Union boss appointed to $15b government fund board without checks
Before the audit, the fund required conflict of interest declarations for its staff and board and since the review has extended that to suppliers.
'ANAO has recommended that we also require such declarations for external experts used as part of due diligence processes. NRFC has accepted that recommendation. No conflict of this kind was identified by the audit,' a spokesperson for the fund said.
Board members were found to have been appointed appropriately, except that 'due diligence checks were not documented for one member appointed to the NRFC Board in October 2023', referring to Thompson. There is no suggestion that Thompson is not qualified for the role. He was contacted for comment.
The fund itself does not make board appointments, the Department of Industry, Science and Resources makes them.
Husic announced Thompson's appointment in October 2023. The long-time unionist had previously been on the boards of Cbus, the Coal Mining Industry Corporation and the Construction Industry and Property Services Industry Skills Council.
Coalition spokesman for industry Alex Hawke said there were 'serious concerns' about the auditor-general's findings.
'I have requested an urgent briefing from the auditor-general and will formally raise these issues when parliament resumes,' he said.
Upon the release of the audit, the fund agreed with and began to implement all recommended changes. A spokesperson said the organisation welcomed the findings.
'Some of the areas identified for improvement have already been addressed, and others are currently being addressed,' they said.
Loading
'While it is important to make sure we are continuously improving in these areas, as an organisation we are focused on delivering impactful investments on behalf of all Australians. We are on track to meet our investment targets and are getting on with the job.'
Husic's successor as industry minister, Tim Ayres, a former official with the same union as Thompson, defended his former colleague's appointment.
'Mr Thompson has experience that has been recognised by both sides of government,' a spokesperson for Ayres said. 'Appointments will be made throughout the life of the corporation to suit the needs of the NRFC and their functions. A well-balanced board with the right expertise is vital to ensuring that the NRFC can successfully fulfil its investment mandate.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Advertiser
33 minutes ago
- The Advertiser
Elon Musk victory in war on strict Australian web laws
"A win for free speech in Australia." This is what Elon Musk's lawyers have said after overturning government orders blocking a post claiming transgender people belonged in a mental institution. Musk's social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, and Canadian activist Christopher Elston have been in a legal battle with the eSafety Commissioner. Mr Elston reposted a Daily Mail article in February 2024 about Australian transgender man Teddy Cook and his appointment by the World Health Organisation to advise on issues of transgender and non-binary people's health. In the post, Mr Elston called Mr Cook a female and said trans people "belong in psychiatric wards". When Mr Cook came across the post, he made a complaint to the eSafety Commissioner which moved to block the post. Mr Elston's words were allegedly degrading to Mr Cook and the broader transgender community, the online regulator said. The activist's X account allegedly had more than 395,000 followers and the post was viewed 377,000 times and reposted 6,000 times in less than a fortnight. After X and Mr Elston challenged the notice, the Administrative Review Tribunal was asked to determine whether an everyday person would consider the post as cyber-abuse. Tribunal member Damien O'Donovan found late on Tuesday that the post did not intend to cause serious harm. However, he found the ordinary person would take away that transgender people belong in a psychiatric ward. "The post, although phrased offensively, is consistent with views Mr Elston has expressed elsewhere in circumstances where the expression of the view had no malicious intent," Mr O'Donovan said. X, through its lawyers at Thompson Geer, welcomed the decision. "This is another example of the eSafety Commissioner overreaching in her role and making politically motivated decisions to moderate what she considers Australians should and shouldn't read and hear from the outside world." Mr Elston said the decision sends a clear message to the government that it "does not have the authority to silence peaceful expression." In the tribunal hearing, lawyers for Mr Elston denied he intended to cause serious harm. The Canadian said he didn't know Mr Cook, reposted public information and usually misgendered people in his posts. A spokesperson for the eSafety Commissioner noted the decision saying the regulator would continue to take seriously the responsibility of amending harms and protecting Australians. The decision is the most recent chapter in a long-running legal battle between the social media giant and online safety regulator. In May, the commissioner took X to court wanting the platform to do more to keep Australians safe online. The regulator also issued a penalty of $610,500 to the social media giant in February 2023, alleging it failed to adequately respond to questions about how it tackled harmful content on its platform, including child sexual abuse material. X is disputing the fine. Lifeline 13 11 14 Fullstop Australia 1800 385 578 "A win for free speech in Australia." This is what Elon Musk's lawyers have said after overturning government orders blocking a post claiming transgender people belonged in a mental institution. Musk's social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, and Canadian activist Christopher Elston have been in a legal battle with the eSafety Commissioner. Mr Elston reposted a Daily Mail article in February 2024 about Australian transgender man Teddy Cook and his appointment by the World Health Organisation to advise