The Inspector of the NACC, Gail Furness, SC, has up to 4 staff and at least 106 services outsourced to Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus’ Attorney-General’s Department which scandalises the claim that the Inspector of the NACC, and the NACC itself, is independent of the government.

If the Inspector of the NACC’s office is totally compromised, which it is, then so is the NACC given the NACC Inspector is the supposed watchdog of the NACC.

On page 2 of a MOU agreement between the Attorney-General’s Department and the Inspector of the NACC Gail Furness, SC, it says the below:

Up to 4 (ASL – Average staffing level) support staff working for Inspector of the NACC Gail Furness, SC, are employed by Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus’s Attorney-General’s Department which means their loyalty is to Mark Dreyfus, not Gail Furness. How scandalous is that and what about being “independent of government”.

The Inspector of the NACC, Gail Furness, SC, also tried a swifty on Friday and sent me an email asking for an extension of time for my FOI request, which was already 10 days overdue, which puts the Gail Furness, SC, in breach of the FOI Act which is not a good look to say the least.

Firstly, I will deal with the fake “independent of government” claim about the NACC and Inspector of the NACC.

Secondly, I will deal with the sneaky Inspector of the NACC request for an extension of time which is part of the government / NACC cover-up attempt and a follow-up to my previous article titled “NACC emails expose the big lie – Attorney-General Mark Dreyfuss is interfering with NACC FOI requests”. (Click here to read the article)

In the previous article I said “Besides processing FOI applications, what else does the Attorney-General’s Department do for the Office of the Inspector of the NACC?” Well, below is the answer and it’s very disturbing because they do everything.

MOU between the NACC and INACC (Click here to read)

When reading this article keep in mind that the Inspector of the NACC doesn’t just investigate the NACC. The NACC Inspector would know what and when the NACC are investigating. How?

Section 4 of the MOU between the NACC and the NACC Inspector, as per below, says that the NACC must give the Inspector of the NACC a copy of any summons they issue for witnesses to appear and the reasons for it. 

Given the Inspector’s staff are all employed by the Attorney-General’s Department it would mean the NACC and INACC would be leaking like a sieve to government staff they are meant to hold accountable.

Memorandum of Understanding Between the Attorney-General’s Department and the Inspector of the National Anti-Corruption Commission: For enabling services (Click here to read the full agreement)

Some examples of what the Attorney-General’s Department does for the Office of the Inspector of the NACC are: Everything to do with Human Resources, Information Technology, Banking, Budgets, Records Management, Systems Support etc.

106 services in total, but they can increase that.

It is the Attorney-General’s Department running the whole office for the Inspector except for the Inspector’s role. It means Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus has his eyes, ears and fingerprints over everything the Inspector of the NACC Gail Furness does, even before she does it.

The NACC and Inspector of the NACC started operations in July 2023.

Is says on the Inspector of the NACC’s website:

“This Agreement outlines the enabling services that will be provided to the Inspector of the National Anti-Corruption Commission (the Inspector) by the Attorney-General’s Department (AGD), establishing a clear service level and parameters around support services to ensure effective performance of the Inspector’s functions.” (Click here to read the full agreement)

Below are four pages of the agreement that outlines all the services provided. I published the whole list below as it really drives home that the government is running the office of the Inspector of the NACC and have access to all the information in that office. When anyone says the NACC or INACC is independent of government it is a lie.

I wonder if someone in the A-G’s office drafted and/or edited the NACC Inspector’s report on the NACC’s Robodebt cover-up? As per above on page 4 it mentions “editorial activities” as a possible additional service.

Apparently, there is no corruption whatsoever in the Attorney-General’s Department and they wouldn’t leak any information to their mates in other government departments. So, it’s ok for the Attorney-General’s Department to run the Inspector of the NACC’s office. Or at least that is what the government want us to believe.

Sneaky request by the Inspector of the NACC for an extension of time

I was sent the below email on Friday from the Attorney-General’s Department FOI team on behalf of the Inspector of the NACC. My FOI requests to the NACC Inspector are managed by the Attorney-General’s Department.

