Kerry O'Brien (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Primary Industries, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Hansard source

I move opposition amendment (1) on sheet 5388:

(1)    Schedule 1, item 5, page 3 (line 28) to page 4 (line 11), omit subsection 66AY(1), substitute:

        (1)    The Minister must, in writing, as soon as practicable after the commencement of this section, appoint a person to:

             (a)    conduct a Commission of inquiry into:

                   (i)    the 2007 outbreak and spread of equine influenza in Australia;

                  (ii)    the causes of the outbreak and spread, and, in particular, any protocols, measures or practices that may have contributed to it;

                 (iii)    the nature of protocols for the importation of horses and the policy settings upon which they are based, including the role of ministers in the determination of policy settings and the appropriateness of those policy settings;

                 (iv)    quarantine requirements and practices relating to the outbreak and spread;

                  (v)    any matters incidental to the matters referred to in subparagraphs (i) to (iv); and

             (b)    report to the Minister on the matters (including any recommendations relating to the matters) as soon as practicable, and, in any event, on or before a day specified in the instrument of appointment.

That amendment proposes to replace 66AY(1) with a new provision. This provision deals with what we are concerned may be inadequate terms of reference as contained in the bill.

The amendment would have three effects. Firstly, it would require the minister to appoint a person to conduct a commission of inquiry rather than being couched in permissive language, so the parliament would require the minister to conduct that inquiry or appoint a person to conduct a commission of inquiry. Secondly, it would require the terms of reference to be as stated in the legislation. And, thirdly, it would make absolutely clear the range of matters which should be investigated.

We had a discussion last night as to what might be the interpretation of the provisions in the bill, and it was suggested that the provisions would cover matters relating to the outbreak and spread of equine influenza in Australia. We believe it would be preferable if this bill required the investigation rather than left that as a matter for interpretation and a matter upon which the commissioner might have to come back to the parliament to seek further authority in the case of a challenge. We suggest that one could not rule out the possibility of a challenge, in relation to the potential breadth of the inquiry, from an interested party or from a potential witness at the inquiry—someone who believed that their position might be prejudiced by the extent of the inquiry going beyond certain matters and perhaps including other jurisdictions.

We believe it is far preferable for the commission’s terms of reference not just to be specified in the legislation but to be as broad as possible. We think that the terms of reference ought to be specific as to the types of matters which should be investigated—for example, the protocols, measures or practices. This covers a range of circumstances, and we have discussed some of those, such as whether there are appropriate protocols established—that is, the rules that have been laid down in relation to the importation of horses.

We have been talking about measures such as those contained in the AUSVETPLAN about showering before leaving the quarantine station, to minimise risk, and we have been talking about practices and whether the observance of such measures has been rigorously followed. We think it is much more responsible of the parliament to be specific that we intend—we expect; we require—this inquiry to deal with all of those aspects, rather than to leave that as a matter for interpretation.

The other matter which we think ought to be specifically spelled out in the legislation as a requirement for the terms of reference is the question of the policy settings upon which protocols are based, the role of ministers in the determination of those policy settings and indeed the appropriateness of those policy settings.

We are concerned, given that this government has form in relation to terms of reference shielding ministers from proper inquiry, that these terms of reference not be constrained by the minister with the discretions which are contained within the language in the bill currently and that it be a requirement that the commissioner look into the relevance of policy settings in relation to their role in the outbreak and spread of equine influenza.

Of course, we agree that there may be matters which ought to be inquired into which arise in the course of those inquiries and which should be open to the commissioner. We therefore agree that what I will describe as the catch-all provision—which is the fifth provision: ‘any matters incidental’ et cetera, which I think is basically the same as the provision in the bill—ought to remain to allow the commissioner to delve into fields that arise from the sorts of inquiries that we have outlined in the earlier provisions.

It is our belief that it is much more preferable that these matters be required by the parliament to be investigated. This bill comes here to equip the minister with the power to commission an inquiry. We think that the parliament ought to be specific about the range and extent of the inquiry it requires, and these provisions would assist in the specification by the parliament of the terms of that inquiry. We do think that, despite the assurances which have been given, there is a risk that this inquiry will not be as broad as it should be, and we do believe, given the form of this government in relation to such inquiries, that there is a serious risk that the terms will be drawn in such a way as to constrain the inquiry and protect ministers from the proper reach of it. I think that would be a travesty, given that there clearly has been an involvement of ministers in policy settings affecting protocols as they apply to the importation of horses. That should be properly investigated and ministers involved ought to be accountable, through the inquiry, to the Australian people. We believe our amendment is important and we urge the Senate to support it.