Matt Gregg (Deakin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The bill before us today, the Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus No. 1) Bill 2026, is about keeping Australians safe, which has to be the primary concern of every member of this parliament. This bill updates and improves pieces of crime related legislation, including amendments to the Crimes Act, the Criminal Code Act, the Director of Public Prosecutions Act and the Extradition Act. A lot of these changes are quite technical in nature, but if you read through the bill you'll see there are a number of very significant and important changes too, which I'd like to go through in turn. The common thread is that they are all about keeping Australians safe.

Schedule 1 is about making amendments to modernise the law around enforcement and the procedures that allow our agencies to operate more efficiently.

A division having been called in the House of Representatives—

Sitting suspended from 10:31 to 10:42

Part 1 of the bill lists Sydney West Airport as a major airport to empower the Australian Federal Police to exercise the necessary powers at the airport. These powers already apply to every other major airport in the country. This amendment does not create new powers; it simply extends them to the new airport in Sydney's west, which is a completely commonsense change.

Part 2 of schedule 1 of the bill clarifies that specific warrants and orders contained in the Crimes Act can also be made electronically. This is so officers do not have to waste time going to court to fill out hard copy forms. It also makes it easier to obtain these important warrants and orders outside of ordinary court hours. It improves the efficiency of law enforcement and makes sure that we're keeping pace with modern lodgement practices—again, a commonsense change. It addresses major issues with in-person lodgement, which is eminently sensible.

Part 3 of the bill extends the sunset date for three sets of warrants—network activity warrants, data disruption warrants and account takeover warrants—as well as emergency authorisations. These warrants were originally set to expire in September this year. They will be extended to 2029. That will enable the government to complete its more exhaustive package of reforms to these areas, but will ensure the preservation of the status quo up until that time. Again, another very important change. Another aspect of those warrants is that the data disruption warrants will fall outside of the powers of the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission. This is to reflect the fact that they are now focused on being an intelligence gathering organisation. Disruption is really outside of their purview, and that also reflects the independent review of the relevant legislation.

Other parts of the bill look at our drug laws. These are aligning practices at a Commonwealth level with those of the states. So, instead of measuring criminal culpability based on the purity of a substance, we're simply allowing the inclusion of the total weight of any mixed substance. For example, if cocaine is mixed with pseudoephedrine, you can count the whole lot as cocaine. This is commonsense. It reflects the culpability of those involved in it and prevents unnecessary time and money being spent assessing the purity of a substance when that is not a relevant fact when it comes to these criminal offences.

There are also changes to evidence provisions, enabling the issuing of a certificate which confirms the chain of custody after drugs have been taken away and prior to prosecutions. Currently, individual officers all have to write reports. They also have to be available to give oral evidence in court. This is exhaustive and, frankly, fundamentally unnecessary. This doesn't undermine the right to a fair trial. If someone wants to contest the processing of a particular drug in court, they're still entitled to do so. But this enables a simplified approach, which means, again, that trials can focus on relevant facts at issue and not get sidetracked by these unnecessary administrative burdens.

Another small reform that I neglected to mention in relation to schedule 1 is the continuation of the Australian Capital Territory police's powers around precharge detention and investigation. When these provisions were originally drafted, the ACT had envisioned that it would be introducing its own regime. But, as time has gone on, it's become evident that the Commonwealth regime will do. So this just continues the status quo for them.

Schedule 3 is, again, a fairly uncontroversial change. Under the Director of Public Prosecutions Act currently, if there's a perception of or a real conflict of interest, the only option is for the Director of Public Prosecutions to step down so someone else can step up. This change effectively empowers the Attorney-General, if such a conflict is raised, to appoint someone temporarily to address that conflict without the current hoo-ha, which is again a very commonsense piece of reform. It also changes the title of Associate Director of Public Prosecutions to Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions. It's using language similar to that seen in other departments.