From: AGD FOI Requests
Sent: Friday, 1 November 2024 11:39 AM
To: SHANE DOWLING
Cc: AGD FOI Requests
Subject: UPDATE on FOI24/413 and requested response ASAP – Decision not to investigate referrals from the Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme

Good afternoon Mr Dowling

The purpose of this email is to provide you with an update in relation to your FOI request for documents (FOI24/413) for:

I seek access to the following documents (date range 10^th of June 2024 to 23 August 2024) in relation to the “Inspector of the National Anti-Corruption Commission to inquire into the decision not to investigate referrals from the Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme”.

 (Please exclude all communication (emails and letters etc) from and to the public regarding this request)

 All final emails and letters (not duplicates and please exclude all attachments/enclosures to emails) between the Inspector and the NACC related to the Inspector’s investigation of the NACC’s decision not to investigate the Royal Commission’s Robodebt referrals, including, but not limited to:

• All final emails and letters (not duplicates and please exclude all attachments/enclosures to emails) between the Inspector and NACC Commissioner Paul Brereton.
• All final emails and letters (not duplicates and please exclude all attachments/enclosures to emails) between the Inspector and all other NACC staff.
• All final emails and letters (not duplicates and please exclude all attachments/enclosures to emails) between the Inspector and Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus, his office and his department.
• All final emails and letters (not duplicates and please exclude all attachments/enclosures to emails) between the Inspector and any external lawyers representing Commissioner Paul Brereton and NACC staff. 

Date range for the above request is from the 10^th of June 2024 to 23 August 2024.

We note the statutory due date for this request was 22 October 2024 and the decision is now a ‘deemed refusal’ under the FOI Act. We sincerely apologise for the delay in processing your request. Please be advised that the department on behalf of the Inspector of the National Anti-Corruption Commission (INACC) is continuing to work on your request as a matter of priority. More information regarding deemed refusals and your rights are available via the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner website: Freedom of information | OAIC.

The department is currently working with the INACC to review documents identified within scope of your request to determine sensitivities to material. Consultation with the National Anti-Corruption Commission is also required.

We request that you consider delaying submitting an Information Commission review to the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) and seek your support for the department to submit a section 15AC extension of time to the OAIC until 2 December 2024 to process your request. We will provide you with a decision prior to this date if we are in a position to do so.

Please indicate your position to support our request via return email asap.

Kind regards.

Freedom of Information & Privacy

Attorney-General’s Department 

Email end

I emailed the above FOI request on the 23rd of August 2024 to the Inspector of the NACC and the Attorney-General’s Department negotiated down the scope of my original request to what is above, and they agreed it would be OK.

On the 10th of September they said to me “The Inspector of the National Anti-Corruption Commission agrees to the revised scope” which is the scope in the above email. 

They also said “As we have only recently settled on a scope that is processable, I would like to request your agreement to extend the processing period for your request by 30 days. I am requesting this extension of time from you to ensure the department has sufficient time to process and finalise your request in accordance with the FOI Act.”

And: “If you agree to the requested extension, the new due date will be 22 October 2024. However, the department will make every effort to provide a decision to you as soon as possible.”

But they ignored the 22nd of October date for a decision which makes it a ‘deemed refusal’ and failed to notify me. That puts the Inspector of the NACC in breach of FOI laws, which is not a good look, to conceal the truth from the public about what was happening in the NACC / Robodebt cover-up.

I am a journalist which they know and they know I would report what they are hiding. They also deliberately put the go slow routine on it so they could publish the NACC Inspector’s report first. 

Now they want me to “consider delaying submitting an Information Commission review to the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC)” and want my support to file a “a section 15AC extension of time to the OAIC” for a further delay until 2 December 2024.”

The people playing the FOI games with me are staff employed by the Attorney-General’s Department working in the Inspector of the NACC’s office and also staff in the FOI office at the Attorney-General’s Department all of whom report to the Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus, not the Inspector of the NACC Gail Furness, SC. 

How did all the politicians approve such a dodgy and corrupt set-up?

I’ll keep following up.

Please use Facebook, “X”, email and the other buttons below and help promote this article.

Kangaroo Court of Australia is independent media and is 100% crowdfunded by readers like yourself so please support on the links below. Click on the PayPal button below to donate or for other donation options click here to go to the Donations page.

Thank you for your support.

For the KCA t-shirt shop click here.

For the Fugitive Clothing t-shirt shop click here

Join the free email subscription below and you will be notified immediately I publish new articles which is normally twice a week.