Investigators sound alarm on prime minister’s staffing powers

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has defended the way he allocates staff to his opponents amid accusations he is acting out of political interest, as one of his own former advisers says the discretionary power must be examined in an ongoing investigation.

Asked on Monday morning whether his administration of staffing allocations was appropriate, Albanese responded: “This wasn’t a system that was put in place by me. It was put in place by the former government”.

Albanese’s defence comes less than a fortnight after a lead investigator into politicians’ parliamentary resources said: “questions about what decisions should be made by the executive and what decisions should be made by the parliament with respect to resourcing is a matter with which we must contend”.

The comments were made by Mathew Jose, a former senior adviser to Albanese and prime ministers Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard. Jose is one of the lead investigators of a government-ordered review that began work in April and will report by late 2027. Former Coalition and Greens staffers are also leading the review.

Associate Professor William Partlett of the Melbourne Law School said he believed the National Anti-Corruption Commission could investigate the issue if they felt it had passed the “serious and systemic” test necessary for matters to fall under the commission’s jurisdiction.

“Corrupt conduct does not have to be criminal. It is something that is a breach of the public trust. Now it has to be serious and systemic. So, if the NACC were to find that in a systemic and in a serious way the government, the prime minister was using this power in a breach of the public trust … then I think there’s at least an arguable investigation that should take place about whether this is corrupt conduct,” Partlett said.

Acting NACC commissioner Kylie Kilgour told a Senate inquiry last month that her interest was “piqued” by the federal government’s oversight of a controversial $560.9 invite-only grant program in which nearly three-quarters of grants were allocated to notionally Labor-held or competitive seats.

Labor established the NACC during the last term of parliament amid a promise to return integrity to politics following the 2022 election. The commission’s structure has been criticised for lacking rigour in its threshold of corrupt conduct and default setting of holding private hearings.

Liberal senator James McGrath, the opposition spokesman for parliamentary business, described Albanese’s provision of staffing as both a “manipulation” and a “disgrace”.

“This is a prime minister who is allergic to transparency. This whole sorry saga has been a blatant attempt to weaken parliamentary scrutiny and shield Labor from accountability,” McGrath said.

The senator said he would welcome recommendations from the independent review that strengthened checks and balances on the prime minister’s power, adding that investigative actions “are only having to be taken now after Anthony Albanese took the reins as PM”.

Many independent politicians, such as senator David Pocock and MP Sophie Scamps, have had to privately fundraise to afford additional staffing in their offices.

Podcast host Hannah Ferguson, who will run against Albanese as an independent in his electorate of Grayndler at the next election, criticised the prime minister’s explanation for his administration of staffing, saying the decision should be made independently.

“It is so exhausting and infuriating to hear this sentiment of ‘I’ve inherited the rules’ from the person who is in the perfect position to change those rules,” Ferguson said.

“[Albanese is] just letting Australians down by not equipping, with equal opportunity and resources, politicians from every corner of the country to do their job serving their communities, and it is clearly this game playing, politicking that everyone is so sick of right now.”

Cut through the noise of federal politics with news, views and expert analysis. Subscribers can sign up to our weekly Inside Politics newsletter.