Extradition legislation will also be changed. That is the powers of police to arrest people who are the subject of orders from foreign countries seeking either to prosecute them or to ensure that they serve their sentence of imprisonment. Often we're talking about serious offenders. This will enable police to effectively exercise powers of arrest similar to those already seen in crimes legislation in Australia. This reflects the fact that we're often talking about individuals who have committed very serious offences. It allows fair and proportionate use of police powers of entry and arrest. In circumstances where, for example, there is a need to capture someone between 9 pm and 6 am, the police have to exercise proper discretion and make sure that's eminently necessary. So it's ensuring a proportionate framework but nevertheless a rigorous application of those powers.

There are also rule changes around those who have waived their extradition rights. This is ordinarily an administrative process that people go through. When a country requests that someone be sent back to that country, there is a formal review process. A person can waive that administrative process. This enables that in a more direct way, at the same time allowing those individuals to be kept in detention until such time as they're handed over to the other country, where they'll face either prosecution or imprisonment.

Schedule 5 amends the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act. This is a very technical amendment. In Victoria, what was formerly known as the Victorian Inspectorate is now known as Integrity Oversight Victoria, and this amendment simply reflects that change.

These are fairly commonsense changes to the law, as we've seen so far, so it's a bill that I absolutely commend. In particular, the changes around drug legislation are incredibly important for efficiency's sake, ensuring that the trial process is rigorous and focused on the criminal culpability of the individuals involved and not allowing a discount in culpability simply because of impurities in a substance. But it's also proportionate because it prevents double charging. So, if there are two substances that are governed by these legal regimes, you're not going to be charged for each substance separately. They're treated as one. For example, pseudoephedrine and cocaine mixed together in a powder would be treated as a packet of cocaine. You wouldn't have one charge for pseudoephedrine and one charge for cocaine. It simplifies the process. It reflects the way the states have worked for a very long time. It is commonsense enforcement that reflects the culpability of the offenders involved. This enables a more rigorous and robust enforcement. It's not awarding impurity. It's not awarding dodgy drug-dealing practices. This is just ensuring that the criminality is properly reflected in the way things are prosecuted. It is really facilitating a better and more efficient criminal justice process by enabling prosecutions to be focusing on evidence of probative value as to whether someone is guilty and culpable of an offence and not on technical administrative issues. The same is true in relation to the warrants and orders. This is about making a better, more efficient justice system , improving the way criminal justice works in Australia. It's something that ought to be commended.

I want to pay tribute to the Attorney-General, who is doing a lot of work dealing with crime. This is something that I know is incredibly important to my community and communities around Australia. The Albanese government is working incredibly hard. We have a no-nonsense approach to this kind of criminality. This is one of many reforms that the government is going through to ensure that we have a rigorous criminal justice process and that our law enforcement agencies have the powers, tools, clarity and certainty they need to do their jobs effectively. So I commend the Attorney-General, and I commend this bill to the House.

Claire Clutterham (Sturt, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of the Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus No.1) Bill 2026. At its heart, this bill is about supporting law enforcement agencies to provide efficient and effective services to Australians to keep them safe. Law enforcement agencies play a critical role in the functioning of our communities and of our country and they need to be appropriately equipped to carry out their functions, with appropriate, reasonable and proportionate safeguards as well.

When out and about in my community, I've received some feedback of a general nature that crime, particularly opportunistic crime, is on the rise and that people feel just that little bit less safe generally. Car theft, petty robbery, low-level property damage and general antisocial and threatening behaviour are on the rise. Opportunistic crimes committed randomly and without preplanning cause fear within communities, reducing connection, increasing scepticism and undermining cohesion. Deliberate, targeted crime does this too, just on a much more significant scale.

Cost-of-living pressures, social issues that are still lingering from the pandemic and the development of technology that facilitates, for example, car theft or the duplication of garage remote codes means that opportunistic and deliberate crime is happening and police resources are stretched. Australians do not want police resources to be so stretched that difficult decisions about which call-outs to attend, which offences to investigate and which offences to prosecute need to be made any more than is absolutely necessary. No-one wants that, and this bill contains measures to assist with this.

