Corruption is no simple business. Investigating it takes skill, diligence and care.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
And plenty of time.
Take the investigation into corruption launched by the ACT Integrity Commission examining the way the Canberra Institute of Technology awarded consulting contracts worth more than $8.5 million to a consultant who dubbed himself a "complexity and systems thinker".
It took two years for an interim report to be released. This found the former chief executive's actions in misleading the board and minister amounted to "serious corrupt conduct".
Now the work goes on. The report - dubbed part one - said there was no evidence from which it was reasonable to infer any particular underlying motive on the part of the former chief executive. It hints that further work will consider the evaluation of specific contracts, the role of the territory's procurement board and just what the contracted consulting work was intended to do.
But the question arises: what further value will be gained from a long investigation into the saga? Would the commission be better off dealing with the other outstanding matters sitting in the in tray? Or is turning every page and looking under every stone critical to the commission's work?
Most of what gets reported to the Integrity Commission amounts to not very much at all. The commission's most recent annual report said it dismissed 83.1 per cent of matters brought to its attention in 2022-23. Fourteen matters prompted an investigation and three required a preliminary inquiry; nine were referred to other entities.
It took the commission an average of 72.8 working days to assess a matter referred to it in the 2022-23 financial year. And those matters are not simple tick-and-flick exercises, either.
"For example, one matter received via email contained six different attachments totalling 858 pages of information. This subsequently resulted in 29 contacts between the complainant and Commission. Another matter involved 38 attachments and 110 pages of material, and resulted in 27 contacts," the commission's report said.
And that's before an investigation is even launched. Block out years in your diary for those.
In the case of the Canberra Institute of Technology, Leanne Cover was stood down as chief executive on full pay for two years. There is no doubt that this is how procedural fairness is supposed to work. No findings had been made against her, and the right to a presumption of innocence is absolute.
Skills Minister Chris Steel had his hands tied. No doubt the government would have loved to have ended Ms Cover's employment as soon as possible. He had to grit his teeth for two years while the opposition took every chance to remind the public Ms Cover was being paid handsomely after a damning Auditor-General's report and stiff criticism from the minister.
Corruption watchdogs are political hot potatoes. The concept is deeply appealing to the public because they are an organisation which promises to keep the bastards honest. Politicians in government are very reluctant to criticise the watchdog's work because it swivels the spotlight back to them: so, what have they got to hide?
But the public also demands action. Shrugging and saying, "It's in the hands of the Integrity Commission, so we just have to wait" wears thin very quickly. Unresolved corruption allegations, particularly ones that have played out in public, are like scabs for the opposition and the public to pick at, taking a very long time to heal.
Even this week, during public hearings into a corruption investigation into the awarding of a construction contract for the Campbell Primary expansion project, the integrity commissioner, Michael Adams KC, revealed findings were a "long way off".
The appropriately high standards of the ACT Integrity Commission regularly conflict with the far lower thresholds of the pub test.
The public made up its mind long ago on the Canberra Institute of Technology saga, well before formal findings were made and released. Though, of course, many had also taken a view on the handling of the Dickson land swap - a controversial deal brokered between the ACT government and the union-owned Dickson Tradies - when the commission cleared Chief Minister Andrew Barr of corruption.
So time really is of the essence.
The commission's public hearings this week pertain to things that may, or may not, have taken place in the office of Deputy Chief Minister Yvette Berry, who is also Education Minister. That will not be cleared up before the election.
And there are hints, too, that it has not been smooth sailing within the commission itself. Consultants have been brought in to improve the culture of the workplace, from which almost half the staff left in 2022-23 and where the average tenure is barely 18 months. That's less than some of the time spent on high-profile investigations.
So what can be done?
Members of the Legislative Assembly this term have displayed a lack of public curiosity into the work of the Integrity Commission.
READ MORE:
The Assembly's standing committee on justice and community safety has not held a single inquiry into the work of the commission in the almost four years that have passed this term. It's now unlikely one would be announced before the election.
Privately, the slow progress from the commission has frustrated members and their staff to no end. It has made parts of the public service look like speedy daredevils.
The opposition has also sought to avoid highlighting potential issues with the Integrity Commission's processes, instead focusing its attacks on the government. It's hard to knock this as a political strategy - it's best to fling mud where it has a chance of sticking - but the opposition could have seized the moment to prove their credibility as astute, integrity-focused lawmakers.
Further findings in the Canberra Institute of Technology contracts saga may well be explosive in a way that will make anyone suggesting now the investigation should be abandoned for other, more pressing, questions of corruption look really silly.
But what will not change is a public and political desire for proceedings to be hurried up so that corruption is stamped out contemporaneously rather than becoming a historical project.