Conflict-of-interest issues continue to trouble the National Anti-Corruption Commission, while questions remain about who it recruits. Sarah Russell reports.
It’s nearly two years since former commissioner Brereton was found to have engaged in “officer misconduct” for not appropriately managing his conflict of interest with Kathryn Campbell over the Robodebt referral, yet NACC deputy commissioners appear unclear about what it means.
Documents obtained by MWM via a Freedom of Information request raise concerns about confusion on how conflicts of interest are identified and managed at the NACC. The documents also demonstrate the problems that arise when senior staff are plucked from the public service.
A Commonwealth departmental deputy secretary moving directly to a deputy commissioner role with the NACC could reasonably be expected to encounter NACC referrals concerning that department, its senior officers, programs and contractors, which would immediately raise conflicts of issue, potential or real.
Penny Shakespeare
Acting Deputy Commissioner Penny Shakespeare is a case in point. A longstanding Commonwealth public servant, Shakespeare commenced as acting Deputy Commissioner at the NACC on 6 July 2026 straight from her job as a deputy secretary at the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing (DHDA).
Two days after her appointment to the NACC, two matters involving her former department were discussed at the NACC Senior Assessment Panel (NSAP) meeting, according to the minutes.
The NSAP usually comprises the Commissioner, the Deputy Commissioners, the General Manager Operations, the General Manager Corruption Prevention Education & Evaluation, and the General Manager Legal. The Commission’s CEO is also a member as an observer.
In the first matter discussed at the NSAP meeting, Shakespeare declared that she had a “professional relationship with REDACTED” from her time as deputy secretary and “considered there to be a conflict of interest”. It was decided that Shakespeare would not “participate in the discussion or consideration of this matter”.
In a second matter, Shakespeare disclosed that she had “worked professionally with REDACTED” in her role as a deputy secretary. Despite this, “Acting Commissioner Kilgour ruled that the association does not amount to a real, apparent or perceived conflict of interest,” the FOI documents state.
NACCered from the start. What will Brereton’s departure change?
However, two days later, the sentiment regarding potential conflicts of interest involving Shakespeare and her former department had changed. Acting deputy commissioner Shakespeare would no longer be involved in any DHDA matters.
Shakespeare wrote to a NACC colleague on 10 July explaining,
“Regarding REDACTED, while I don’t know any of the individuals involved, I have discussed with Kylie and the other DCs and we have agreed the best approach is for me not to be involved in any Department of Health, Disability and Ageing matters given my length of work and seniority there.”
Shakespeare recognised that conflicts of interest could arise. As she stated in her declaration to the Attorney General of material personal interests, this would be “particularly the case for current and former Health Ministers, Secretaries and senior officials from the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing.”
On 8 July, Kilgour determined that Shakespeare’s disclosed professional association with DHDA did not amount to a “real, apparent or perceived conflict of interest”. By the following day, however, Kilgour and the Deputy Commissioners had agreed that Shakespeare should not be involved in any DHDA matters because of the length and seniority of her service there.
If there was no real, apparent or perceived conflict on 8 July, why was complete recusal from all DHDA matters considered appropriate on 10 July? Conversely, if complete recusal was the appropriate safeguard, why was it not implemented from the outset?
The public deserves to know why Kilgour changed her mind.
The recruitment process
In her media release on 22 June 2026, Attorney-General Rowland stated that the government “is committed to strengthening the NACC, including by continuing to make appointments through an open, competitive and merit-based selection process”.
A recruitment process is underway to appoint a new Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner. Applications closed on 13 July 2026. If the Labor government is genuinely interested in “strengthening the NACC” to investigate corruption, the government should not appoint those who have worked in senior positions in the public service (or indeed those with close military ties).
Further, a national anti-corruption body should have robust systems for identifying foreseeable conflicts of interest before cases are allocated. To help restore the public’s confidence in how the NACC manages conflicts of interest, these systems should be clearly articulated on the NACC website.
Systemic corruption at the NACC is a culture, not a legalistic nuance
Dr Sarah Russell is a public health researcher. She is the Principal Researcher at Research Matters and Chair of Progressives of the Peninsula. She was formerly the Director, Aged Care Matters.