Firstly, however, I'll go to criminal law. There are many different purposes to criminal law. First and foremost is the maintenance of social order. Criminal law plays a critical role in keeping things in order within a society. As society changes, which it does regularly, clear definitions surrounding what behaviours are harmful and disruptive—and thus off limits—are important. This helps to set boundaries and acts as a deterrent against committing crimes or aiding in the commission of crimes. This makes communities safer and more predictable. It also helps to hold people to account for their actions by ensuring that people who commit crimes face consequences. This also facilitates trust and confidence in the criminal law system because it demonstrates fairness to the wider population. It demonstrates that everyone is subject to the same rules and also limits people taking justice into their own hands, which is a very dangerous approach on many levels.

Ensuring victims receive justice is the second key purpose of criminal law. I recently met someone in my electorate of Sturt who had been the victim of a very serious crime. She had two main drivers going forward. The first was justice for herself—to be heard and to have the effect that the serious crime had on her to be soundly understood. The second driver was to share her story so that lessons could be learned and strategies put in place to minimise the prospects of what had happened to her happening to anyone else. When victims do not feel heard or feel that nothing was done in response to what happened to them, there is a loss of trust and confidence in the police, the courts and all operators in the justice system, and issues and offences are less likely to be reported, potentially leading to escalation and this sense amongst perpetrators that it is possible to get away with offending.

In this respect, the third key purpose of the criminal law is the rehabilitation of offenders. This is important because it offers opportunities for offenders to reintegrate into society and once again become productive members of the community. If the underlying causes of criminal behaviour can be addressed through rehabilitation then the prospects of reoffending are lowered, which is a good thing for the entire community. Through rehabilitation, the criminal justice system is motivated to break the cycle of crime and promote meaningful and sustainable positive change for individuals and for communities.

Fourth is deterrence and punishment. The goal of deterrence is to discourage members of society from committing criminal offences, and the fear of punishment is the general deterrence and discouragement mechanism. However, deterrence is effective only if a person has the capacity to reflect. Because many people commit crimes in the heat of the moment, this is one of the major obstacles for deterrence in criminal justice. That is why implementing punishments and making them publicly known as a form of education is an equally important part of deterrence, because it sends the message that all criminal acts will be punished, that authorities are motivated to catch offenders and punish them and also that Australians, quite rightly, expect this and deserve this.

Finally, the criminal law, particularly the way it operates in this country, is complete with safeguards, thresholds, clear processes, and an emphasis on procedural fairness and the protection of the rights of individuals. Innocent until proven guilty, or the presumption of innocence, is a fundamental principle of the criminal justice system in Australia, and it must remain forever so, no matter what the alleged offence is. The minute we start picking and choosing who is entitled to the benefit of this principle is the minute we turn our backs on core legal principles and core human rights and invite false accusations and invite the state, as the prosecuting authority, to punish individuals without justification.

Our criminal law system, including the measures in this bill, guards against this. Equally, the appellate process, where decisions of courts of first instance are appealable on certain grounds, operate in order to correct mistakes or injustices where they have occurred. The standard of proof in criminal offences beyond reasonable doubt is the right standard when punishment may involve the deprivation of liberty. No other standard is appropriate. As difficult as this sometimes is to accept, it is better to let a guilty person go free than to convict an innocent individual. It is this notion that underpins the standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt. With such a high threshold, the likelihood of a potentially guilty individual walking free increases, but it also makes it that much more difficult for an innocent individual to be wrongly convicted of a crime.

This bill, containing all the safeguards and thresholds as it does, with its five schedules, speaks to the purposes of criminal law and also speaks to the idea that it's important to continually examine whether the criminal law in this country remains true to those purposes, whether it is contemporary in its approach to societal changes, and whether it provides adequate powers and resources to ensure that the criminal justice system operates effectively.

Going to the five schedules, schedule 1 deals with police powers and warrants. The bill will amend the Crimes Act to enable the Australian Federal Police to exercise critical powers at the new Western Sydney International Airport, ensuring a consistent policing and security framework at major airports nationwide. And it will modernise the way law enforcement agencies can apply search warrants and assistance orders to better align with today's digital operating environment, but without affecting the substantial thresholds and safeguards that are already in existence around these processes.

