Wednesday, 22 March 2023

Committees

Select committee

Establishment

Debate resumed.

Adem SOMYUREK (Northern Metropolitan) (12:54): When I speak on IBAC it can take a while. I spent four days in November 2021 speaking to IBAC. When the subject matter is IBAC, I can speak for four weeks straight on IBAC. We are told that there is dirt on IBAC and the Labor Party committee members have it. If they do, can I please have it? If anyone else in the community has dirt on IBAC and if anyone within the organisation of IBAC has dirt on IBAC, please give it to me.

Normally I have a very high bar in terms of raising matters. I certainly do not abuse parliamentary privilege. For the 21 years that I have been here my guiding principle has been never to say anything that I was not prepared to say outside. I have never abused parliamentary privilege. But after having read the IBAC report under privilege, because I would sue them if it was not under privilege, they gave space to tainted testimonies of witnesses with an axe to grind as if it were fact. Apparently they have no evidentiary bar that they have to get over; they can just present assertions as facts. If you have got dirt on IBAC – I appeal to the Labor Party committee members who have dirt on IBAC – please, please give it to me. I am prepared to use it.

Let us talk about Mr Redlich. Mr Redlich is a serial leaker. He leaked what he was investigating. I did not know what IBAC were investigating until I took the stand – well, until the public examinations started – but he leaked to the media what they were investigating. He leaked that there was a formal investigation to the media. He then leaked there was going to be a public examination to the media. See a pattern emerging here? He then leaked the draft report of the investigation. For good measure, he leaked the final report, 24 hours before it was due to be tabled, to the media. I had to wait until the report was tabled whereas the media had it 24 hours before me. I went out to do a press conference without having read the final report, but I had to do a press conference. There is a theme developing here. Now, because he was slighted on a parliamentary committee, he writes the Presiding Officers a private letter, thinking that it is going to get leaked. It did not get leaked, so he leaks the letter to the media himself.

This man is out of control. He is puerile. I have seen young Labor politicians at work, and even they would not do anything as shameless as this. He is absolutely drunk on power. The man is a narcissist. It is all about self-aggrandisement. It is all about self-promotion. The textbook definition of ‘corruption’ is the misuse of entrusted power for private gain. I contend that the former Commissioner, Redlich, has been leaking to media in exchange for favourable media coverage. I contend that he has been acting corruptly.

Let us get to the substance of the issue in terms of the parliamentary oversight committee. This is not about Redlich’s concern for parliamentary oversight of IBAC. It has got nothing to do with it. He was slighted. I contend that he was slighted; that is what this problem is. Sure, there are many problems with the accountability mechanisms of our Westminster system. The system was not designed with disciplined modern political parties in mind, so the accountability mechanisms do not work. It is a winner-takes-all system, and that needs to be reformed. We all know that. But Mr Redlich was not motivated by the high-minded pursuit of one of his oversight mechanisms not working how it should.

The man is drunk on power, and he was slighted because a group of MPs shut him down. That is what the problem here is. He was shut down by MPs, and he thinks that he ought to be able to bully MPs into submission. I think he comes pretty close because MPs are scared of IBAC as it is. There are two mechanisms for oversight of IBAC: one is the Victorian Inspectorate, which is a joke, which is an absolute joke. It is underfunded, it has no teeth. That needs to be bolstered. The other is the IBAC oversight committee, and MPs are shit-scared of IBAC because one mention of an MP’s name in an IBAC report is terminal for their career. The former Commissioner knows this. He could not stand the fact that he was shut down, and now he is having a big dummy spit. That is what this is all about. I do not think Mr Redlich should be ever heard from again. He should exit stage left and nick off.

In terms of these Greens, I have made my views clear on this issue. I read in the papers yesterday that they are worried about damaging a Labor government. What is your job? You have got a contract.

Samantha Ratnam: Who said that?

Adem SOMYUREK: You probably said it off the record via an unnamed source.

The PRESIDENT: Through the Chair, please, Mr Somyurek.

Adem SOMYUREK: Your contract with the electorate is to hold the government to account irrespective of the ideological persuasion of that government. You cannot play ideological buddies. You have got to hold the government to account. It does not matter if they are Socialist Left in the government or whatever they are – you have got to hold the government of the day to account. That is your contract with the electorate. That is your job with the contract. I have got to tell you, Barber would not have done this. Barber did not care at all. Barber used to strike fear into Labor government ministers. He was forensic. He used to hold us – at that point, I was on that side – to account, and he did a good job.

I am still contemplating whether I bring to this place a motion referring Mr Redlich to the Privileges Committee on the grounds that he was trying to bully MPs and so was in contempt of Parliament. I will decide that over the next couple of weeks.

Lee TARLAMIS (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (13:01): I move:

That debate on this motion be adjourned until later this day.

Motion agreed to and debate adjourned until later this day.