Australia news live: Nacc chief acknowledges ‘disquiet’ over new corruption body but denies it is widespread; Newcastle coal protest under way | Australia news

Corrupt conduct ‘stamp’ on robodebt referrals would not advance public interest: Nacc

The National Anti-Corruption Commissioner, Paul Brereton, is still fronting parliamentarians on the issue of the anti-corruption body’s decision not to investigate robodebt referrals.

The committee’s deputy chair, Helen Haines, has asked why the Nacc said it could not provide compensation to victims or make a criminal finding as part of its decision-making.

Brereton said he didn’t see “anything particularly unusual” about considering the body’s lack of remedies in its decision not to investigate the referrals of potential corrupt conduct.

Haines asked if there was public interest in making corrupt conduct findings, even when there might not be a remedy. Brereton responded:

The public interest lies in exposing corrupt conduct. But if you’re exposing conduct that has already been exposed, that’s where I don’t think you’re adding much value.

And we we’ve never said that there is no value in it, but when you look at … balancing all the considerations, the value in simply adding a stamp of corrupt conduct to the conduct that had been found by the robodebt royal commission did not advance a public interest, or would not advance a public interest. That was our thinking, or my thinking, anyway.

More from the ACCC inquiry into the supermarket sector

The counsel assisting the ACCC inquiry, Naomi Sharp SC, appeared to grow frustrated with Coles senior executives at one point during this morning’s hearing.

Sharp pressed the executives to confirm that even though Coles makes a “commitment” to take a certain volume of produce from a grower, there is nothing legally binding the supermarket to do so and it doesn’t always happen.

The ACCC’s inquiry previously heard from fruit and vegetable suppliers who said they would prefer to have firmer commitments from Coles on how much produce it would actually purchase, to avoid losing money and wasting stock.

As she questioned the supermarket giant’s chief commercial officer, Anna Croft, on the topic this morning, Sharp said:

Can I just be very clear on this point – when you say commitment, what you really need is [a] non-binding forecast?

Croft replied:

We endeavor to deliver our forecast with all of our suppliers, and where we would not deliver that, we would seek to understand [why] that is.

Mick Keogh, who is one of the ACCC’s deputy chairs and is leading its supermarkets inquiry, then said:

I don’t think you’ve answered the question. The question was quite specific about the nature of the contractual obligation.

Coles owns 17 sites it has not launched development applications for

Circling back to the ACCC supermarkets inquiry, during this session, Coles executives have also revealed the company owns more than a dozen sites it has not launched development applications for.

As part of its inquiry, the competition watchdog is examining allegations that Coles and Woolworths engage in “land-banking” by buying sites to block competitors from moving into the same location.

Earlier this morning at the hearing, the Coles property manager Fiona Mackenzie, said the company was yet to submit development applications to build on 17 of 42 of the company’s freehold sites across the country.

The NSW Greens party says a leaked classified document recommending anonymous gambling on poker machines continue until 2028 is “a huge concern”.

A draft report by the independent panel for gaming reform’s executive committee has recommended a “centralised account-based gaming system” be launched in 2027, before becoming mandatory for all venues in 2028.

This new system would be linked to a statewide self-exclusion register and facial recognition technology. It should also collect data “to enable automated risk monitoring” of transactions.

Cate Faehrmann, who leads the NSW Greens’ gambling portfolio, says the government cannot afford to wait until 2028 for a mandatory system.

At this rate, it doesn’t seem as though there is going to be anything resembling cashless gambling in NSW in this term of government.

Given NSW has more than 87,000 poker machines, it will be incredibly disappointing if the report doesn’t offer recommendations as to how to reduce this number.

If an account-based system means that people are identified and need a card or digital wallet to play, which isn’t linked to their bank accounts and sets play and daily limits, then that sounds promising.

The executive committee’s recommendations have been shared with a broader panel of stakeholders and are now being debated.

The NSW government has notreceived a final copy of the report and says it won’t speculate on what it will recommend.

The Coles chief customer officer, Amanda Mcvay, has said the supermarket giant sells shoppers’ “de-identified” data to the suppliers of the products it stocks on its shelves.

Mcvay and other senior Coles executives are giving evidence for the second day in a row to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s inquiry into the supermarket sector.

Under questioning by the counsel assisting the inquiry, Naomi Sharp SC, Mcvay said Coles shared customers’ email addresses with its marketing platform Coles 360.

Mcvay said Coles also shared “purchase behaviour” data that had been “aggregated and anonymized” with its internal “customer research and insight” platform Synergy, which it then sold to suppliers. She said:

Those suppliers I spoke of … [there is an] opportunity for them to purchase the access to the customer behaviour data within their categories, so that they can continue to learn and improve and to understand how their items are performing.

The Nacc commissioner, Paul Brereton, says he accepts the inspector’s finding of “apprehended bias” against him in the robodebt referral decision but does not agree with it.

The anti-corruption body’s top investigator is being quizzed by parliamentarians in an inquiry into its inaugural annual report but the focus has centred on the controversial decision.