Secondly, in schedule 2 to the bill there are critical amendments to the Criminal Code directed at ensuring that the prosecution of serious drug offences is efficient and effective. This includes the implementation of an evidentiary certificate which allows prima facie evidence of specific facts, normally technical or formal in nature, to be provided and approved without calling a witness. The amendments also change the way drug threshold quantities are measured. The current purity approach, which does not reflect how drugs are typically trafficked, will be replaced with mixed quantity requirements.

Schedule 3, another safeguard, contains amendments that streamline the process for managing an actual, perceived or potential conflict of interest identified by the Director of Public Prosecutions, meaning that a sufficiently senior person can exercise powers and functions in lieu of the director where it is not appropriate for the director to do so because of a conflict of interest.

The Extradition Act will be modernised by schedule 4 to the bill to improve not only the efficiency of the extradition process but also its safety. The amendments provide that, once a person waives extradition, they are to remain in custody until they are physically surrendered to the requesting country or released under an appropriate order, saving time and money. The Extradition Act will also be amended to provide police officers with the power to enter premises and use reasonable force when executing an extradition arrest warrant, reducing operational risks to the police and to the community.

The final schedule is schedule 5, which is a technical amendment to the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act. This is required in order to update terminology to reflect changes in Victorian legislation in relation to Integrity Oversight Victoria.

Criminal law is complex. It must be constantly examined to ensure that these complexities are being appropriately managed. But we in the community all play a role, too. For the average Australian individual or business, there are things we can all do to deter both opportunistic and deliberate crime. Some may say it's a shame that things are not as they were 40 years ago, when you could leave the keys in the ignition as you popped into the shop. But things aren't the same. The South Australian police commissioner made this very salient point last week when he asked fuel retailers to implement easily available and effective prepay systems to avoid people driving off without paying for fuel, an offence that has spiked given current market conditions. Prepay eliminates this. So retailers: please implement it. Commissioner Stevens quite rightly warned that police would stop responding to call-outs about this issue, because resources are so stretched.

To the community: lock your doors; use the alarm; don't leave the engine running as you go into the shop; don't leave your phone, wallet and other valuables lying around; take sensible precautions; take simple actions of deterrence. This helps police, and these deterrence actions that you can take make it harder for an opportunistic or deliberately motivated perpetrator to commit an offence, which means police resources can be directed elsewhere, to where the need is greater—and we know the need is great.

This underscores the need for constant examination and measurement of the effectiveness of the criminal law system, which underscores the importance of this bill. I thank the Attorney-General for her work and commend the bill to the House.

Michelle Rowland (Greenway, Australian Labor Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank members for their contribution to the debate on the Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus No. 1) Bill 2026, which supports the effective administration of government by updating and improving key pieces of crimes related legislation. This is critical to supporting law enforcement and related agencies to keep the community safe.

The bill will ensure that police have the necessary powers to keep passengers safe at Australia's newest airport, in Western Sydney. It will modernise the way law enforcement agencies can apply for search warrants and assistance orders. And it will ensure that the Australian Federal Police and the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission continue to have appropriate access to critical powers to identify and disrupt serious technology enabled criminal activity. The bill will improve the operation and efficiency of prosecution of serious drug offences, aligning Commonwealth procedures with state, territory and international approaches while retaining procedural fairness.

The bill will enhance the efficient running of Australia's federal prosecution agency by clarifying and modernising the Director of Public Prosecutions Act, including by streamlining the process of managing an actual, perceived or potential conflict of interest identified by the Director of Public Prosecutions. Frameworks in the Extradition Act will be clarified and modernised to streamline processes and ensure law enforcement officers are equipped with appropriate powers to effectively perform their functions.

Finally, the bill will update terminology to modernise language and provide clarity and consistency across jurisdictions. The amendments in the Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus No. 1) Bill 2026 modernise, streamline and clarify important provisions, ensuring law enforcement and related agencies can efficiently and effectively perform their critical functions. This bill is vital to ensuring our crimes legislation remains up to date and adequately supports our agencies to keep Australians safe. I commend the bill to the chamber.

Rebekha Sharkie (Mayo, Centre Alliance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is the bill now be read a second time.

Question unresolved.

As it is necessary to resolve this question to enable further questions to be considered in relation to this bill, in accordance with standing order 105, the bill will be returned to the House for further consideration.