James Stevens (Sturt, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I think it would be remiss at the commencement of remarks on a bill related to the Australian Defence Force to not first make mention of the milestone yesterday of the exit from Afghanistan of the United States, and of course the experience over the last month, particularly, of our own heroic ADF personnel and other personnel from other agencies—DFAT and home affairs—and the effort that they've gone to to help many people, particularly Australian citizens, safely leave Afghanistan. Of course, I pay tribute to all of those who served there over the last 20 years, particularly the 41 fallen Australians. I pay tribute to them, their sacrifice and, of course, the sacrifice of Australians throughout the history of the Commonwealth in conflict, particularly major conflict overseas and particularly those who lost their lives.

It's a poignant reminder of how significant the Defence Legislation Amendment (Discipline Reform) Bill 2021 is, because our Defence Force is so vital to the national security of our nation. They have our utmost respect, and we need to ensure that our legislative frameworks when it comes to dealing with them are modern and efficient. Those are the two things I would like to reflect on in my contribution in support of this second reading.

I also pay tribute to those who have already made a contribution to this bill, particularly ex-service personnel. I apologise if I'm missing any, but I think I heard the contributions of the member for Stirling and the member for Solomon. There may be other former serving personnel who have contributed to this second reading debate. I was quite interested to hear both of their contributions, because they are uniquely qualified to speak on this. I also pay tribute to my colleague Senator Andrew McLachlan, who I know was quite involved in the process leading to this bill coming to the chamber. He has particular experience when it comes to military justice. I know that other contributors in this second reading debate talked about the contribution that he made to what is now before this parliament. I pay tribute to him.

I'm very proud that we have some excellent ADF capability in my home state of South Australia, particularly RAAF Base Edinburgh, which, frankly, is a RAAF and Army base. It's a vital national security asset to the Commonwealth. Many people who serve on that base and serve in uniform live in my electorate of Sturt, adjacent to that base. We're also very proud to have such a significant defence industry capability in South Australia. We are building the Royal Australian Navy's future frigates and submarines in South Australia. We have other great military assets, like Cultana and Woomera, which are so vital in testing and proofing ranges and so on.

This bill does two important things: it improves the efficiency of our military justice system and it modernises our military justice system. Regarding the second of those, I endorse the comments Mr McCormack, the member for Riverina, made about modernisation, in particular in relation to introducing cyberbullying as a category that needs to be reflected in our military justice system. It is vitally important that we recognise the potential for cyberbullying, not just in the services but throughout our society. We've changed, updated and modernised other elements of our justice system to make sure we recognise the significance of this type of activity as bullying and its potential to lead to very, very significant long-term impacts on victims. In many cases it can lead to suicide. It is a very serious thing, and we need to acknowledge it. We need to indicate that we won't tolerate it and that we believe that anyone who engages in it should be appropriately dealt with.

The amendments in this legislation, which ensure that that's very clear in the military justice system, will send the message to those who serve in uniform that, in the ADF, just like in any other part of our society, we don't tolerate what is emerging as a new form of potential harassment. Mobile phones, smartphones et cetera, and all the various devices that can capture material now, didn't exist in decades gone by, so I understand why it isn't until now that we haven't had a proper mechanism in place to deal with this category of offence. But I am very pleased that it is being picked up in this legislation. I also endorse some of the other modernisation in the legislation, which other speakers have talked about. It is vitally important that, as regularly as possible, we ensure that the military justice system is capable and competent to deal with the most modern, developing offences. They may not have existed in decades gone by but they do exist now and need to be appropriately dealt with through the mechanisms of the military justice system.

Regarding the efficiency of our military justice system, we talked about the lower level summary offences in the Defence infringement system. I particularly note the member for Stirling's comments about this, as someone who has experienced the military justice system. I don't cast the aspersion that he's necessarily been within it, but he's served in uniform and therefore is aware of examples of how, in the past, the system hasn't necessarily been as efficient as it could have been. There's a saying that the punishment should fit the crime, and I think the process should also fit the crime. Though I have not served, I understand from the contributions of those who have that at times some of the disciplinary processes can, frankly, take far too long. For some of the lower level offences, the fact that you've got a question mark over you and you're awaiting the outcome of a particular disciplinary procedure can cause significant impacts on your career. It can hold you back from consideration for certain promotions or impede progression in your career. A comment was made by one of the contributors that, in some ways, having a low-level conviction for something is better than having an outstanding matter for the same allegation. That's because, until that allegation is resolved, you can be put on pause for any progression through the ranks within the ADF. I think we can all agree that it is fair and right that people get access to swift justice, which is fair justice. When certain allegations are hanging over the head of service personnel, they should not have to wait for an undue period of time to get an outcome as a result of potentially avoidable bureaucracy or delays. Equally, and as something else that contributes to the efficiency of this, we believe in the importance of the right to the presumption of innocence.

We also believe in the right of appeal and that when a decision is made against someone, whatever the disciplinary decision might be—whether or not it's a conviction or whatever action it might be—it's important that there's an opportunity for review. Again, that has to be in the context of the scale of the offence and the scale of the consequences that the person is subject to, if they are found to have committed that offence. Equally, when you've got summary justice being distributed, it's important that there is an appropriate scale of review in place for those determinations that might be made against someone. That's another thing that this bill does. It creates efficiency where allegations are made, but it also ensures that there's fairness, there's a presumption of innocence and there's some natural justice in the processes so that, as the scale of an alleged offence is more significant, so too is the substance of the process, the right to appeal and other representation. The military justice system has the same capability as courts martial in undertaking proper trials where the offence meets that threshold. Equally, as has been mentioned by other contributors, the civilian justice system is very commonly referred to when there's an allegation of a crime that's been committed that would be a crime of the same substance outside of the military system in civilian life in this country. I think that's very important. It's important that we make sure that we have a very high standard when it comes to discipline in the forces. Also, if you serve in the forces, you should have the same rights and privileges as any other citizen of this country.

Clearly, the Defence Force needs its own system of enforcing its rules, as the consequence of not doing something—say, not following an order—in the Defence Force is quite different to the consequence in any other workplace. Having the categorisation of offences in the military system that wouldn't be considered offences in other workplaces—you wouldn't use the term 'offence' in other workplaces or our parts of our society—is vitally important within the ADF because, as I mentioned at the commencement of my remarks, we rely on our service men and women so much to secure our national security and the interests of our country. We're proud of them and the service that they provide to our country and have provided throughout our history. This is a good opportunity for us to make sure that the military justice system, which is very important, is modern and efficient so that they are capable of receiving justice and also have no ambiguity whatsoever about the standards and what is expected of them.

With those comments, I thank all those that have contributed to the debate. Thank you for the bipartisan support for this important reform from all those on both sides of the chamber. I think this is an excellent outcome, particularly for the men and women in uniform that serve our nation with such great distinction. I commend the bill to the House.

See this speech in context