This article is more than 2 years old

This article is more than 2 years old

Integrity in politics should be treated with the same seriousness as national security, the opposition leader, Bill Shorten, said, as he committed Labor to a federal integrity commission if the party wins the next federal election.

In his first speech to the National Press Club this year, Shorten acknowledged voters were disaffected with politics and were craving solutions to clean up the system.

He described restoring public confidence in Australia’s democractic system as “bigger than me versus Malcolm, bigger than Labor versus Liberal” and crucial to winning back trust.

“Because the most corrosive sentiment in democracies around the world is the idea that politicians are only in it for themselves,” he said on Tuesday.

“And that’s simply not true. It’s not true of me or Tanya [Plibersek] or any of our team. It’s not true of nearly everyone I’ve known in 10 years of parliament, from all viewpoints and parties.

Why a federal Icac is voters' best chance at breaking the scandal cycle | Lenore Taylor Read more

“But so long as the political news is dominated by the minority who do the wrong thing, the travel rorts and dodge donors and sinecures where cabinet ministers walk straight into cushy jobs in the same sector, then we’re going to have a hard time convincing the Australian people that we’re serving their interests, not ours.”

Shorten described a national integrity commission as “resolving the gaps and inconsistencies in the current framework”, which he would enact in the first year of a Labor government.

“This is not about partisanship, this is about trust,” he said, adding he was not aware of any corrupt conduct.

“It has to be independent and well-resourced, secure from government interference. It needs a broad jurisdiction, effectively operating as a standing royal commission, with all those investigative powers, into serious and systemic corruption in the public sector.”

Shorten said the commission would have the power to hold public hearings, one commissioner and two deputies appointed on a bipartisan basis for one fixed five-year term, and would make findings of fact, which would then be referred, if necessary, to the appropriate authority.

He invited the government to work with Labor in establishing an integrity commission in this term of government. But while Malcolm Turnbull did not rule out looking at the proposal, he issued a pre-emptive strike against Shorten before the Labor leader had even delivered his speech, telling reporters Shorten was no anti-corruption “warrior”.

“I have to say, though, you know, Bill Shorten’s credibility on the question of corruption is pretty tattered,” the prime minister said.

Turnbull said the government was considering a Senate inquiry into an integrity commission and the government was looking at its response.

“I’m looking at it, we are reviewing the report,” he said. “Obviously in anything like that, the devil will always be in the detail.

The Senate acts as an anti-corruption body? Barnaby Joyce is having a laugh | Scott Ludlam Read more

“As we all know, if you look around the states and territories, the Independent Commission Against Corruption – some of the Icacs have worked better than others. So, there is a lot of experience to learn from. It isn’t something to embark on in a rushed or ill-considered way.”

The announcement has already been greeted with scepticism from the Institute of Public Affairs, which criticised the proposal as only “a good idea if you believe in trampling on fundamental legal rights”.

“The mere act of being referred to a federal Icac will assume guilt before a fair trial, and will be used as a political weapon rather than uncover actual cases of serious corruption,” said its policy director, Simon Breheny.

“The Turnbull government must demonstrate its commitment to the bedrock principles of our legal system and reject calls for a federal Icac.”



Tuesday’s Guardian Essential poll put Labor in an election-winning position on the two-party-preferred measure, and suggested voters were preoccupied by rising energy costs and cost of living pressures.