It s not all bribes and backroom deals: corruption trends and complexities in Australian government agencies Penny Jorna Australian Institute of Criminology
Outline of presentation What we know about corruption in the Australian government Why should we be concerned with corruption in the government? Who detects, responds to and deals with corruption in Australian government departments and agencies? The fraud/corruption nexus AIC research about corruption where do we get our data and what is it telling us? Conclusions
Corruption and the Australian Commonwealth Commonwealth agencies and departments (more than just the Australian Public Service) Australia perceived to be one of the least corrupt countries in the world (Transparency International) No national integrity system or whole of government Anti-Corruption commission/agency Whistle-blowing in the public sector protections in place only from 2014 The nature of the work involved
Crime displacement, collusion and corruption Crime displacement... A change in offender behaviour, along illegitimate means, which is designed to circumvent either a specific preventive measure or more general conditions unfavourable to the offender s usual model of operating (Gabor 1990)
Crime displacement and collusion Tactical displacement leading to collusion Fraud control measures have blocked opportunities for dishonesty As a consequence, criminals have sought to modify their tactics by forming corrupt relationships with public servants to facilitate the commission of fraud through access to information or by enabling the commission of acts of dishonesty in collaboration with insiders
Australian Anti-Corruption agencies Commonwealth, 1 Tasmania, 1 Commonwealth Western Australia, 1 Queensland, 1 New South Wales, 2 New South Wales Victoria Queensland Western Australia Tasmania Victoria, 2
Commonwealth Ombudsman The Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013 (PID Act), came into effect on 15 January 2014 (replaced the whistleblowing scheme for APS employees) The Commonwealth Ombudsman is responsible for promoting awareness and understanding of the PID Act, and monitoring and reporting on its operation to parliament.
Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity (ACLEI AFP ACC Dept. Of Agriculture ACLEI CrimTrac ACBPS AUSTRAC
ACLEI Investigations ACLEI notifications/ investigations 2007-08 to 2010-11 (n) 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 Complaints received regarding misconduct 80 130 180 Finalised investigations 35 (13)* 70 (22)* 107 (35)* * ACLEI undertakes both joint investigations and own investigations, figures in () are solely ACLEI investigations. From 2010 Australian Customs and Border Patrol was added to ACLEI jurisdiction. Source: ACLEI 2011, 2010, 2009
Australian Public Service Code of Conduct (select points) An APS employee must: behave honestly and with integrity in connection with APS employment; take reasonable steps to avoid any conflict of interest (real or apparent) and disclose details of any material personal interest of the employee in connection with the employee's APS employment use Commonwealth resources in a proper manner and for a proper purpose; not improperly use inside information or the employee's duties, status, power or authority: o to gain, or seek to gain, a benefit or an advantage for the employee or any other person;
Australian Public Service Code of Conduct Australian Public Service Investigations and breaches of Code of Conduct, 2007-08 to 2010-11 (n) 160 140 136 120 100 109 105 80 60 40 20 47 52 69 0 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 Code of conduct complaints pertaining to corruphon Breach found Source: APSC 2011, 2010, 2009
The fraud/corruption nexus and the problems with conflating the two Defining corruption there is not a standard definition of corruption used by the whole of the public service The 2011 Fraud Control Guidelines defines fraud, however it is still up to agencies how that is interpreted The AIC Fraud against the Commonwealth survey defines corruption as a method for committing fraud Is corruption a distinct crime? Should all incidents of internal fraud be classified as corruption?
Commonwealth internal fraud incidents 2008-11 Number of internal fraud incidents 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000 3,371 3,001 3,828 N 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 0 Number of internal frauds Source: AIC Cth Fraud Survey data (2009-11)
Commonwealth internal fraud by focus of incident Internal fraud (2008-09 to 2010-11) (percentage of agencies) Source: AIC Cth Fraud Survey data (2009-11)
Illustrative internal fraud incident types Internal fraud (2008-09 to 2010-11) (number of incidents) Source: AIC data (2009-11)
Corruption in the Commonwealth Percentage of agencies that experienced an incident of corruption 2010-11 19 2009-10 13 Percentage of agencies that experienced corruption 2008-09 12 Source: AIC data (2009-11)
Is corruption in the Commonwealth increasing? Commonwealth corruption incidents (2008-09 to 2010-11) +247% Source: AIC data (2009-11)
What internal Commonwealth corruption is detected? Number of internal corruption incidents 2008-09 to 2010-11 (n) 13 2 2010-11 11 8 2009-10 9 7 2008-09 7 9 23 63 43 Other corruphon 63 243 Unable to be determined 92 45 Abuse of power 342 Collusion or conspiracy 48 Conflict of interest AccepHng kickbacks/gratuihes 33 69 Bribery of employee 49 75 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Source: AIC Cth Fraud Survey data (2009-11)
Agency difficulties with classifying corruption What makes corruption? Example One - Corruption Employee of an agency Misused a government credit card Stole money Method used was listed as Corruption Other corruption, misuse of credit card. Example Two Misuse of Documents Employee of an agency Misused a government credit card Stole money Method used to commit the fraud was Misuse of documents other Misuse of corporate credit card. = Corruption = Internal fraud Source: AIC Cth Fraud Survey data (2011)
Conclusions The way that agencies interpret incidents affects how the data is classified, fraud or collusion, misuse of documents or corruption. The covert nature of corruption affects the measurement of both the nature and extent of corruption (Smith 2010: 23). Better techniques for measuring levels of corruption need to be developed across government agencies. Agencies need to understand the motivations, risks and ways perpetrators commit and rationalise fraud and corruption.