NACC Chief Executive Issues Apology to Parliament Over Inaccurate Evidence Provided

NACC Chief Executive Issues Apology for Inaccurate Parliamentary Evidence

National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) chief executive Philip Reed has formally apologised to Parliament for providing inaccurate evidence regarding the work hours of integrity chief Paul Brereton. Initially, Mr Reed claimed Mr Brereton’s consulting for the Inspector General of the Australian Defence Force (IGADF) occurred only outside of his NACC hours.

Recent clarifications revealed that Mr Brereton gave advice to the IGADF on eight occasions during NACC business hours, contradicting previous statements. In a letter to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee, Mr Reed admitted this discrepancy and corrected his earlier testimony from October 7.

Mr Reed explained that out of 22 instances over 28 months where Mr Brereton responded to requests from the IGADF, 14 were outside ordinary business hours. This means approximately eight consultations happened during his official working time at the commission. Mr Reed stated, “I apologise for this inaccuracy in my evidence.”

The issue first surfaced after ABC News reported in September that Mr Brereton, who earns more than $800,000 annually, had continued to provide consultancy to the military despite assurances he had ceased involvement. His dual roles raised concerns about conflict of interest given his military background.

The NACC announced previously that Mr Brereton would step away from all Defence corruption investigations to avoid any perceived conflicts. However, the commission maintained there was no actual conflict of interest and described the step as “unnecessary.”

Adding to the unfolding revelations, Australia’s military justice chief James Gaynor also apologised recently for underreporting consultations with Mr Brereton. Mr Gaynor confirmed he sought advice on 21 occasions, rather than the 11 initially disclosed.

Meanwhile, the NACC’s own inspector, Gail Furness, is currently investigating two complaints related to Mr Brereton’s military ties. One complaint was lodged by a former NACC employee. The watchdog is actively reviewing these matters for potential breaches.

Philip Reed is scheduled to appear before Senate estimates next week to address questions arising from this controversy. The parliamentary session will likely focus on the implications of dual roles and the accuracy of disclosures related to government oversight officials.