Certainly, the proposed National Integrity Commission Bill should not be readily dismissed.

Indi MP Cathy McGowan, leading a group of crossbenchers in introducing the Bill to Parliament on Monday, pointed out how the aim was to create a “culture of integrity” and prevent corruption “so all of us are our best selves”.

In recent years we have witnessed probes for the wider public good conducted by NSW’s Independent Commission Against Corruption, known by its acronym, ICAC, which investigates corrupt conduct involving or affecting the NSW public sector.

As state opposition water spokesman Chris Minns commented last year, “we are lucky in NSW, we have the ICAC” in place to “get to the bottom of potentially corrupt or inappropriate behaviour”.

Again, in theory, no one should quibble with the benefits that brings to the community in terms of transparency and accountability.

Federal Finance Minister Mathias Cormann though immediately talked-down the Bill’s worth.

MORE OPINION

He argued there was bipartisan support for fighting corruption.

But he also said that a commission as outlined in the Bill was “an overreach” that, for example, could force journalists to reveal their sources.

The raising of such concerns should be encouraged as this is a vital part of the political process, in reaching a legislative consensus that can achieve the stated aims without being tripped-up by hidden flaws.

But rather than simply oppose, it is incumbent on the Parliament to ensure the Bill is drafted correctly.

Notably, it has been put that the Bill uses the same definition of corruption applied by ICAC and one that had been tested in the High Court.

Given that 34 former judges urged Prime Minister Scott Morrison at the weekend to set-up such a commission, this is a path that should be taken.