on issues of transgender and non-binary people's health. In the post, Mr Elston called Mr Cook a female and said trans people "belong in psychiatric wards". When Mr Cook came across the post, he made a complaint to the eSafety Commissioner which moved to block the post. Mr Elston's words were allegedly degrading to Mr Cook and the broader transgender community, the online regulator said. The activist's X account allegedly had more than 395,000 followers and the post was viewed 377,000 times and reposted 6,000 times in less than a fortnight. After X and Mr Elston challenged the notice, the Administrative Review Tribunal was asked to determine whether an everyday person would consider the post as cyber-abuse. Tribunal member Damien O'Donovan found late on Tuesday that the post did not intend to cause serious harm. However, he found the ordinary person would take away that transgender people belong in a psychiatric ward. "The post, although phrased offensively, is consistent with views Mr Elston has expressed elsewhere in circumstances where the expression of the view had no malicious intent," Mr O'Donovan said. X, through its lawyers at Thompson Geer, welcomed the decision. "This is another example of the eSafety Commissioner overreaching in her role and making politically motivated decisions to moderate what she considers Australians should and shouldn't read and hear from the outside world." Mr Elston said the decision sends a clear message to the government that it "does not have the authority to silence peaceful expression." In the tribunal hearing, lawyers for Mr Elston denied he intended to cause serious harm. The Canadian said he didn't know Mr Cook, reposted public information and usually misgendered people in his posts. A spokesperson for the eSafety Commissioner noted the decision saying the regulator would continue to take seriously the responsibility of amending harms and protecting Australians. The decision is the most recent chapter in a long-running legal battle between the social media giant and online safety regulator. In May, the commissioner took X to court wanting the platform to do more to keep Australians safe online. The regulator also issued a penalty of $610,500 to the social media giant in February 2023, alleging it failed to adequately respond to questions about how it tackled harmful content on its platform, including child sexual abuse material. X is disputing the fine. Lifeline 13 11 14 Fullstop Australia 1800 385 578 "A win for free speech in Australia." This is what Elon Musk's lawyers have said after overturning government orders blocking a post claiming transgender people belonged in a mental institution. Musk's social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, and Canadian activist Christopher Elston have been in a legal battle with the eSafety Commissioner. Mr Elston reposted a Daily Mail article in February 2024 about Australian transgender man Teddy Cook and his appointment by the World Health Organisation to advise on issues of transgender and non-binary people's health. In the post, Mr Elston called Mr Cook a female and said trans people "belong in psychiatric wards". When Mr Cook came across the post, he made a complaint to the eSafety Commissioner which moved to block the post. Mr Elston's words were allegedly degrading to Mr Cook and the broader transgender community, the online regulator said. The activist's X account allegedly had more than 395,000 followers and the post was viewed 377,000 times and reposted 6,000 times in less than a fortnight. After X and Mr Elston challenged the notice, the Administrative Review Tribunal was asked to determine whether an everyday person would consider the post as cyber-abuse. Tribunal member Damien O'Donovan found late on Tuesday that the post did not intend to cause serious harm. However, he found the ordinary person would take away that transgender people belong in a psychiatric ward. "The post, although phrased offensively, is consistent with views Mr Elston has expressed elsewhere in circumstances where the expression of the view had no malicious intent," Mr O'Donovan said. X, through its lawyers at Thompson Geer, welcomed the decision. "This is another example of the eSafety Commissioner overreaching in her role and making politically motivated decisions to moderate what she considers Australians should and shouldn't read and hear from the outside world." Mr Elston said the decision sends a clear message to the government that it "does not have the authority to silence peaceful expression." In the tribunal hearing, lawyers for Mr Elston denied he intended to cause serious harm. The Canadian said he didn't know Mr Cook, reposted public information and usually misgendered people in his posts. A spokesperson for the eSafety Commissioner noted the decision saying the regulator would continue to take seriously the responsibility of amending harms and protecting Australians. The decision is the most recent chapter in a long-running legal battle between the social media giant and online safety regulator. In May, the commissioner took X to court wanting the platform to do more to keep Australians safe online. The regulator also issued a penalty of $610,500 to the social media giant in February 2023, alleging it failed to adequately respond to questions about how it tackled harmful content on its platform, including child sexual abuse material. X is disputing the fine. Lifeline 13 11 14 Fullstop Australia 1800 385 578 "A win for free speech in Australia." This is what Elon Musk's lawyers have said after overturning government orders blocking a post claiming transgender people belonged in a mental institution. Musk's social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, and Canadian activist Christopher Elston have been in a legal battle with the eSafety Commissioner. Mr Elston reposted a Daily Mail article in February 2024 about Australian transgender man Teddy Cook and his appointment by the World Health Organisation to advise on issues of transgender and non-binary people's health. In the post, Mr Elston called Mr