Letter

In response to National Anti-Corruption Commission is two years old – Has it restored integrity to federal government?

Distrust of the NACC

The NACC is rightly the subject of public mistrust, arising from its own reports, its choices of subjects for investigation and from errors and omissions in its leadership.

Now we learn that the NACC is encouraged to think that mistrust is accepable. Funded by a government grant of taxpayer earnings, the Australian Research Council is mapping the positive values of public mistrust.

Mystified? Yes, you should be. Mistrust of the NACC has been thoroughly earned. No, it contains no positive values.

How has this bunkum been promoted? The researchers are misled by Erik Erikson’s theoretical musings that a healthy amount of mistrust can lead to positive outomes, such as enhanced self-protection, improved decision-making, and a more realistic assessment of situations. Mistrust is also said to foster vigilance, boundary-setting, and a more nuanced understanding of relationships.

Wrong. Vigilance, self-protection and heightened alert result from the observation of dangers. Mistrust is not the cause of this alert focus, Mistrust is the judgment that vigilance is required.

The NACC has been hypocritically shaped to create an illusion that something is being done to avert corruption. And now, that our mistrust of the NACC is positive.

— Glen Davis from New South Wales