The Greens political party, and especially Greens Senator David Shoebridge, have shown their true colours and sold out Robodebt victims the same as the Labor and Liberal Parties have, which likely helps explain at least in part why The Greens are not rising in the polls.

In fact, The Greens have sold out everyone who has made a complaint to the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) or is awaiting justice from the NACC, of which the Robodebt victims would be the largest group with over 470,000 victims.

I’ll look at The Greens’ sellout first, then look at how it has likely impacted on their stagnation in political polls.

Greens Senator David Shoebridge thinks he is unaccountable

I published an article last week titled “NACC cover-up scandal exposes Inspector Gail Furness SC and Greens Senator David Shoebridge” which starts off:

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. (Click here to read the full article)

I followed up with some emails to dig deeper as per below:

On Wednesday the 8th of July, I emailed some questions to the Inspector of the NACC, Gail Furness SC, and Senator David Shoebridge with the same questions. The Gail Furness email is below:

Dear Inspector of the NACC Gail Furness SC

I am an independent journalist and have some questions:

1. Do you have, or have you had in the past, any association and/or friendship with Senator David Shoebridge?
2. Given both you and Senator David Shoebridge are barristers and are members of the NSW Bar Association have you ever met David Shoebridge in any professional capacity or at any social functions?

Please respond by 5 pm Thursday the 9^th of July 2026 so I can publish.

Regards

Shane Dowling

Gail Furness responded with 1. No and 2. No to the 2 questions. (Click here to see the email)

I emailed David Shoebridge asking the same questions, but he did not respond, although I did receive the automated email response from his office. (Click here to see the automated email)

I emailed Gail Furness SC further questions on Sunday the 12th of July 2026, as per below:

Dear Inspector of the NACC Gail Furness SC

I am an independent journalist and have some further questions:

In your public statement last week, you said one of reasons you had stopped your investigations into 2 complaints against former NACC Commissioner Paul Brereton was because you “cannot justify such expenditure in circumstances where Commissioner Brereton has resigned.”

1. Did you ask the federal Attorney-General and/or federal government for further funding so you could finish the 2 investigations?
2. Does everyone in the federal public service get corruption investigations against them discontinued if they resign?

At the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee senate estimates hearing on Tuesday (26/5/26) Senator David Shoebridge asked you questions about funding and you said you have sufficient financial resources, and you had been able to bring in additional support to deal with the 2 complaints.

3. Given you told the senate estimates hearing on the 26/5/26 that you had sufficient funding how can you now say you can’t justify the “expenditure” to fulfill one of your key functions?

On page 4 of your public statement last week, you said:

“For completeness, as part of considering the complaints I had received, I had sought and been provided with documents from the NACC concerning the assessment of all 98 defence related referrals made to the NACC from July 2023 until October 2025. At the point when I discontinued this complaint investigation, my analysis of that information was not complete and there were some matters which were contested by the lawyers acting for the Commission.”

4. Given your “analysis of that information was not complete” of the “98 defence related referrals made to the NACC” can you say for certain that Paul Brereton did not abuse his position when dealing with the “98 defence related referrals.”?
5. Given your “analysis of that information was not complete” how can you say for certain that no corruption or crimes took place when Paul Brereton and the NACC were dealing with the “98 defence related referrals.”?

General questions:

6. Given the NACC has a shocking reputation with the public do you realise that your decision to discontinue the 2 corruption investigations into Paul Brereton has done further damage to the NACC’s reputation as well as damage to you and the Office of the Inspector of the National Anti-Corruption Commission’s reputation?

In the first corruption investigation into Paul Brereton in 2024 you found he was guilty of officer misconduct because he breached the NACC Act section 184 (3) (b) (v) is not unlawful, but: arises, wholly or in part, from a mistake of law or fact.

7. Why did you employ former judge Alan Robertson only to investigate Paul Brereton given others were involved in the Robodebt cover-up?
8. Why was Alan Robertson only employed to investigate if section 184 (3) (b) (v) had been breached?
9. Why was Alan Robertson not allowed to investigate if more serious offences had been committed such as breaching section 184 (a) is unlawful conduct, or (b) (i) is corrupt conduct or (b) (iii) arises, wholly or in part, from improper motives.?

10. Would you be OK with doing a Zoom interview for my YouTube Channel and website?

Please respond by 5pm Monday the 13^th of July 2026 so I can publish.

Regards

Shane Dowling

Gail Furness’s office responded on Monday the 13th of July 2026 with:

Good morning,

The Inspector has asked me to respond to your email.

In her statement published on 8 July 2026, the Inspector stated that significant public money has been spent on the two complaint investigations which included public money spent by the NACC in responding to them. In order for the draft reports, which were in part contested, to be completed, further considerable public funds would need to be spent. The Inspector could not justify such expenditure in circumstances where former Commissioner Brereton had resigned and the systemic issues which had been identified had been satisfactorily addressed.

The Inspector did not state that she had insufficient funds. 

The Inspector had completed a draft complaint investigation report on the first complaint investigation. At the point when it was discontinued, the analysis of that information was not complete because there were some matters which were contested by the lawyers acting for the Commission, in submissions made to the Inspector. The Inspector is required to consider submissions made before completing a report and was doing so.

In her statement, the Inspector stated that there was no corruption issue involved in either complaint. A corruption issue includes ‘abuse of office’.  There was no allegation of criminality in either complaint.

The Inspector declines your request for an interview. (Click here to see the full email chain)

I am not overly impressed with Gail Furness’ response, and she avoided numerous questions, but at least she did respond which is more than what Senator David Shoebridge did.

Senator David Shoebridge and many other Greens politicians attack other politicians and public servants for failing to be accountable, and now David Shoebridge thinks he is above being accountable by refusing to answer my questions.

The NACC corruption and cover-ups, which Shoebridge is now part of, won’t go away, and the blowtorch will continue to be put on the government and NACC management. David Shoebridge will also feel the heat of the blowtorch in the future now that he has decided to protect Gail Furness and her corrupt conduct.

Gail Furness needs to be sacked before the NACC can be fixed, but she won’t be, especially now she has David Shoebridge’s support.

The Greens fail to get any growth in political polls

The Labor, Liberal and National Parties have all dropped support since the May 2025 federal election, and One Nation has skyrocketed in support.

But The Greens are still only sitting on 12% support, which to me says there is a major problem with The Greens.

The Greens do a good job shining a light on government corruption and failings, but they lack backbone when they have an opportunity to do something about it. And now Shoebridge has undermined some of that good work by supporting Gail Furness.

After almost every budget and numerous times throughout the year the federal Labor government needs The Greens’ support in the Senate to pass their budget and various legislation. And it is at those times The Greens could bargain hard to get real changes for things like the NACC or AUKUS etc, but they never do.

After the latest May budget all The Greens seem to have negotiated from Labor was a longer time to review the proposed NDIS changes, which is not much.

Unless The Greens start playing hardball with the Labor government and get some real achievements, they could start going backwards.

Admin: Thirty-four 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, 196 wonderful people have stepped up and become monthly supporters. That’s huge, thank you!

We’re now at 4 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.