Robert Oakeshott (Lyne, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to support the Law and Justice Legislation Amendment (Identity Crimes and Other Measures) Bill 2008 for three reasons: firstly, as for most other speakers here this evening, the issue of starting to address the most insidious of crimes, identity crime; secondly, the recognition in this bill of the work of AUSTRAC and the increasing importance of the role that they play in law enforcement at both a national and an international level; and, thirdly, the issue of victims certificates and the exploration of this new area of law at the most local of levels and at the front line of victim support.

As most other speakers here tonight have mentioned, some of the most distressed constituents we all deal with are those who have been victims of identity crime. There is a silent element to the crime and it leaves people in complete shock at the situation they find themselves in. Through my electorate office I recently dealt with some examples of identity fraud. The member for Riverina previously mentioned a Facebook scam. We have also had an example, through my office, of the crime where very clever password software is used to crack into and take control of various social networking sites. In our instance it was a Facebook site. That then leads to all sorts of follow-on problems in getting control of your identity back.

We also had the example of someone who had not left one of our local towns for over two years yet racked up all sorts of driving offences in Sydney and could not understand why. They had all sorts of difficulties with the various agencies in trying to get the message across that they had not even been to Sydney let alone driven against the law.

The third example I would give to highlight the point of how quickly scams can come along is a report from this week from my electorate office that there is now a fiscal stimulus scam floating around where people are being rung up at home and bank details are sought on the promise that ‘it is the government here to help’ and ‘we’ll provide you with a cheque if you give us your bank details’.

The reason for giving those three examples is to make the point of just how quickly scams can evolve and therefore how quick the response of law enforcement needs to be. But hopefully those examples also make the point that, in the battle in information, communications and technology, the good guys have as much access to information technology as the bad guys. Password software, the scrambling software that is now increasingly becoming available, is keeping pace with law enforcement, and it is a huge challenge as more and more scams come online more quickly.

The point of those examples is also that this is an international issue. Information technology by its inherent nature has an international aspect to it yet identity crime is also a most local crime. The work that AUSTRAC does in following the movement of money shows that, even though it is a significant international issue, it is also the most local of issues. It comes down to the poker machine in the pub, the local racetrack and legitimate businesses in towns such as the ones I represent. Casinos are obviously highly identified with the work of AUSTRAC. Basically, it is ‘game on’ in all its forms, local and international, and thankfully we are starting to see some action and direction from government in response to it.

I do pick up on the point that was made by the previous speaker with regard to dividend savings and efficiency savings. If the government is serious about increasing the width and breadth of the powers of the various law enforcement agencies in dealing with identity crime, theft and fraud, increasing the width and breadth of the powers of AUSTRAC and starting to empower victims in response to identity crimes, then it is surely illogical to at the same time have efficiency dividends and efficiency savings which limit the work done by the law enforcement agencies for economic reasons.

I think the victims certificates are a fascinating area of the law. I reserve judgment, but I am sceptical about how successful they will be and certainly hope to be proved wrong. Victim support in identity crime is certainly needed and I am pleased to see that action is being taken in that area. Various policing strategies on identity crime have identified more need for support for victims of identity theft as well as the need for a consistent response to the needs of victims of identity theft. But it is a vexed question; it is a difficult one. If financial savings have been lost and if it is outside of a jurisdiction, how do you provide that support to victims? So I am pleased that there is an attempt at this in the legislation with victims certificates. However, it does raise some challenging questions for the law. I would really be interested in a response from the Attorney-General or the Minister for Home Affairs, who is at the table, with regard to whether the various law societies and peak law bodies have the view that magistrates will be using these certificates and will be comfortable in the legal issues with regard to their use.

As well, I will be interested to see whether the financial institutions will pay attention to these victims certificates. The wording is nice in that they may assist in the process of trying to regain certain elements of the identity crime. However, from the point of view of an individual who, in a practical sense, has been through the horrific experience of identity crime, the cost-benefit of going through a court process for a ‘may assist’ option from a financial institution—without a guarantee that a magistrate will tick it off and accept the argument—I think has several caveats which may prove the victims certificates worthless. As I said, I am sceptical, but I certainly hope I am wrong. If, through the minister or through staff, there can be a response as to what those various bodies, such as the financial institutions, are saying with regard to these victims certificates, I would be very interested. Also, over time, as they start to get used more and more, I think not only I but many other members in this place will be interested in the role that these victims certificates will play at a community level with regard to what is an increasing type of crime—that is, identity crime—and therefore does need increasing work from members of parliament with regard to help and advocacy for the victims of those crimes. If there could be feedback once these certificates are starting to be defined within the court process and with regard to what worth the financial institutions place on them, I think it would be appreciated by most people in this House.

Finally, I also pick up on comments from others, and send a message to the constituent body that I represent on the mid-North Coast of New South Wales. It is startling how many people do not place a value on their own identity. Quite often, the issues that are being dealt with through this legislation can be avoided by some simple protections. The stand-out message that I hope we can all take back to our constituencies is a strong message about protecting yourself as an individual. The Galaxy survey that was mentioned earlier, which showed that over 70 per cent of people do not do anything to protect their identity—whether by shredding documents or by being aware of passwords and various internet issues—is an issue of concern and therefore an issue for an education and prevention message from all of us to our constituencies. There are the simple tick-offs: there is the obvious one of shredding documents, particularly bank statements and the like, as well as regularly checking funds, cutting up cards when they expire, and using different passwords—and, representing an elderly community, I know that can be difficult. However, the use of different passwords will assist. The other obvious one, and probably a good message for all of us as well, is to not put too much information in the public domain. It is extraordinary what you can find in the public domain about pretty well anyone these days, and my strong message is that it is not only friends who are looking on various internet sites; it is enemies as well.

This is valuable legislation. I do hope it works. I do want to mention AUSTRAC. I think they have an increasingly important role to play within law enforcement in Australia. The figures that they talk about as far as the movement of money into and out of Australia are extraordinary and, in a lot of ways, reflect badly on this chamber and the other place in that, as the law makers, this is happening under our noses. It should be an embarrassment that not millions but billions of dollars are moving illegally in and out of this country. And there are all the implications that go with that. It may be drug trafficking, terrorism or paedophilia—there can be all sorts of illegal elements attached to that movement of money. So the role that AUSTRAC play is incredibly important as a central point for detecting illegal activity, and I certainly hope that the government also recognises that, places great value and weight on its work and gives it full lead to do the good work that it should be allowed to do. With those words, I certainly support this bill.

See this speech in context