Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I would like to thank the member for Kingston for the way in which she conducts herself in a bipartisan approach, generally speaking, in this important portfolio. This bill delivers on two things which I believe should be critical priorities for any national government: delivering fairness in our military legal system and looking after those who volunteer to serve our nation in the Australian Defence Force.

The ADF is full of dedicated, hardworking and professional people. I've been fortunate to meet many of them during my time in this place. I've taken part in a number of exchanges and activities under the ADF Parliamentary Program, including spending some time with our personnel in Afghanistan. As a member of the Defence Subcommittee of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade, and in my work on the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, I've had further opportunities to work closely with our ADF personnel.

Our soldiers, sailors and air men and women are some of the best trained and most disciplined in the world. In any large organisation like the ADF, especially one which by its nature involves stressful work under pressure, individuals will occasionally make less than optimal decisions. Some people will fall foul of the rules, and when they do a court martial stands ready to assess the facts of the case and pass judgement. Although a court martial has special procedures most appropriate to the administration of military justice, it remains ruled by our society's core legal principles. One of the most important legal principles that underlies our justice system is the independence of our judiciary. To deliver fairness in legal proceedings, judges must be independent from the state's prosecution arm. It is that independence which helps to ensure the judiciary's impartiality, and impartiality is at the heart of fairness. In civilian life a judge has tenure. There is clarity of their remuneration structures and, at least in some jurisdictions, there is a transparent process in respect of their appointment.

The effect of schedule 1 of this bill is to enhance the independence of these processes in the military judicial structure to further secure fairness in the cases that come before it. The bill will increase the maximum term of appointment for members of the judge advocates' panel, who sit as Defence Force magistrates and provide legal advice to court martial members, from three years to five years. It will also provide for the Chief of the Defence Force to set selection criteria and processes for the appointment of judge advocates to the panel in a notifiable instrument. This will support a more open selection process, providing transparency for all in how candidates apply and how they are assessed.

The bill also ensures that remuneration for judge advocates when acting during a court martial is determined by the remuneration tribunal rather than by the ADF, ensuring that judge advocates do not depend on the chain of command for their pay. This will bring the process of setting remuneration of judge advocates in line with the process for the Registrar of Military Justice and the Chief Judge Advocate, ensuring consistency and clarity as well as maximising their independence. The rules and procedures of these courts are set by the Judge Advocate General, who is supported in their work by the Chief Judge Advocate. Once again, this bill makes similar provisions enhancing the independence of that position. The bill provides for the Judge Advocate General to lay out, in a notifiable instrument, the selection criteria and process for the role. It provides for more-robust processes for the termination of the Chief Judge Advocate where necessary, which are consistent with the standard provisions for termination of statutory appointments.

Taken as a whole, the amendments in schedule 1 will bring greater guarantees of fairness to the military justice system. They are part of this government's growing track record of bringing greater fairness to all aspects of our national policy making. We have brought fairness to our taxation policy, eliminating bracket creep for low- and middle-income earners and cracking down on multinational taxation avoiders. We've brought greater fairness for vulnerable workers, passing legislation to punish employers who exploit them and banning dodgy deals between employers and unions. We've brought greater fairness to industrial relations, reinstating a tough cop on the beat in the construction sector and reducing exploitation of workers by the criminal CFMEU. We have increased fairness in the distribution of GST with a more equitable and sustainable funding formula and greater fairness in medical treatment, listing an additional 1,900 medicines on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme.

The contrast with the Labor Party and the Leader of the Opposition is stark. While we've introduced fairer taxes, the Leader of the Opposition wants to slug retirees with a huge new multibillion-dollar tax. He wants to ensure that high-income earners on $200,000 a year can get a refund on their franking credits, but a self-funded retiree who has done the right thing and saved for their future will get nothing. While we've introduced fairer taxes for small businesses and more opportunity for society's vulnerable jobless, Labor's tax plans threaten 1.4 million workers' jobs and will undermine the investment decisions—

See this speech in context