Is there anyone or anywhere else I can go to sort this out if I don't get in? Can I go to my local services Australia office or email or something?.
Reports now that welfare recipients are spending 4-5 hours on hold to Workforce Australia, trying to avoid payment suspensions, and get demerits overturned
Is this your experience?
Australians impacted by Robodebt have until 4pm on Friday, March 6, to register for a new class action settlement with payouts between $1,000 and $50,000 au.finance.yahoo.com/news/centrel...
