On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity, I present the committee's report on committee proceedings in the 45th Parliament.
Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e).
by leave—I rise as chair of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Australian Commission for Law-Enforcement Integrity to briefly speak about the committee's report on proceedings in the 45th Parliament. The committee has become aware that a former MP and member the committee, the Hon. Stuart Robert, may have held a conflict of interest during the 45th Parliament that was not properly managed. This matter has been raised in media reports and in the proceedings of other committees. From this committee's perspective, the central matter relates to a private briefing that the committee received from Unisys, a technology company, on 30 November 2017. It has been alleged that in this briefing Mr Robert held private interest that was not disclosed. Given the seriousness of the matter, the committee reviewed its records from the time and agreed to publish this report to put on the parliamentary record details of committee proceedings that have been discussed publicly.
This report provides key points from the committee's review of its records, including information that would not normally be published, but only to the limited extent necessary to respond to concerns raised in the public domain. Based on minutes, this report confirms that a private meeting was held by the committee on 17 October 2017, and included on the agenda a proposal from Mr Robert to meet with Unisys in relation to an ongoing inquiry into the integrity of Australia's border arrangements. At some point in the meeting, in the absence of the chair and deputy chair, Mr Robert was appointed acting chair. Then, on the motion of Mr Robert, the committee agreed to hold a private briefing with Unisys. On 30 November 2017, the private briefing with Unisys was held. The minutes show that the chair left during the briefing, and in the deputy chair's absence the chair appointed Mr Robert as acting chair.
Based on the minutes, the committee has not identified evidence that Mr Robert declared a conflict of interest in relation to the Unisys briefing. Having reviewed its records, the committee is confident its deliberations were not unduly influenced by the private briefing with Unisys. The invitation to Unisys shows a clear understanding of how the briefing related to the committee's inquiry. Moreover, the committee's report on that inquiry does not mention Unisys, nor do any of the recommendations appear to relate to Unisys. As to whether or not Mr Robert held a private interest that should have been declared and managed, the committee is not able to form a view because it has not received evidence in relation to this question. It also does not have an opportunity to gather such evidence before it ceases to exist on 1 July 2023, at the commencement of the National Anti-Corruption Commission. The committee is mindful that Mr Robert has rejected any imputation or allegation of improper conduct. As a general principle, the committee is of the view that any committee member who has a private interest in the subject of a committee inquiry should, at a minimum, declare that interest.
I trust that the information in this report will usefully inform parliament and the public in relation to the committee's proceedings in 2017.
