On 1 October 2024, the Commission received a referral under section 32 of the National Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2022 (Cth) (NACC Act), containing information that a former staff member of the office of Ms Zoe Daniel MP (the consultant) had lobbied a journalist at the Australian Financial Review (AFR) on behalf of a donor.
The essential issue raised by the referral was a suggestion that Commonwealth resources under Ms Daniel’s control (ie, a parliamentary staffer) may have been misused by or on behalf of a parliamentarian, to lobby on behalf of a donor.
Media reporting
The Commission is aware of media reporting in early October 2024 of the above referral, and is making this public statement because the referral is in the public domain, being satisfied that it is in the public interest to do so.
Assessment of referral
The Commission has, in accordance with its usual processes, assessed the referral to determine whether it raises a corruption issue that the Commission can investigate, and if so whether and how to deal with it. In the course of that process, the Commission has sought and obtained further relevant information from several sources, showing that:
- The consultant ceased to be employed and paid as a member of parliamentary staff in Ms Daniel’s office, on 5 August 2024.
- At the time of the approach to AFR on 12 August 2024, the consultant was a temporary part-time consultant to Ms Daniel, and was remunerated by Ms Daniel’s private not-for-profit company and not by the Commonwealth.
- The approach to AFR on 12 August 2024 was not made at the request or with the knowledge or authority of Ms Daniel, but in the consultant’s capacity as a consultant to a third party – not Ms Daniel’s not-for-profit company, but another client of the consultant.
As no use of Commonwealth resources was involved, and as the approach was not made with Ms Daniel’s knowledge or authority, the Commission considers that no corruption issue arises, and will take no further action in relation to the referral. It should be noted that the consultant disputes the accuracy of the AFR report of the substance of their representations, but it is unnecessary for present purposes to resolve that dispute as the outcome is the same, whichever version is correct.
Ms Daniel has fully co-operated with the Commission. The matter is now closed and the Commission will not be making further comment on it.