The Greens senator David Shoebridge asked whether he agreed with the conclusion by retired judge Alan Robertson SC that Brereton’s involvement meant the Nacc’s decision was “affected by apprehended bias”. Brereton said:

I have said repeatedly that I accept it, though I do not agree with it.

Shoebridge pressed him to explain why. Brereton responded:

First of all, because minds differ … as to whether circumstances give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias. I don’t think these circumstances did so, but others have a different view. And I accept that that different view is open, and I therefore accept the commission has accepted the decision.

The New South Wales parliament has passed the “biggest reforms to the biodiversity offsets scheme since its inception” after inquiries triggered by a 2021 Guardian Australia investigation.

The legislation, promised by the Minns government before the 2023 election, introduces changes aimed at reversing the decline of the state’s biodiversity and improving the integrity of the offsets scheme.

The Blue Mountains MP Trish Doyle, introducing the bill to the lower house, said:

This bill represents the biggest reform to the biodiversity offset scheme since its inception. It is a significant first step in implementing our commitments to fix the biodiversity offset scheme and set nature in NSW on a path to recovery.

Biodiversity offsets are used by developers to compensate for clearing of endangered habitat by protecting and restoring equivalent ecosystems elsewhere. A series of reports by Guardian Australia in 2021 revealed major problems with the NSW scheme.

The legislation introduces several new requirements including that the scheme transition from one that had required no net loss of biodiversity to one that delivers a net positive for nature. The bill passed with support from the Coalition but was opposed by the Greens who said it would not be sufficient to change the “business as usual” scenario of offsets facilitating further environmental decline.

MPs who spoke in favour of the bill, including several independents, said it was just a step in what needed to be a longer reform process to address the state’s biodiversity crisis.

The bill passed the upper house yesterday evening.

The treasurer, Jim Chalmers, has rejected criticism of the under-16s social media ban from X owner Elon Musk, saying he was “not concerned” about the billionaire.

As reported earlier, Musk wrote on his platform X that he believed the plan to ban children from social media was “a backdoor way to control access to the Internet by all Australians”. X is one of the platforms which will be restricted for access to under-16s, alongside Facebook, Snapchat, TikTok, Instagram and Reddit.

In a news conference, Chalmers was asked about Musk’s criticism. He said it didn’t worry the federal government.

I’m not concerned about it … Elon Musk having that view about protecting kids online is entirely unsurprising to us. He’s expressed similar views before.

Our job is not to come up with a social media policy to please Elon Musk, our job is to put in place the necessary protection for kids online, and that’s our motivation.

The idea that Elon Musk is not delighted with our steps to try and protect kids online is not an especially big surprise to us, nor does that trouble us greatly.

The latest from the scene of the Rising Tide climate protest

Rising Tide activists are continuing their protest in the Port of Newcastle for a second day, however police have set up a perimeter to keep protesters confined to an area so that coal ships can still pass through.

Yesterday afternoon the protesters entered the port from Horseshoe Beach aboard kayaks and rafts, and were joined by a boat from Greenpeace, in what is expected to be one of the largest climate protests in Australia’s history.

It came after the NSW police won a legal challenge in a bid to stop the protest going ahead, which means the activists will not be protected from being charged under obstruction and unlawful assembly offences while blocking the waterway.

The Minns government had also attempted to cut off access to Newcastle harbour by issuing a maritime exclusion zone to try to prevent protest but the notice was made invalid by the supreme court after Rising Tide made an urgent application.

This morning, the NSW police set up yellow buoys around a section of the water at Horseshoe Beach. Organisers of the protest said they received a note from police saying it had been set up for people’s safety and moving past them would result in a response by the police, but not an immediate arrest.

The office of NSW transport minister, Jo Haylen, confirmed that ships are still passing through the port today, with eleven ships in total expected. Earlier today, the NSW police put out a statement about the protest saying:

For their own safety and that of the other users of the Port, we request that people who still attend this event refrain from entering the harbour on kayaks or other vessels with the intention to obstruct other users of the Port, or engage in other forms of civil disobedience. We also encourage all participants to follow the directions of police.

The community is reminded that under NSW Legislation, the safe passage of vessels is protected. Unlawful activity may result in fines or imprisonment.

The Nacc commissioner, Paul Brereton, does not accept there is “widespread” disquiet about the federal integrity body after the fallout of its decision not to investigate robodebt referrals.

Under questioning by Greens senator David Shoebridge, and Liberal MP Keith Wolahan, Brereton accepted there was some public distrust but it was not widespread. The Nacc commissioner said:

I’m, frankly, not as pessimistic about the current position of public trust as some are. I agree that there are some sectors and segments which do not have trust in the commission … I think they are probably segments that may never have really been inclined to trust the commission but there are certainly some that do not have trust in the commission.

Brereton said public support from the Nacc parliamentary committee and federal politicians “would go a long way to reinforcing public trust, I think”.

Shoebridge asked whether Brereton accepted there was “widespread disquiet about how the Nacc has handled the robodebt referral”. Brereton said:

I accept that there is disquiet in some areas. I’m not prepared to accept that it’s widespread.

