‘Actual experts’: Dedicated royal commission branch wasn’t consulted on whether to hold Bondi probe

The Federal agency that runs royal commissions wasn’t consulted on whether to hold one in the wake of the Bondi Beach terror attack.

Monday’s shock revelation comes after Anthony Albanese claimed “actual experts” had advised him against holding a royal commission into to the worst terror attack on Australian soil.

For weeks after the horror mass shooting which claimed 15 lives on December 14, the Prime Minister repelled calls from the families of victims, the Jewish community and Opposition to hold a royal commission.

Mr Albanese cited undisclosed “actual experts” in his justification to opt instead for an independent review to be led by former director-general of security of Australia Dennis Richardson.

“Our position is not out of convenience. It is out of conviction that this is the right direction to go in,” Mr Albanese said.

“And the actual experts, who are the current experts, have all recommended this course of action, and we are following the advice that we received from authorities who are in 2025 dealing with this atrocity.”

It took the PM until January 8 — 25 days after the attack — to eventually relent and call a royal commission.

Shadow multicultural affairs minister Paul Scarr used a Senate estimates hearing on Monday to question officials at the AG’s department which agencies or experts had advised against holding the royal commission.

Department secretary Katherine Jones revealed that she hadn’t been asked for advice and couldn’t identify anyone on her team who had.

“No, Senator. No, I wasn’t. The Attorney-General’s Department was consulted on some draft letters patent once the decision had been taken to establish a royal commission but we had not provided advice previously,” Ms Jones said.

Senator Scarr said he was stunned the PM did not seek advice from the agency with the most expertise on royal commissions.

“I’m gobsmacked that the Prime Minister didn’t seek advice from the Attorney General’s Department with respect to whether or not a royal commission should be established in response to the Bondi terror attack,” he told witnesses.

“The Prime Minister actually went out and said ‘actually experts’ and ‘current experts’ had advised against a royal commission. And now we find that the department within the government which has the particular knowledge at its fingertips with respect to royal commissions was not consulted - how can that be the case?”

Don Farrell, who was the representative minister in the estimates hearing, was equally as puzzled when asked if he could disclose the identity of the experts.

The Labor frontbencher said he wasn’t sure who the PM was referring to but vowed to follow up with Mr Albanese.

In her response, Ms Jones highlighted that a dedicated royal commissions branch within the AG’s department had been disbanded prior to the Bondi attack because there were no ongoing probes.

“Up until recently we had disbanded that royal commission branch because all of the recent royal commissions has concluded,” she said.

“We’ve retained some corporate knowledge in the department but we’ve now, very rapidly re-established that branch.”

She said while the AG’s department had oversight of any probe, the significance of the terror attack would mean the Prime Minister’s department and Cabinet would play a “significant role” in this investigation.

Ms Jones also took a question on notice about whether the AG’s Department provided advice on the Richardson review.

Senator Farrell said parliamentarians should acknowledge that the PM did eventually call the Commonwealth probe.

“I guess we can kick over the traces about what’s happened here but I would make the point to Senator Scarr that the significant fact here is the Prime Minister did make a decision to call a Royal Commission,” he said.

“He’s done that in consultation with the New South Wales Government, which itself had set up a royal commission. And you might recall, the Prime Minister made it very clear when New South Wales originally made that decision, that the Federal authorities and Federal Government would participate fully and cooperate fully with that inquiry.

“We did set up an inquiry very, very quickly after that terrible attack in Bondi, to put Mr Richardson in charge of inquiring about what’s gone on here. That process has been rolled into this royal commission process.

“So, in terms of what the Opposition was calling for, we’ve done what the Opposition has called for.”

Senior Liberal Senator Michaelia Cash also questioned the decision-making process to calling a royal commission during a separate Senate estimates involving officials in the Prime Minister and Cabinet’s department.

The Leader of the Opposition in the Senate repeatedly asked if the “actual experts” cited by the PM existed.

“Who the ‘actual experts’, who are the ‘current experts’? Do you know who these people are? It’s a simple question,” Senator Cash said.

“Do they exist. Can we establish that perhaps? Minister Wong, do these people actually exist?”

The line of questioning prompted a heated exchange between Senator Cash and the representative Minister in the hearing, Penny Wong. Both Senator Wong and department officials took the question of their identity on notice.

“The Prime Minister was upfront about making a decision after consulting within an outside government, he was upfront about that,” Senator Wong claimed.

The senior Labor minister also accused Senator Cash of trying to “seek political points” and frequently referred to her absence from the late-night vote on the hate speech legislation in response to the Bondi attack.

“I appreciate there’s a political point that you’re seeking to make. You’d also say the Australian people are entitled to know why you didn’t turn up to vote for legislation that was around about combating anti-Semitism,” Senator Wong said.

Both Senator Wong and department officials were also unable to name who and how many people were consulted about the final terms of reference for the royal commission.

Earlier on Monday, AG department officials also revealed training modules about understanding and tackling anti-Semitism would soon be rolled out to Australian public servants.

The department’s chief people and strategy officer Bridie Dawson said the new training was expected to be released in March and would complement a suite of existing multicultural measures.

“The department will also work closely with the APS Commission. They are looking at some specific anti-Semitism modules,” she said.

“I’ve been advised they’re hoping to roll them out in March, so that will be further resources that will be available to the department through their APS Learn platform.

“We have a number of report and support mechanisms.

“We also have a CALD action plan. We also have a cultural e-kearning course, which covers cross-cultural communication and cultural diversity. As of the end of December, we also have indigenous cultural awareness training to complement that.

“The department already has a robust anti-racism training module that staff can access.”