Cook a female and said trans people "belong in psychiatric wards". When Mr Cook came across the post, he made a complaint to the eSafety Commissioner which moved to block the post. Mr Elston's words were allegedly degrading to Mr Cook and the broader transgender community, the online regulator said. The activist's X account allegedly had more than 395,000 followers and the post was viewed 377,000 times and reposted 6,000 times in less than a fortnight. After X and Mr Elston challenged the notice, the Administrative Review Tribunal was asked to determine whether an everyday person would consider the post as cyber-abuse. Tribunal member Damien O'Donovan found late on Tuesday that the post did not intend to cause serious harm. However, he found the ordinary person would take away that transgender people belong in a psychiatric ward. "The post, although phrased offensively, is consistent with views Mr Elston has expressed elsewhere in circumstances where the expression of the view had no malicious intent," Mr O'Donovan said. X, through its lawyers at Thompson Geer, welcomed the decision. "This is another example of the eSafety Commissioner overreaching in her role and making politically motivated decisions to moderate what she considers Australians should and shouldn't read and hear from the outside world." Mr Elston said the decision sends a clear message to the government that it "does not have the authority to silence peaceful expression." In the tribunal hearing, lawyers for Mr Elston denied he intended to cause serious harm. The Canadian said he didn't know Mr Cook, reposted public information and usually misgendered people in his posts. A spokesperson for the eSafety Commissioner noted the decision saying the regulator would continue to take seriously the responsibility of amending harms and protecting Australians. The decision is the most recent chapter in a long-running legal battle between the social media giant and online safety regulator. In May, the commissioner took X to court wanting the platform to do more to keep Australians safe online. The regulator also issued a penalty of $610,500 to the social media giant in February 2023, alleging it failed to adequately respond to questions about how it tackled harmful content on its platform, including child sexual abuse material. X is disputing the fine. Lifeline 13 11 14 Fullstop Australia 1800 385 578
West Australian
2 hours ago
- West Australian
Housing approvals in WA drop by 7.5 per cent and put the State's ambitious new homes goal at risk
Housing approvals dropped by 7.5 per cent in WA in May, putting them at higher than a year ago but the sluggish numbers mean the State is not on track to build enough houses to meet its target and win extra cash from the Federal Government. The Commonwealth has put bonus funding on the table for States that meet their share of the 1.2 million new homes five-year housing accord target. Nationally, building approvals grew by 3.2 per cent in May, but this was mainly driven by strong growth in Victoria and NSW, new data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics showed. Approvals in WA dropped 7.5 per cent from a month earlier. Federal Housing Minister Clare O'Neil saw green shoots in the data, with her office saying momentum was building nationally towards the targets. 'These positive trends show we're on the right track, but we'll keep doing the hard work so more Australians have access to affordable, secure housing,' a spokesperson from her office said. But shadow minister Andrew Bragg said the improvement was 'marginal'. The Property Council estimates WA will fall about 9.4 per cent short of its target to build about 129,700 new homes by mid-2029 if current building trends continue. Separate forecasts from the Master Builders show the State will be 3.4 per cent shy of its target – although this would drop to about 12 per cent below if building approval rates don't pick up. Master Builders WA chief executive Matt Stanton said the State was among the closest in the country to meeting its housing target. But a hurdle is Perth's long cultural and lifestyle attachment to lower-density living, with apartments and townhouses playing little role in the city's development. 'If we're going to meet demand on housing supply with the fastest growing population of any state and also an economy that's firing pretty close to on-all-cylinders, then we do need a higher and medium density construction … to make up a greater part of new developments moving forward,' he said. Property Council WA chief executive Nicola Brischetto said approvals too often didn't translate into building actually starting, so the data tended to be a bit volatile. 'The biggest barriers are the availability of builders, cost of construction, and the economic viability of many apartment projects,' she said. 'Workforce continues to be the biggest challenge … It's the physically being able to get stuff done, but also, when you've got a constrained labour market, that will put pressure on prices and drive costs up.' Ms Brischetto commended the WA Government for having concentrated heavily on easing workforce shortages but said now there also needed to be a focus on boosting productivity, through using more pre-fabricated and modular construction or adopting AI for scheduling and ordering.
Sky News AU
2 hours ago
- Sky News AU
‘Woke' Allan government continues on ‘desperate path' towards Voice treaty
Sky News host Danica De Giorgio discusses the 'most woke government' in the country wanting to divide Australians by race. A report on Victoria's four-year truth telling inquiry has been tabled in parliament – and has delivered 100 recommendations for Indigenous Victorians, including cash compensation and a formal apology. 'We might just be about to find out what the Allan government is prepared to freely give away and give up – all at the expense of taxpayers – as part of its ongoing, desperate path to treaty,' Ms De Giorgio said. 'Let's be honest, if this big push for funding goes ahead, who is going to pay for it? The Victorian taxpayer of course.'
