Transparency is a powerful integrity tool. When corruption and misconduct are exposed, and when the actions taken to address them are visible, public trust can be rebuilt and a culture of integrity can be established.

In this blog, we examine the role of transparency in preventing corruption, drawing on recent commentary from IBAC and national data on public trust to highlight why visible integrity processes matter.

Transparency as a foundation of integrity

Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (IBAC) Chief Executive Officer, Alison Byrne, recently discussed the central role transparency plays in effective corruption prevention.

“Transparency has the power to help IBAC combat corruption,” she said. “We can’t ignore the impact of information – of exposing the corrupt conduct or misconduct by those tasked to serve the community, and the recommendations or action IBAC has taken to address it.

“We believe that once an investigation is complete, procedural fairness is undertaken and where it is in the public’s interest, IBAC should have the ability to tell Victorians the outcome – and that Victorians deserve to know.”

The ability to publish findings and recommendations strengthens confidence in integrity systems and reinforces expectations of ethical conduct across Victoria and the broader public sector.

Transparency as a deterrent

According to Byrne, “Calling out corruption is a powerful deterrent to others – the more people who know what defines corruption and the consequences engaging in it has, the more people may think twice before engaging in this conduct, and the more people who may recognise it and report it.”

IBAC has also emphasised that greater transparency increases public awareness of its role, encourages credible reporting, and supports integrity across Victoria Police and the broader Victorian public sector.

Public trust and awareness: What the data shows

This is particularly important in light of findings from Transparency International Australia’s (TIA) 2025 Australian Constitutional Values Survey (n=1,800), which were presented at the national Anti-corruption Commissions: Why they are undermined and towards best practice conference in October 2025. Survey findings included:

• Australians place significantly more confidence in independent integrity agencies than in politicians, news media or the federal government
• Awareness is solid but uneven: over 60 per cent of respondents recognise their state’s anti-corruption commission agency name, yet only one in four feel they know “a fair amount” or more about it, highlighting a clear opportunity for stronger public-facing education and prevention work.
• Victoria’s IBAC recorded the lowest level of public trust among Australia’s anti-corruption bodies, at just 27 per cent.

“Public trust is like a vase,” said Clancy Moore, CEO of TIA, addressing the conference. “Once it’s broken, you can fix it but the vase will never be the same again. So it’s important for anti-corruption commissions to build trust by demonstrating their transparency, responsiveness, and commitment to integrity in operations.”

Legislative reform to support transparency

In response to this data, IBAC has sought legislative reform through its submission to the Parliament of Victoria’s Integrity Oversight Committee (IOC) Inquiry into the adequacy of IBAC’s legislative framework. The submission called for expanded powers to publish investigation outcomes and recommendations, and to conduct public examinations for education and prevention purposes.

The IOC has since tabled its inquiry report, making 31 recommendations to the Victorian government and IBAC, many of which will result in increased transparency in IBAC’s work, including:

• permitting IBAC to table in parliament and publish its recommendations following an investigation without the need for a special report
• enabling IBAC to table in parliament and publish de-identified recommendations made to Victoria Police along with implementation status updates on those recommendations
• allowing IBAC to hold public hearings for the purpose of prevention and education.

An important step forward

Byrne reports that while these recommendations do not go as far as IBAC had sought – including reform to remove the requirement for ‘exceptional circumstances’ to hold public hearings – the proposed changes still represent an important step towards a more open integrity framework.

IBAC welcomed the recommendations and encouraged their acceptance and implementation by the Victorian Government.

What this means for the public sector

For public sector agencies, the message is clear: publishing outcomes, sharing lessons learned, and openly addressing integrity risks can foster a culture where ethical behaviour is understood, expected and actively supported.

Conclusion

As the government considers the IOC’s recommendations, enhanced transparency has the potential to play a critical role in restoring confidence, deterring corruption, and reinforcing integrity across Victoria.

As Byrne has emphasised, the ability to communicate the outcomes of investigations – once procedural fairness is complete and where it is in the public interest – helps build awareness, support deterrence, and strengthens public trust in integrity systems.

Resources

• Australians place more trust in anti-corruption commissions than in politics (TIA)
• CEO update: Is transparency the key to improving corruption prevention? (IBAC)

***

CourtHeath acknowledges the Traditional Aboriginal Owners of Country throughout Victoria and pays respect to Elders past and  present, and to the ongoing living culture of Aboriginal people.

A participant in the UN Global Compact, CourtHeath seeks to raise awareness about the sustainable development goals and the principles of the Global Compact with business and government organisations in Victoria.

***