Royal Commissions Spectacle or Genuine Reform
Royal Commissions: spectacle or genuine reform?
With Victoria’s Royal Commission into the integrity of major construction projects now underway, much attention will inevitably focus on who gets called and whether anyone is ultimately charged.
AND I get the drama and sensation, former Premiers may be called and other high profile individuals…
But having seen Royal Commissions from the legal side in the past I think the most important question is:
What actually comes out the other end?
History suggests that a Royal Commission shouldn’t be judged by the theatrics, it’s what it uncovers and more importantly what it changes that really matters.
Take the Hayne Royal Commission which exposed extraordinary failures in financial services including institutions continuing to charge fees to deceased customers and the broader ‘fees for no service’ scandal.
The lasting impact was much bigger than individual prosecutions. It drove significant changes to financial services regulation, governance, accountability and consumer protection.
The Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse produced 409 recommendations and led to major changes including the National Redress Scheme, changes to reporting obligations and reforms to institutional practices.
And the Victorian Royal Commission into the Management of Police Informants produced 111 recommendations and resulted in significant changes to the way sources are managed and supervised.
The Cole Royal Commission into the Building and Construction Industry produced sweeping findings and ultimately contributed to the creation of the ABCC. Yet the number of successful prosecutions flowing directly from its referrals was comparatively small.
That distinction is particularly relevant now.
Earlier this year barrister Geoffrey Watson SC estimated that corruption and inflated costs may have cost taxpayers $15 billion across the Big Build.
Watson put that estimate into further perspective when he said: “It could be $30 billion not $15 billion.”
The figure is an estimate and remains to be tested but it is eye watering. AND that is precisely why a Royal Commission is needed.
The Victorian Commission has the opportunity to answer:
Why was this able to occur?
Did regulators have the powers and resources they needed? If not, what was lacking? If so, why did they not act?
What needs to change so it cannot happen again?
The test of the Royal Commissions success will be what comes out the other end.
This article is a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
Recent articles
-
A Satirical Look at How Professional Indemnity Claims Really Get Handled
Introducing Continuity Perpetuity, a fictional insurer whose proprietary claims methodology ensures every claim is perpetually considered and then vigorously defended.
-
Royal Commissions Spectacle or Genuine Reform
With Victoria's Royal Commission into major construction projects underway, the real question is not who gets called or charged. It is what actually comes out the other end.
-
Does Victorian Building Warranty Insurance Really Protect Subsequent Owners
A significant concern is emerging about the practical protection warranty insurance gives to people who buy a home after the building works are finished. Fall-Armytage brings it into focus.
-
How Domestic Insurers Use Cash Settlements to Underquote Repairs
Insurers increasingly offer cash settlements from preferred repairers that will not cover the cost of the actual repairs, and the scope of works proposed is often not enough.