Abstract
This article reviews developments in the Australian integrity system made during the last three decades. It evaluates current organisational arrangements across national and state jurisdictions and examines the drivers and challenges involved with further expansion of integrity systems. The article argues that, while a more comprehensive system of integrity may be warranted, there have been improvements and that there are limits to further expansion of integrity frameworks given Australia's particular system of government.
Acknowledgements
The author of this article gratefully acknowledges the Institute for Public Administration Australia/University of Canberra Public Administration Research Trust Fund for the grant made to facilitate this research. Thanks are also given to research assistance provided by Helen Tracey and Elizabeth O'Brien.
Notes
1. WA Inc refers to the web of relationships between business and both major political parties in WA that became notorious in the 1980s.
2. In addition to competition between anti-corruption bodies and police departments, there is also competition among different integrity agencies. The Victorian Office of Police Integrity's recent draft report (VOPI Citation2010) attacked the Police Department's investigations and the work of its Ethical Standards Department in relation to police shootings and deaths during pursuits. This criticism was seen by some observers as an attempt to take over this function (Ackerman Citation2010).
3. The Borbidge Coalition Government in Queensland (1996–1998) established an inquiry into the Criminal Justice Commission (CJC). This was seen primarily as an attempt to undermine the CJC (Prenzler Citation2009, p. 581). The inquiry was closed down by the Supreme Court of the state on the basis of its ‘ostensible bias.’
4. These include all those members of VIACC, plus the Auditor-General, Ombudsman, Parliamentary Integrity Commission and the Public Sector Standards Commissioner.