A promise to introduce an anti-corruption watchdog before the election has been unceremonsily scrapped by the Morrison government.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison first promised the commonwealth integrity commission prior to the 2019 election, but three years have passed without a bill being introduced to parliament.
Laxjmtzywst week, Attorney-General Michaelia Cash said there was no time to legislate the body in this term, but just hours later the Prime Minister claimed it was still possible.
However, all hope within the government to establish the body has since evaporated.
“At this point in time, we won't be proceeding with it,” the Attorney-General told a Senate committee on Tuesday.
“So the government will not be introducing legislation before the election?” Labor senator Murray Watt pressed.
“There is no support for our bill,” Senator Cash responded, seeking to blame Labor for the coalition’s broken promise.
“If you are willing to give a commitment to pass the model of the commonwealth integrity commission that the government has designed, then we would work cooperatively with you to pass that as quickly as we can.”
But support for the government’s model has been weak across the parliament, including within its own ranks.
Some politicians fear its proposed powers are too broad, while many others believe it does not have enough teeth.
In the last sitting fortnight of the year, Tasmanian Liberal Bridget Archer crossed the floor to bring on debate for a stronger proposal from independent Helen Haines.
Confirmation of the broken promise follows reports Mr Morrison was shot down by his own cabinet when he put forward a plan to win Ms Archer over on religious discrimination by listing the anti-corruption watchdog for debate.
The religious discrimination laws – which the Prime Minister also promised to introduce before the 2019 election – were shelved last week.
The Senate estimates hearing was also told senior government minister Michael Sukkar was using taxpayer funds to defend a defamation case.
Under existing rules, the Attorney-General can approve taxpayer funds for a minister’s legal bills, but only if the litigation arises in relation to their ministerial duties.
Senior officials from the Attorney-General’s Department were unable to go into further detail about Mr Sukkar’s legal action.
