‘Limited and inconsistent’ whistleblower protections in private sector
Inadequacies identified seven years ago in Australia’s sector whistleblower regime are still yet to be addressed, according to a joint submission.
A joint submission by Griffith University, the Human Rights Law Centre and Transparency International Australia has urged Treasury to consider pursuing comprehensive reform to strengthen and harmonise whistleblower protections.
“We would welcome the Treasury’s further engagement and consultation to provide greater detail on how whistleblower protections could be reformed to reflect best practice and bolster the regulatory response to wrongdoing in the accounting, auditing and consulting sector,” the three organisations said in a submission to Treasury.
The submission explained that one of the major issues for individuals working in the accounting, auditing and consulting industries is that it is possible to fall under three sets of different and inconsistent whistleblowing laws.
Individuals working in accounting, auditing or consulting could fall under the Corporations Act whistleblower protections, the Tax Administration Act whistleblower protections, and the Public Interest Disclosures Act.
“This complexity is not conducive to empowering whistleblowers to bring information of misconduct, illegal conduct, fraud and other wrongdoing to the attention of regulators,” the submission said.
While some individuals are covered by multiple regimes, the submission noted that some individuals are covered by none.
“It is our view that the Corporations Act does not sufficiently cover partners or employees of a partnership, a category that workers at some of the largest accounting, auditing and consulting firms fall into,” the submission said.
On the other hand, the whistleblower protections in the Tax Administration Act do apply to partners and partnerships in taxation matters.
The submission said there was no need for this inconsistency to remain, which creates confusion and uncertainty for whistleblowers.
“The purpose of whistleblower protection is to encourage the disclosure of serious wrongdoing by those who are most likely to see it occur, which can happen within all types of organisations, partnerships and other bodies,” it said.
“It should be sufficient to satisfy the eligibility component of whistleblower protections that the person is an employee or worker of any entity to which Commonwealth regulations or legislation apply.”
The submission also warned that there are significant gaps in the protections available for officers and employees of accounting, auditing and consulting firms who are contracted service providers to the Commonwealth government.
The three organisations said there is also a lack of practical support for whistleblowers.
“The reality is that many people who know of wrongdoing occurring across the private and public sectors in Australia are staying silent because they do not have the support to navigate disclosure pathways or take action if they suffer reprisal,” the submission said.
The submission said the inadequacies in Australia’s private sector whistleblower protection regime were comprehensively identified in the 2017 Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services report.
“Yet, seven years on we are still to see a significant number of the report’s recommendations outstanding,” the submission said.
“Piecemeal reforms to the whistleblower protection legislation applying to accounting, auditing and consulting firms cannot hope to sufficiently address shortcomings in regulatory oversight.”
The submission called for the government to endorse all 12 areas of reform set out in Protecting Australia’s Whistleblowers: The Federal Roadmap.
One of these reforms is to provide businesses with a single, simple Whistleblower Protection Act covering all relevant Commonwealth regulations, rather than multiple legislative requirements.
Another is to establish a whistleblower protection authority with full powers and duties to implement the regime, including enforcing protections and ensuring compensation.
“These recommendations have been put forward frequently in past consultations and inquiries. It is our view that these reforms, implemented comprehensively, would address the key gaps we identified,” the organisations said.
