Jozef Imrich, name worthy of Kafka, has his finger on the pulse of any irony of interest and shares his findings to keep you in-the-know with the savviest trend setters and infomaniacs.
''I want to stay as close to the edge as I can without going over. Out on the edge you see all kinds of things you can't see from the center.''
-Kurt Vonnegut
The early conclusion to what was already a dubious exercise in scrutiny is exactly what we’ve come to expect.
Deborah O'Neill
Labor Senator
May 22, 2025
Remember when PwC paid for and appointed Dr Ziggy Switkowski to write a report in the midst of the Peter-John Collins-initiated global tax scandal? They creatively called it “independent”.
This week, in a move drawn from the same well-worn playbook, the law firm that PwC appointed and paid for to assess its implementation of those reforms has also delivered a report. Unsurprisingly, this report is also branded as “independent”.
Ending monitoring early with key governance reforms incomplete is a sign of complacency. Aresna Villanueva
There is a pattern here. The PwC International reputation management apparatus hangs over this saga like a shroud at a funeral. These so-called “independent” reviewersfunction like security guards beside the crash site, waving the public past and insisting: nothing to see here. But Australians are not that easily distracted.
For those of us who have scrutinised this scandal closely, especially through the Senate, PwC’s latest announcement doesn’t come as a surprise. The move to conclude external monitoring of its reform process eight months ahead of schedule is, unfortunately, exactly what we’ve come to expect. This is not a milestone. It’s a marketing exercise. It is a bid to control the narrative, not to deliver genuine accountability.
We are told the firm is pleased with recent governance changes and the strength of its board. That’s fine. But none of that speaks to the fundamental breach of public trust that triggered one of the most serious corporate integrity crises in modern Australian history.
Ending monitoring early, based on PwC’s own disclosures, while key governance reforms remain incomplete, is not a sign of renewal. It’s a sign of complacency.
PwC remains under formal supervised remediation by its international parent. A central reform to ensure a majority of independent non-executive directors on its governance board is unfinished.
PwC can declare its house is in order as many times as it likes. But it does not get to set the terms of public trust.
This week’s announcement is not closure. It’s choreography.
No organisation that has presided over wrongdoing of this magnitude should expect the public to accept a self-authored assessment of its ethical rehabilitation. That judgement lies where it always should, with regulators, Parliament and the people.
Internal reviews, no matter how polished or externally branded, are beside the point. The real work of scrutiny lies elsewhere. And rather than commissioning photo ops and self-declared victories, PwC would do better to focus its energy on deep cultural change and long-overdue structural reform. It should leave the business of compliance, credibility and trust to those the public has confidence in.
That work is already under way. The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services, which I chaired in the 47th Parliament, tabled its final report in November 2024: Ethics and Professional Accountability: Structural Challenges in the Audit, Assurance and Consultancy Industry. That report identifies not just PwC’s failings but a pattern of systemic weakness across the sector, from structural conflicts of interest to faltering ethical standards and regulatory capture.
It also sets out 40 clear and actionable recommendations. They include governance rules for large partnerships, increased transparency and competition in the audit market, robust whistleblower protections and a mandatory code of conduct for consultants. These are not symbolic gestures. They are concrete tools to rebuild a sector that has consistently failed to meet the standards expected of it.
Some reforms are already moving forward. Many others await implementation. I am confident that the government understands the scale of the problem and the urgency of the solution.
Labor’s new Minister for Financial Services, Dr Daniel Mulino, and Assistant Minister for the Digital Economy, Dr Andrew Charlton, bring deep capability to these roles. Both understand the centrality of audit and consulting integrity to our economic and democratic institutions. And I know both are committed to delivering the reforms this moment demands.
Because this is not just about PwC. What began as one scandal has exposed much more. The sector-wide decline in audit quality, the erosion of professional accountability and the blurring of ethical boundaries between consultancy and public service are not isolated issues. They are structural failings.
Audit is meant to be independent. Assurance is meant to assure. These aren’t just functions. They are public guarantees that the system works, that companies can be trusted, that taxpayers are protected and that superannuation is safe.
And right now, too many of the firms responsible for those guarantees are falling short. The truth is, no amount of internal monitoring or self-congratulatory reporting will shield any firm from scrutiny. That scrutiny, from parliament, from the media, from regulators and from the public, will continue. And it will apply across the board.
PwC can declare its house is in order as many times as it likes. But it does not get to set the terms of public trust. It’s time the charade of “independent” purchased reports was put aside for good. They don’t get to mark their own homework any more.
