Ms BYRNES (Cunningham) (15:00): My question is to the Minister for Government Services. What are the lessons for the NDIS and the government services portfolio given the evidence before Senate estimates this week on the contracts presided over by the department under former minister Stuart Robert. 

Mr SHORTEN (Maribyrnong—Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme and Minister for Government Services) (15:00): I thank the member for Cunningham for her question. Senate estimates this week heard some evidence about the allocation and conduct of a particular contract given to company called Salesforce. The background to this contract and the investigation was initially triggered following reports on 1 December last year. Following media reports, my agency heads reviewed contracts. They got Ian Watt to review procurement practices in the previous term and what observations there were to be made. Dr Watt has presented his review. This has been reported to the House.

But, in particular, the new leadership of the NDIA have had cause to review the contract entered into in February 2020 with Salesforce Australia for their CRM, their customer relationship management software. The contract is valued at $76 million. It was initially intended as a small project, but it kept getting revised upwards and not delivering.

Around the time the contract was entered into, there was a push to use Salesforce in other agencies across government. I'm informed that Microsoft was offering a similar product but for one-third of the cost. Within the agency, the NDIA, it was pushed by senior staff including, specifically, hand-picked appointees of the previous government. The then member for Fadden was the minister at the time.

There were questions asked about the appropriateness of the contract, and the contractor who asked this question and was sacked in 2021, under the previous government. After the change of government, Ernst & Young were brought in to do assurances and advise on the project. The problem is—

Mr JOYCE (New England): Careful of that one.

Mr SHORTEN: I'm getting advice that we should be careful. I think you guys should have been a lot more careful when you were in charge. Potential issues include—these are serious matters—the procurement documents, the assessment of alternative products, who was the responsible officer for this project, how did they satisfy themselves that it was value for money. So yet again, there seems to be an association between the missing member for Fadden, dodgy contracts and controversy.

The CEO has confirmed that the contract was initiated when the member for Fadden was minister. I can now advise the parliament it has been referred to a forensic auditor. Staff have been referred to the APSC Commissioner. It was not ruled out going to the National Anti-Corruption Commission. And what we also heard in committees yesterday—and it was a bit ironic listening to some of the earlier questions from the opposition today—is a parliamentary committee chaired by the member for Macquarie has reviewed whether or not the former MP declared his friendship with the consultants Synergy 360. No conflict of interest was ever declared by the then member for Fadden—yet again.