Arch Bevis (Brisbane, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Homeland Security) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Crimes Legislation Amendment (Child Sex Tourism Offences and Related Measures) Bill 2007. There can be few offences that are more harmful to the fabric of our society, to our families and to the things we all hold dear than child sex offences. I have no doubt that every member of parliament, whatever their political persuasion, regards offences of this kind as the most the egregious and is supportive of any effort that the parliament can make to protect the innocence of young people, whether they are Australian citizens or young children elsewhere in the world. Sadly, we know that in some parts of the world there has been trade in child sex activities. This bill goes, in some measure, to addressing that. The bill has the support of the Labor Party, and I would anticipate the support of all members of parliament.

The bill amends the Australian Crime Commission Act 2002, the Crimes Act 1914, the Criminal Code 1995, the Surveillance Devices Act 2004 and the Telecommunications (Interception and Access Act) 1979. The bill will amend the definition of ‘serious and organised crime’ in the Australian Crime Commission Act to expressly include child sex carriage service offences. It will repeal parts of the Criminal Code that deal with child sex tourism. It will insert those provisions into the Criminal Code, with some updating of the language and the structure of the offences. I am pleased to say it adds a preparatory offence to capture the behaviour of people who are preparing to commit a child sex tourism offence. It adds new child sex tourism offences to capture the procuring and grooming of a child for the purposes of child sex overseas. It improves the operation of carriage service offences for grooming persons under 16 years of age for sexual activity. It adds a new offence that would make it illegal for Australian citizens and residents to possess, control, produce, distribute or obtain child pornography and/or abuse material while overseas, and it addresses a gap in the current legislative regime by providing for the forfeiture of child pornography and child abuse material and equipment containing such material that is used in the commission of a child sex offence.

Child sex tourism provisions that are currently in the Crimes Act are being moved in line with the general transfer of criminal offences from the Crimes Act to the Criminal Code and the modernisation in the drafting of those offences. The notes on the clauses in the explanatory memorandum identify the corresponding Crimes Act provisions to be replaced, and this is a modernisation process which Labor supports.

The new preparatory offences capture the behaviour of people who are preparing to commit an offence under the proposed division 272. The offences capture a wide range of preparatory behaviour. The inclusion of an offence of this kind will enable a person to be arrested prior to a child under 16 being harmed. The offence of engaging in preparatory acts applies both inside and outside Australia and addresses a gap in the coverage of the existing child sex tourism offences. It is important for all Australians to comprehend that the will of the parliament on this is strong and that whether offences are committed against citizens here in Australia or against children overseas is of no account. This bill quite rightly does not only allow people in one country to be prosecuted with child sex offences; it also makes it an offence for these activities to be undertaken outside of Australia.

Currently the Crimes Act prohibits a person from benefiting from or encouraging conduct which would amount to a child sex tourism offence being committed overseas. These offences are targeted at child sex tour operators. It is a sad reflection on circumstances that we actually do have what I would loosely describe as an ‘industry’. They are targeted at people who think they should be able to profit from operating child sex tours. At present it is an offence for those operators rather than the child sex client. There is nothing in the current offence provisions which clearly prohibits any preliminary steps being taken by a person who wishes to participate in a child sex tour. This bill will address that issue.

The object of the new grooming and procuring offence is to capture people who groom or procure a person under 16 with the intention that the person under 16 will engage in or submit to sexual activity. These offences will capture the grooming of a young person in a foreign country as well. The proposed amendments address that existing gap in our legislation. They are modelled on existing provisions within the Criminal Code which deal with the use of a carriage service to procure or groom a person under 16 for sexual activity. However, the new offences are not limited to conduct involving the use of a carriage service.

The new provisions will make it an offence to possess, control, produce, distribute or obtain child pornography or child abuse material whilst overseas. The proposed offences will apply to Australian citizens or residents of Australia who may be living, travelling and/or working outside of Australia. This too closes a gap in the existing legislative framework and makes clear again the view of the parliament that this activity is abhorrent and unacceptable wherever it may be perpetrated. The conduct is clearly offensive and, if it occurred within Australia, it would be captured by either Commonwealth or state offences. These proposed new arrangements cover the situation where a foreign country does not have specific laws to deal with this behaviour or is unwilling or unable to prosecute. It should be clear that the Australian parliament will ensure those people are prosecuted.

I want to make reference to a couple of items in the bill more specifically. Item 2 amends the Crimes Act to provide a scheme for the forfeiture of child abuse and child pornography material or an article that contains material that is used in the commission of a Commonwealth child sex offence. At present, child pornography or child sex abuse materials or articles containing such material can be forfeited after following the full processes under the Proceeds of Crime Act. Such material is clearly inappropriate to return to the owner under any circumstances, so the amendments create a streamlined process for the forfeiture by order of a court either immediately after a conviction or following a separate hearing.

Items 3 to 7 in the bill are also worthy of comment. They ensure that special protections for children in proceedings for sexual offences that are set out in the Crimes Act will continue to be available under the provisions of the Criminal Code. The special provisions will also apply to proceedings for offences against the proposed division 273.

