Don Farrell (SA, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for the Centenary of ANZAC) Share this | Hansard source

By leave—as has been circulated on the grey, I move opposition amendments (1) to (6) and (8) to (11) on sheet 8060:

(1) Clause 1, page 1 (lines 5 and 6), omit "Serious or Organised", substitute "Serious and Organised".

(2) Schedule 1, item 2, page 3 (lines 9 and 10), omit "serious or organised", substitute "serious and organised".

(3) Schedule 1, item 3, page 3 (line 15), omit "serious or organised", substitute "serious and organised".

(4) Schedule 1, item 4, page 3 (line 18), omit "Serious or organised", substitute "Serious and organised".

(5) Schedule 1, item 4, page 3 (line 21), omit "serious or organised", substitute "serious and organised".

(6) Schedule 1, item 4, page 3 (line 24), omit "serious or organised", substitute "serious and organised".

(8) Schedule 1, item 7, page 5 (line 3), omit "serious or organised", substitute "serious and organised".

(9) Schedule 1, item 12, page 5 (line 22), omit "Serious or organised", substitute "Serious and organised".

(10) Schedule 1, item 12, page 5 (lines 25 and 26), omit "serious or organised", substitute "serious and organised".

(11) Schedule 1, item 12, page 6 (line 4), omit "serious or organised", substitute "serious and organised".

Amendments (1) to (6) and (8) to (11) change the phrase 'serious or organised' crime to 'serious and organised' crime throughout the bill. It is a uniform change and will impact the aviation and maritime bills in exactly the same manner. It is important that we get the language right when we are adding new purposes to important legislation. We need to ensure that we are targeting identified problems in a precise manner.

As Labor members in this place said in the last parliament when an identical bill was put forward, we are concerned that the mission of transport security remains tightly focused around managing the post-9/11 security environment. Currently that is about safeguarding unlawful interference at our regulated airports and seaports, and really focuses on terror-related activity. That is the purpose of this legislation.

These amendments are intended to widen that purpose to include targeting serious criminality which may not be unlawful interference of a terrorist type. While serious criminality should be targeted, it is a different focus to terrorism and, hence, this bill. While Labor will not oppose the widened purpose, it is important that it reflects expert opinion and directs resources to the defined problem. That is the problem with what the government has done here. Somehow the problem has changed from 'serious and organised' crime to 'serious or organised' crime. Labor believes we should follow the experts. The government refers to the Ice Taskforce report and the Joint Committee on Law Enforcement report of 2011 as the basis of this bill, but they and others always refer to 'serious and organised' crime. For instance, the Ice Taskforce report uniformly talks about targeting 'serious and organised' crime. The Joint Committee on Law Enforcement inquiry into the adequacy of aviation and maritime security measures always refers to 'serious and organised' crime. This is something that the current Minister for Justice should recall, as he was a member of the joint committee at the time. Indeed, the committee recommended the following:

The committee recommends that the scope of the Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 and the Maritime Transport and Offshore Facilities Security Act 2003 be widened to include serious and organised crime in addition to terrorist activity and unlawful interference.

This is what the bill seeks to do, but with a less precise definition. The Attorney-General's Department submission on the bill in the previous parliament uniformly talked about targeting serious and organised crime. The law enforcement agencies almost always use 'serious and organised' crime. If you have a look at the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission, that is what you will see.

The Australian Crime Commission Amendment (National Policing Information) Bill 2015, which Labor supported last year, also referred to 'serious and organised' crime. Indeed, the Senate report on this very bill uniformly talks about targeting 'serious and organised' crime. Despite the use of 'or' throughout, this is never explained. Only the bill itself uniformly talks about targeting 'serious or organised' crime. Even the department's 2015-16 annual report, tabled in the house on 7 November last year, refers to this legislation as targeting 'serious and organised' crime. You will see that on page 30. For reasons of keeping a proper focus, Labor's amendments will extend the purpose and specification of the offences in this bill to 'serious and organised' crime. In the draft regulation, which will specify offences requiring consideration when issuing ASICs and MSICs, we expect that this revised definition will better focus resources.

I would also like to make some comments about the group 2 amendments (7) and (12). The second group of amendments, comprising (7) and (12), will be put in place on a legislative basis for existing review mechanisms. As part of the change package, the government is proposing to harmonise what are currently different appeal systems for the ASIC and the MSIC. ASIC cardholders will have a clearer system of review rights, one equivalent to the existing MSIC system. The amendments will retain the new uniformity between the maritime and aviation systems.

About one-quarter of one million Australians have an ASIC or an MSIC card. For many, the access that those cards provide is crucial to their employment and their livelihood. The amendments will require regulations made after this bill is passed into law to contain a review mechanism that either already exists or is proposed by the government as part of the harmonisation. Inserting into the respective maritime and aviation security acts a requirement for regulations to include a review mechanism provides an extra level of assurance that the system will include reviews when an adverse finding is made.