Look no further for proof than the agenda to create a federal anti-corruption commission, a reform for integrity pushed into the political mainstream by independent MPs - primarily Cathy McGowan, her successor as MP for Indi, Helen Haines, and Zali Steggall.

But crossbenchers in the next parliament could go further in shaping integrity measures.

Independents could again set the agenda in ways that spell more changes to life inside the public service, if their ideas are adopted by the new government.

Here are some that could make a mark on the federal bureaucracy.

With some exceptions, there are no controls on which companies senior public servants can work for immediately after they leave their agencies. The Commonwealth doesn't have the legal power to impose general restrictions on where former staff work. There's also little monitoring of how former public servants apply their inside knowledge in new roles.

That raises issues, because for some senior bureaucrats life after the public service can mean a job in a private sector company they used to deal with in their agency. Questions then arise about the closeness between government agencies and the sectors they're meant to do business with.

What can go wrong? There's the potential for former public servants to ingratiate themselves with prospective employers while they're meant to be serving the interests of the public through responsible decision-making and regulation. Another risk is that they profiteer from the knowledge they gained while working for their former agency.

Overall, rules on the future employment of senior public servants are lax compared with overseas.

At least one independent wants to address "revolving doors", and make it harder for public servants to take jobs in companies affected by their decisions. New MP for Goldstein, Zoe Daniel, wants to introduce an enforceable three-year cooling off period for ministers, staff, and bureaucrats looking for jobs in private sector industries over which they had legislative or regulatory influence while in government or the public service.

Ms Daniel might get support in this from incoming independent MP for Mackellar, Sophie Scamps, who wants to prevent ministers leaving office from moving immediately into industry jobs.

The two independents could find an Upper House ally on this issue in Jacqui Lambie, who has lamented the lack of protections against "revolving doors" between government decision-makers and the private sector.

The Audit Office isn't exactly a household name, but it uncovered two scandals that are known just about everywhere around the nation. Both the "sports rorts" community grants program, and the "car park rorts" fund, not only came to define the Morrison government in the eyes of many voters but also fuelled the national movement for greater integrity in government.

The public might never have known about these programs but for the work of the Australian National Audit Office. Voters might also have been alarmed to know that, at one stage, the Morrison government actually cut the agency's funding - a move one Labor MP described as "revenge" for the "sports rorts" saga.

Auditor-General Grant Hehir also warned that years of funding cuts to the agency had taken their toll, and it would conduct fewer performance audits in future without a cash injection. The Coalition government later gave it nearly $62 million additional funding, but Labor argued it fell well short of the money requested by the Audit Office to do its work. Integrity advocates argue that the Audit Office's overall funding is well below what is needed.

Independent David Pocock has promised to fight for funding to be restored at the Australian National Audit Office, which he says should have adequate resourcing to do its work overseeing how public money is spent. Kylea Tink, an independent who unseated Liberal MP Trent Zimmerman in North Sydney, has also campaigned on stronger powers for the Audit Office.

Whistleblowers inside the public service need greater protections from the repercussions they face for revealing wrongdoing. Too often, they lose their jobs, experience mistreatment, and in some cases, can face jail.

The Morrison government admitted the laws weren't doing enough to shield public sector whistleblowers, and promised reforms strengthening protections after the election. Now the Coalition has lost power, it will fall on Labor to make those changes, and independents will likely push it from the crossbench.

Ms Daniel, a former ABC journalist, has promised to push for better whistleblower protections. She will find support in that from fellow crossbenchers independent MP Andrew Wilkie and Centre Alliance MP Rebekah Sharkie, who have long championed better whistleblower laws. The Greens have also made whistleblower protections part of their platform.

The best word to describe the amount of cash the government spends on contracts is "megabucks". In fact, in 2020-21 it published more than 84,000 contracts on its tender website, with a combined value of $69.8 billion.

For many of these, there's not a lot of publicly available information about the work or products that the money will buy. It makes it hard to assess the value of that spending. While agencies and departments are required to post their tenders and notices for awarded contracts on the AusTender website, the details are scarce.

READ MORE:

The federal government also spends "megabucks" on grants. It published more than 108,200 of them on its GrantConnect website between 2018 and June 2021, and they had a total value of $60.2 billion.

But public confidence in the fairness of government grants is shaky after the "sport rorts" saga. It's not certain that a federal integrity commission would be able to investigate the kind of "pork barrelling" that has created so much groundswell for integrity reforms in government. Other changes might be needed.

Ms Tink wants better budget oversight to stop "pork barrelling" and the waste and mismanagement of public funds, including cost benefit reporting and greater transparency on both tendering and grants.

This is a reform that can be expected to happen inside the public service soon. Labor has promised to create a federal integrity commission this year, and it has a clear mandate to do so, having campaigned strongly on the issue.

The question will be how strong a model Labor adopts. So far, it has an outline for a federal integrity watchdog, and it will need to thresh out the details and put forward a detailed model including with legislation.

Dr Haines has already provided one and put forward a bill in the last parliament. It will be her, along with other independents and the Greens, who will push Labor to adopt the strongest possible model.

If Labor does follow the model put forward by Dr Haines in the last parliament, it would be a new Commonwealth agency with power to investigate public servants and question them in public hearings, to identify, stamp out and deter corruption.

This kind of watchdog would have public servants looking over their shoulder if they're doing the wrong thing. That's the point.