Items 10 and 11 deal with section 474.27 of the Criminal Code and make it an offence to use a carriage service to groom a person under the age of 16 for sexual activity. Currently, an element of the grooming offences is that the person uses that carriage service to transmit a communication to a second person and that that communication material is of itself indecent. That is a limiting factor in the pursuit of cases of child sex abuse. The requirement that the communication include material that is indecent does limit the types of communications that can be captured for the purposes of making a charge of grooming offences. Indeed, grooming activity may well involve the transmission of other communications designed to capture the confidence of a victim or a potential victim. Items 10 and 11 amend section 474 to ensure that these provisions operate as effectively as possible to capture persons who groom children for sexual intercourse or indecent contact by removing that requirement that the communication itself includes indecent material. This will make the offences consistent with the proposed grooming offences elsewhere in this bill. Again, the opposition—the Labor Party—supports those measures.

Item 18 of the bill enables a law enforcement officer to apply for an emergency authorisation for the use of a surveillance device where there is a risk of loss of evidence in relation to the investigation of an offence against these provisions in the Criminal Code. The parliament and the public quite rightly expect tight controls on the use of surveillance devices in our community, and that is appropriate. In a society such as ours we do not lightly give to the authorities and the government the right to interfere with what we would otherwise regard as our right to privacy and liberty; but we do acknowledge, in a range of areas, the need for law enforcement and intelligence agencies to be able to gather intelligence through the use of surveillance and interception devices. The changes that are proposed in this bill are, I think, consistent with what the public would regard as a fair and proper thing in order to ensure the safety of young people here and abroad.

Similarly, there are amendments to the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act. These amendments ensure that the warrants that are issued under this act may be issued in relation to new child sex tourism offences and dealing in child pornography overseas. The act currently refers to child sex tourism offences in the Crimes Act. As these offences are being repealed, it is necessary to repeal various references to them as consequential amendments. As a result of the changes that are being made in the bill, telecommunications interception warrants will be available for the investigation of a child sex tourism offence or overseas child pornography offences without any further requirement that the offence have an element of organisation or planning. This is different to the current arrangements, in which such warrants are only available for the investigation of a child sex tourism offence where the offence involves, amongst other things, two or more offenders and substantial planning and organisation. I think the government proposal in this area is also correct: there is no reason for that restriction to apply.

As I said, we on this side of the House support this bill. I anticipate all members of the parliament would support the bill. As a parliament, though, we do need to also be confident that the resources are available within the policing and other agencies to properly implement the powers that are set out here. Previously, as shadow minister for homeland security, justice and customs I raised my concerns about the resourcing levels available, particularly to the Australian Federal Police. We have seen a number of media reports about the Federal Police being unable to pursue child sex cases. Indeed, we have seen reports about the Federal Police having to pass on requests to state police to pick up the investigation of these matters because of inadequate resourcing. It is one of the reasons why Kevin Rudd and Labor have committed to the employment of an additional 500 sworn police officers should we win the election. My attention has been drawn to an article only a couple of months ago, on 18 June this year, in the Herald Sun. It said:

In one alarming case, a NSW man who “groomed” a 14-year-old boy in the US for sex on the internet and confided he had molested 100 children was not picked up by NSW Police until four months after the case was handed over by the AFP.

“This matter was originally referred to an operational area of the AFP, however due to operational and resource issues, no investigational activity was able to be commenced at the time,” an agent from the AFP’s online child sexual exploitation team wrote ....

The article went on to quote the Police Federation of Australia Chief Executive Officer, Mark Burgess:

“These delays—or in some cases failure to investigate—are unacceptable and the public expects crimes where children are involved to be a top priority,” ...

I agree with Mr Burgess. I think the whole parliament would agree with Mr Burgess. We do expect the investigation of crimes involving children and the abuse of children, particularly sex offences against children, to be of the highest priority. There are resource implications. It is not good enough, though, for us in this parliament just to give impassioned speeches and vote for legislation which may be good and proper. That is of little consequence if we do not also ensure that the agencies charged with implementing these laws have the resources they need to do that properly. Clearly, the Australian Federal Police have found challenging the range of duties that they have been asked to perform both here and abroad, and their resources have not enabled all of those important tasks to be done. Sadly, what we now know is that in some cases child sex offences have been the ones that have fallen off the bottom of the list. We should make sure that does not continue. We should make sure that the Australian Federal Police and the other agencies involved in these matters are fully resourced to properly implement these laws. Child sex offences are abhorrent to all people in our society. It is not good enough that their priority is so low in the system that policing resources are not available to deal with them. It is not satisfactory that any child suffers sexual assault because there are inadequate resources within our policing agencies to do the task.

These laws are an improvement. They close a number of loopholes. They extend the reach of current laws to make it clear that Australian residents and citizens who behave in this way, whether here or overseas, will fall foul of the law. They make it clear that we will not allow people to bring back into this country child sex abuse material. That is all good and well. We need to ensure that we couple that intention with equal vigour in resources to have the job done properly. Whomever happens to win the election some time over the next couple of months, I think it falls to them to very seriously and earnestly address this issue and to ensure that the Australian Federal Police and the other policing agencies are well resourced to address this problem, to stamp it out and to make it clear that it is unacceptable here in Australia. They should ensure Australia is a leader in the world, stating forthrightly that we will not tolerate child sex abuse, whether it is perpetrated here or abroad, and that we will use every avenue available to us to protect young people.

Debate interrupted.