Tuesday, 2 June 2026

 Jess WILSON (Kew – Leader of the Opposition) (14:48): My question is to the Premier – sorry, I should say the honourable Premier.

Members interjecting.

The SPEAKER: Order! That is not a good start to question time. Leader of the Opposition, I ask you to direct your question through the Chair.

Jess WILSON: Premier, why should Victorians believe the Premier is serious about giving IBAC follow-the-money powers when she voted against them less than three months ago?

 Jacinta ALLAN (Bendigo East – Premier) (14:49): Yesterday the government announced the most far-reaching reforms to IBAC since it was established in 2012, and central to those reforms was recommendation 1, which was expanding the definition of ‘criminal conduct’. The reason why this definition is important is because the expanded powers for IBAC hang from that recommendation. I note that this is a recommendation that is not supported by the Leader of the Liberal Party, who refused to support this when questioned today on radio.

James Newbury: On a point of order, Speaker, the Premier is debating the question.

The SPEAKER: The Premier to come back to the question.

Jacinta ALLAN: As part of the work that we are doing in implementing the recommendations of the committee – and I thank the members of the house who were part of that committee’s work – the committee itself actually went to this question of timing, and it is why yesterday, alongside announcing the most far-reaching reforms of IBAC, we have immediately established an expert reference group. The committee went to this exact point: we need to ensure that we get these changes right, because they are far reaching and because they go to serious matters that demand serious, thoughtful attention, which is why, in supporting the recommendations as we have done, we are supporting expanding the definition of ‘criminal conduct’ – a recommendation I note the Leader of the Liberal Party does not support. We have supported the recommendations around giving IBAC expanded follow-the-money powers, and I announced yesterday that those powers will be retrospective.

James Newbury: On a point of order, Speaker, on relevance, we are 2 minutes into a 3-minute response, and the Premier has yet to explain why she voted against these powers three months ago. Why?

The SPEAKER: The Premier was being relevant to the question.

Jacinta ALLAN: Then finally we are taking the appropriate approach to dealing with these matters in a serious and considered way. This is something the report goes to, and it is something that the integrity agencies as well go to: you have to see Victoria’s integrity system as a system. That is why we did not support the bill that was put to the Parliament previously by those opposite, who were all about the political moment. They were not about the seriousness of these matters.

 Jess WILSON (Kew – Leader of the Opposition) (14:52): Isn’t it the case that the Premier voted against immediately giving IBAC follow-the-money powers in March because she knew it would reveal the true extent of corruption under her watch before an election?

 Jacinta ALLAN (Bendigo East – Premier) (14:52): The answer is no, and I go to this point: you cannot see the follow-the-money powers recommendation that we are accepting and making retrospective in isolation from the recommendation to expand the definition of ‘criminal conduct’ – a recommendation the Leader of the Liberal Party opposes and did not support, would not support, when questioned on this matter this morning. In order for IBAC to have the reforms that we are implementing, that we have accepted – the most wideranging reforms since IBAC has been created – you have to look at expanding the definition of ‘criminal conduct’ in order for those follow-the-money powers to be implemented effectively, something the Leader of the Liberal Party does not support.