Gail Furness SC, Inspector of the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC), has clearly and openly abused her position by sweeping 2 corruption investigations under the carpet to protect former NACC Commissioner Paul Brereton, and Greens Senator David Shoebridge thanked and supported Gail Furness’s conduct.
This is not the first rodeo for Gail Furness SC, and it’s not the first time Senator David Shoebridge has ignored Gail Furness’s corrupt conduct.
On Wednesday, the 8th of July 2026, Gail Furness SC published her 6-page Dear John letter telling the public she had decided to discontinue her second and third corruption investigations that were still afoot into former NACC Commissioner Paul Brereton.
The Dear John letter is dated the 3rd of July 2026, so I assume they still use pigeons to send mail in Canberra, and the fact that it was released on the 8th of July has nothing to do with it being less than 12 hours before the State of Origin decider was played. (The old take out the rubbish routine used by politicians when they have bad news)
The key reasons given by Gail Furness SC for discontinuing the 2 investigations are that she “cannot justify such expenditure in circumstances where Commissioner Brereton has resigned.”
The clear message sent by Gail Furness SC to staff at the NACC is if you resign, you get off scot-free because enforcing the law costs too much to “justify such expenditure.”
Two comments on social media sum up the situation: John Rowsthorne said:
Hang on … are we now saying as a society you will escape punishment because the cost is too high? Are we now putting a price cap on justice? ‘Cannot justify such expenditure’: why the corruption watchdog dropped two investigations into former boss
And Step and fetch said:
“Too late the crooks have left” this is the same reason why the #Robodebt crooks were not pursued. Note to all MP’s and APS staff: if you’re a crook make sure you resign while being investigated as this will stop the investigation and you will be exonerated. #LaborCrimeFamily
In the below video, Senator David Shoebridge asks Gail Furness SC questions at the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee senate estimates hearing on Tuesday (26/5/26) about the 2 investigations.
At the 13.50 minute mark, they discuss the recent government budget, and Gail Furness says she has sufficient financial resources, and she has been able to bring in additional support to deal with the 2 complaints. To me, that contradicts Gail Furness’s claim she stopped the 2 investigations because of financial reasons.
Senator David Shoebridge posted a link on “X” to the published decision by Inspector of the NACC Gail Furness and then said the below in the same thread: (Click here to see on “X”)
David Shoebridge also posted in the same thread on “X”:
Second, Commissioner Brereton’s conduct was defended by the NACC, including by the CEO and at quite significant public expense. The NACC needs fundamental changes to restore confidence and that will require more just a change of Commissioner. (Click here to see on “X”)
and: Third, the complainants deserve a measure of justice. You can see from the Inspector’s brief report that there was a matter of real substance to the complaints, as this snapshot regarding the second of them demonstrates:
and: While I disagree with this decision from the NACC Inspector, I remain deeply grateful for the diligence and independence she has shown in her role. Respectful disagreements based on competing public interest principles have a place in any democracy.
and: Rest assured my team and I will continue to press for the changes needed at the NACC. We will continue to champion whistleblowers and public accountability. The work continues!
Why would David Shoebridge thank Gail Furness SC for her blatant corrupt cover-up? And Shoebridge calls it a “Respectful disagreement” which is a disgrace.
The message David Shoebridge has sent by thanking Gail Furness is if Furness sweeps any more NACC corruption under the carpet, he will support her and say it is “Respectful disagreement.”
Senator David Shoebridge is a barrister and a member of the NSW Bar Association, and his profile has his Senator’s email address, and Gail Furness SC is also a member of the NSW Bar Association.
I wonder if David Shoebridge declared the potential conflict of interest given that part of his role is also to oversee the conduct and performance of Gail Furness SC.
Gail Furness starts off her Dear John letter saying:
“As Inspector of the National Anti-Corruption Commission (Commission or NACC), one of my functions is to investigate complaints of agency maladministration or officer misconduct made in relation to the conduct or activities of a staff member of the NACC (a complaint investigation). The Commissioner is a staff member of the NACC.”
It is Gail Furness’s job to investigate corruption at the NACC and that is factored into her budget as per the above video.
There is no excuse for Inspector of the NACC Gail Furness SC failing to fully investigate corruption allegations against former NACC Commissioner Paul Brereton, and as sure as the sun comes up, a deal was done for Brereton to resign and then for Furness to sweep the corruption complaints under the carpet.
What’s the saying? The cover-up often ends up being a bigger crime than the original crime.
I’m only starting my investigation into this, but there won’t be many reputations left intact by the end. I’ll have plenty more to say in the near future.
Admin: Thirty-three weeks ago, I launched a campaign with a simple goal: find 200 new monthly supporters so I can keep doing this work as a fully independent journalist, running this website and the YouTube channel without corporate backing or paywalls.
Since then, 191 wonderful people have stepped up and become monthly supporters. That’s huge, thank you!
We’re now at 9 to go.
If you’ve been enjoying the work and aren’t yet supporting monthly, I’d be incredibly grateful if you’d consider joining them. Here’s the situation:
Like most independent journalists, I’m basically a one-person small business. Right now, a lot of us are feeling the squeeze, just like many small businesses and households are. To stay afloat and keep bringing you the reporting I do, I need roughly 200 more people chipping in whatever they can comfortably afford each month.
Anything from $3 to $100 (or whatever works for your budget) makes a real difference. There’s no lock-in, you can cancel or adjust anytime.
If that feels doable for you right now, you can see all the options on the donations page by clicking here.
Your support, whether it’s a monthly donation, a one-time donation, or just sharing the work, is what keeps independent voices like this one alive.
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.
Discover more from Kangaroo Court of Australia
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: National Anti-Corruption Commission
And here I was thinking all along that we had a four eyed knight in shining armour to fight for justice on our behalf. Not so, it seems. Shane, well done! Your fearless digging into this steaming pile of mountainess corruption deserves high praise indeed.
I was surprised at David Shoebridge’ almost sycophantic treatment of the Inspector at senate estimates. There was something about it that made me think somethings not right here; his X post was embarrassing. Is it possible that Furness was the “independent” pick when the Nacc was setup?
Yes, I saw his comment on Bluesky and was taken aback because he has previously been all for accountability. It was disappointing to say the least because ending those investigations is clearly not the right thing to do. I hope he offers some sort of explanation other than “differences of opinion.” We expect better from Shoebridge.
Correction: We expected better from Shoebridge
I haven’t given up on him, Jim. I would just like an explanation.
Very disappointed in Shoebridge
He needs to explain his actions
The bar associations protect their own because they think “there but for the grace of god go I”.
I lodged a complaint about a family court barrister about four years ago.
The OLSC obfuscated and delayed the process until the barrister was elevated to the bench and then washed their hands of the complaint because the now judge was no longer touchable.
These elite institutions are corrupt.
The legal system with solicitors, judges and law enforcement bodies, the family court and males are all contradictions in terms. But of course the PC brigade will never let that be said. The whole thing has been reduced to a farce but one that costs innocent people big money.
What Furness is probably saying is that the worst penalty, the most serious one, she would have implemented on Brereton’s conduct in any case was dismissal. Now that he has dismissed himself, there’s no point pursuing because the most she would have done is given him the sack.
Remember, it’s dismissal for the elite, gaol sentences for the rest of us.