An inquiry into Paul Brereton, the former head of the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), has been terminated. NACC Inspector Gail Furness announced the decision to cease the investigation, stating that the expenditure involved could not be justified.
Greens Senator David Shoebridge, who had advocated for Brereton’s resignation, criticized the decision, arguing that it allowed Brereton to evade accountability by stepping down from his role.
The NACC has concluded that pursuing two investigations into Brereton is not warranted, particularly since he is no longer in office. Brereton resigned from his position as the inaugural NACC commissioner in May amid ongoing criticism related to his connections with the defense sector and his management of potential conflicts of interest. He indicated that the scrutiny was detracting from the agency’s primary objectives.
On Wednesday morning, Inspector Furness stated her decision to halt the investigations, which had already incurred significant public costs, based on her assessment that the systemic issues involved had been resolved. She emphasized that neither investigation pertained to corruption within the NACC but focused solely on Brereton’s personal conduct.
Furness explained in her statement, “In order to finalize the draft reports, which are partially contested, substantial public funds would have to be allocated. I do not believe such expenditure is justifiable, given that Commissioner Brereton has resigned and the systemic issues previously identified have been adequately addressed.” She further noted that the ongoing scrutiny of Brereton’s actions was diverting the agency’s attention from its core mission.
The statement highlighted the need for the NACC to concentrate on its essential roles of detecting, investigating, and deterring corruption. Acting Commissioner Kylie Kilgour endorsed Inspector Furness’s decision, pointing out the absence of systemic issues that required attention. “I am dedicated to fostering a transparent and constructive relationship with the Inspector,” she remarked. “We have numerous prevention and educational initiatives underway, along with several critical investigations. There is much work to be done.”
In February, Furness had initiated an investigation following complaints regarding Brereton’s ongoing associations with the defense force. This inquiry was prompted by an ABC report that disclosed Brereton’s continued advisory role to the Inspector-General of the Australian Defence Force during his tenure as NACC commissioner, particularly concerning the inquiry into war crimes in Afghanistan.
During a Senate estimates hearing in May, Brereton indicated that he had revealed his affiliations with the Inspector-General but did not believe it was necessary to outline the exact nature of his involvement. However, on Wednesday, Inspector Furness concluded that the contested matters no longer required resolution as Brereton was no longer in office, and her investigation did not reveal any systemic issues.
She did, however, mention that the NACC had implemented changes to its policies regarding conflicts of interest to prevent “undue secrecy” and to “enhance integrity” within its decision-making processes. Moving forward, all NACC personnel will be required to disclose personal interests and provide comprehensive details about their relevance to the commission’s work. “I am confident that these changes will lead to increased scrutiny, transparency, and accountability in how conflict of interest matters are managed within the Commission,” she stated.
Inspector Furness also indicated that the second complaint regarding Brereton’s conduct during two NACC operations did not reveal any systemic issue necessitating reform. In 2024, the former commissioner was found to have committed “officer misconduct” due to his inadequate management of a declared conflict of interest concerning a Robodebt referral.
Criticism regarding the decision to terminate the investigations has been voiced by Senator Shoebridge, who expressed disappointment over the unfinished complaints. He stressed the necessity for accountability at high levels, asserting that Brereton’s resignation should not exempt him from facing the consequences of his actions. “It is essential for individuals in senior roles to be held accountable, and resigning before a judgment is made undermines that accountability,” he stated.
While acknowledging the diligence and independence of the NACC inspector, Shoebridge affirmed that his team would persist in advocating for reforms within the NACC. He remarked, “Commissioner Brereton’s actions were defended by the NACC at considerable public expense. Restoring confidence in the NACC will require more than merely changing the commissioner.” Brereton’s departure from the commission took place on July 6, two years prior to the conclusion of his term.
