The attorney general, Mark Dreyfus, has revealed Labor’s national anti-corruption commission will be able to investigate “any person” who could seek to corrupt a public official – a key crossbench demand.
After concerns Labor could be preparing to water down its bill to win Coalition support, Dreyfus reassured independent MPs in question time on Monday that both a broad scope for investigations and public hearings will be in Labor’s bill.
The clarification was immediately welcomed by the independent MP Helen Haines, boosting Labor’s chances of passing the bill without significant amendments.
Earlier on Monday the Greens’ justice spokesperson, David Shoebridge, warned that scope to investigate “third parties” external to government was a “key principle” to win the minor party’s support.
Dreyfus will introduce the national anti-corruption commission bill this week after it passes Labor caucus on Tuesday. The bill will then be scrutinised by a joint select committee inquiry before a possible final vote in the Senate in November.
On Friday, the Liberal leader, Peter Dutton, confirmed the opposition was negotiating with the government over the bill, despite saying in May that he supported the tougher Haines bill, which included greater protection for whistleblowers.
Guardian Australia understands that Dutton – who has complained about “show trials” and “protracted investigations” – has lobbied Labor to raise the bar for public hearings, which the government feared would make them available in theory only but nearly impossible to access.
The independent senator David Pocock and MP Zoe Daniel have expressed concern about the possibility of a major party deal, and Daniel pursued this in question time on Monday.
Dreyfus replied that the “Australian people voted for a government which will deliver a powerful, transparent and independent national anti-corruption commission”.
“The commission will have jurisdiction to investigate serious or systemic corruption, and will form a central pillar in the integrity framework of our country,” he said.
“In relation to third parties, the commission will have broad powers to investigate allegations of serious or systemic corruption of or by a public official.
“The commission will be able to investigate a corruption issue that could involve serious or systemic conduct by any person that could adversely affect the honesty or impartiality of a public official’s conduct.”
Dreyfus said that the allocation of public funds “should be made in the public interest”, but the government would not instruct the commission whether it “can or cannot investigate” particular matters, such as pork barrelling.
“If the commission considers the administration of a particular discretionary grants program gives rise to a serious or systemic corruption issue, then the commissioner will have the ability to investigate that issue.”
Haines, the architect of the crossbench anti-corruption commission bill in the previous parliament and likely deputy chair of the coming inquiry, responded on social media that she was “very happy” to hear Dreyfus confirm “third parties will be included in the jurisdiction”.
In response to a further question from the independent MP Allegra Spender, Dreyfus said one of the “deficiencies” of the Coalition’s proposal last parliament was that ministers could not be called to public hearings.
“In order for an anti-corruption commission … to be fully effective, there must be the possibility of public hearings,” he said.
Earlier, Shoebridge reiterated the Greens’ calls for the government to protect the funding independence of the commission and include external stakeholders in its remit.
Shoebridge told reporters a “jurisdiction sufficient to do the job” was “a principle that we won’t give away for a timeline”.
Asked why whistleblowers laws weren’t in the Greens’ top list of demands, Shoebridge said they were “very hopeful” of a solution by the time the commission opens its doors.
The independent MP Zali Steggall said it was good to hear the attorney general confirm the commission “will be able to investigate third parties and hold public hearings”.
“Now we need whistleblower protections.”
