Senate debates

Thursday, 19 June 2014

Bills

Privacy Amendment (Privacy Alerts) Bill 2014; Second Reading

10:52 am

Photo of Helen KrogerHelen Kroger (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Senator Bilyk and I just think that we are having a drink outside and we are having the usual argy-bargy. I appreciate your ruling. If I can try to go back to where I was—you have very successfully interrupted my train of thought—the one that comes to mind, because it affected some stakeholders and some constituents of mine in Victoria, was the introduction of the pink batts insulation scheme. It was introduced on the run and it is one we can all relate to very well. We know why it was suggested: it was necessary to inject capital into the economy so we did not go into the GFC. We know the arguments for it. There has been a judicial inquiry held into that. This is one thing that every Australian man and woman can identify with, because what it demonstrated was that the stakeholders were not consulted prior to the rollout of that program. It did not come here for due consideration; there was no proper inquiry before it was rolled out; it was literally policy done on the run, which was legislated and rolled out straightaway.

Departmental staff have indicated that they were not aware of the various consequences of the way in which they rolled out that program. If I can take you back, we know that there were literally hundreds of fires. I visited a house in in Victoria, where the retired lady was so lucky; she had a fire in her kitchen; they had installed the insulation. She did not know there was a choice. The provider called up and said, 'You know, you can get this and you won't have to pay for it.' She thought, 'Oh, okay.' She did not understand, because the details were not provided to her. She had the insulation installed; they installed it over the current insulation; it blocked and created a huge problem with the electricity in her kitchen. She was in the bedroom when a fire started in her kitchen. It was a neighbour who alerted her to it. She was one of the lucky ones. I went in, and you could see this extraordinary situation where she was very lucky. There was a fire in her kitchen ceiling. Thankfully, she was in the bedroom. She was not intoxicated by smoke.

The whole point of that was that the stakeholders—electricians, for instance—who are skilled and licensed to install insulation were not consulted on what the process here should have been. This could so easily have been averted, and it was not. Alarm bells were ringing at various levels from the Prime Minister and the minister responsible down—we know all that—but no-one took any note. That is probably a very stark but very good example of unintended consequences.

That brings me back to this, because we are just seeking to ensure that, for legislation that comes here, we as a Senate do the task that is set out for us. It is our mandate to review legislation, so we can consult properly, consult widely and ensure that everyone who has significant input has the opportunity to provide that and that what we end up doing is not just creating another layer of red tape, another layer of bureaucracy, but ensuring that the proper processes are put in place.

There is a fantastic booklet that has been put out by the Abbott government. It is this booklet, entitled The Australian Government Guide to Regulation. I would suggest that every person in this place should pick it up and have a read, because it is like a plumber's guide to plumbing. It is our guide to legislation. Everybody in this place should take the time to read this because it will save time, ultimately, for senators of this place and members in the other chamber if they pick up this guide and read it to ensure that the proper processes have been undertaken in bringing any legislation into this place.

I go to page 40 of the guide. There are many areas. This one covers the area of stakeholders. I am not going to go through it. Everybody in this place is bright enough to consult it, pick it up and have a read. But there are various aspects of it which I really commend to the senators in this place to read. They include 'Proper consultation delivers better outcomes'. In that section, we have 'Understanding the attitudes and likely reactions of the people affected', 'Making sure every practical and viable policy alternative has been considered', 'Confirming the accuracy of the data on which your analysis was based'—these are all subheadings which detail ways in which you can do this. Others are 'Ensuring there are no implementation barriers or unintended consequences', 'Affected groups will feel you have listened and considered their views'—and it goes on. It also talks about 'the right consultation tool' to use for the particular job that you are seeking to undertake.

This is not a guide that has been put together for legislators. It is a guide for all agencies, for all departments, which should pull out this little book to literally do a checklist when they are looking at introducing or considering policy. There are also options for the way in which you can consult stakeholders, including 'full public consultation', 'targeted consultation', 'confidential consultation' and 'post-decision consultation'.

In closing, I refer to the committee that inquired into this bill for a very, very limited time. I have to acknowledge the work that former Senator Humphries and outgoing Senator Boyce did on this. They made a number of recommendations in additional statements, if you like, to the report. I do not have time to go through those additional recommendations, but I commend these additional comments to the chamber for consideration.

Comments

No comments