Brereton says resourcing primary factor in decision not to investigate potential corruption from six robodebt referrals

The Nacc commissioner, Paul Brereton, has reiterated resourcing was a primary factor in its decision not to investigate potential corrupt conduct arising from six robodebt referrals.

As we have touched on earlier, Brereton declared a conflict of interest but had some involvement in discussions relating to the decision. The decision is now being reconsidered by an independent decision-maker.

Brereton explained the commission had to consider a number of factors, including whether a referral had been investigated elsewhere.

If we investigated robodebt, that would likely be a large investigation that would use and require the dedication of a significant part of our resources … if we investigated robodebt, there would be other things that we would not be able to investigate.

The deputy commissioner, Nicole Rose, who was ultimately delegated the decision-making power in the referrals, said a lack of resourcing in addition to the absence of any punishment were considerations in the original decision.

Well, resourcing certainly was a consideration, because we knew how much time, money and effort, of course, the royal commission had put into it, and if we were going to liken the type of investigation to a second royal commission … we are set up with very similar powers … so to be running a similar investigation, there’d be many things that would have duplicated what the royal commission had done and done very well.

Meta, parent company of Facebook and Instagram, has warned the government’s bid to ban under-16s from social media will require each company “to collect personal identification or biometric data from all Australians”.

The big tech company says this would be “an inefficient and burdensome process for everyone.”

Meta has responded to the government’s latest social media bill, raising major concerns about how it would work and whether it would achieve its intended goals. They’ve also criticised the rushed timeline for the bill, which was only introduced yesterday, and will get a lightning-fast inquiry process.

A Meta spokesperson said in a statement:

We are concerned the government is rushing this legislation without adequate consultation or evidence and there are still many unknowns with respect to its implementation. The legislation as drafted seems out of step with available research and expert opinions, including those from within the government, academia, industry, mental health organisations, and Australian parents and young people.

They have also criticised the exemption of YouTube and online games from the ban, saying “any new laws aimed at protecting children and teens online should empower parents and be consistently applied across all apps that young people commonly use”.

The government legislation does not prescribe how social media companies should verify the age of their users, leaving that process to the companies themselves. Meta warns it will probably require all Australians to give up more information. The spokesperson said:

Furthermore, the government’s approach will likely require each app provider to collect personal identification or biometric data from all Australians in order to prevent under 16s from accessing their services, an inefficient and burdensome process for everyone.

Parents need clear, efficient ways to oversee the many apps their children use, and that’s why we’ve proposed legislation that requires parental approval and age verification at the operating system and app store level, which reduces the burden and minimises the amount of sensitive information shared.

Brereton describes involvement in robodebt referral decisions as ‘appropriate balance’

The Nacc commissioner, Paul Brereton, has described his involvement in the decision-making process in robodebt referrals as an “appropriate balance” given resourcing limitations.

Brereton said he believed he could make an impartial decision but decided to declare a conflict of interest and delegated decision-making responsibility to a deputy commissioner.

He said he recognised “some might think my impartiality could be affected by my prior professional association, not as some have suggested, a close personal friendship, with one of the six persons referred”.

In August, Guardian Australia revealed this was due to a “close association” relating to Brereton’s service in the army reserve.

Earlier this month, the Nacc released a “corrections to misinformation” fact sheet, which described the relationship as “professional, not personal” and that the two had “never socialised other than at official functions, nor visited each other’s homes”.

In the executive summary of the Nacc inspector’s report, it referenced Brereton’s own words about “person one”. That included that Brereton said he had a “close association” with person one, that they were someone he “knows well”, and “who is well known to me”.

Today, Brereton explained he did not fully exclude himself due to the commission’s resource limitations:

I considered that it would have been irresponsible and negligent for me as a leader of the organization to abandon any involvement in them, provide no guidance, walk away, say ‘it was not my problem’, and leave everyone else to their own devices.

The committee’s Labor chair, Karen Grogan, briefly interrupted Brereton to let him know his opening statement had nearly taken up 30 minutes and senators had questions.

National Anti-Corruption Commission faces parliamentary inquiry

The National Anti-Corruption Commission is facing a parliamentary inquiry this afternoon on its inaugural report.

The commissioner, Paul Brereton, began the hearing with a lengthy opening statement, referencing a recent report by the inspector of the Nacc that found the commission’s initial refusal to not investigate robodebt referrals was “affected by apprehended bias”.

Brereton said he did not want to re-canvass the initial decision as it is now being “independently reconsidered” but accepted the report’s finding.

I have accepted that view through the lens of the legal notion of apprehended bias. I have been found to have made a mistake, for which I am solely responsible.

The commissioner said the original decision was reached “after careful and mature reflection”.

Since commencement, we have been committed to carrying out our work in good faith, with integrity and in the public interest. That does not mean that our decisions will always be popular. Often they will not be. Making decisions that we believe to be right, though they may be unpopular, is what integrity requires us to do. Integrity also requires that we acknowledge and own our mistakes.

The inspector of the Nacc, Gail Furness, will appear after the commission’s appearance finishes.