Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment, Skills, Small and Family Business) Share this | Hansard source

I thank all senators for their contributions to the debate on the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (2019 Measures No. 1) Bill 2019. Australians have been shocked and saddened by the recent terrorist attack on innocent members of the public in London on Friday afternoon London time. Australia's deepest sympathies are with the victims and their families. While the bill that we are debating predates this tragic event, sadly, this event once again demonstrates the need for the legislative measures in this bill, which are aimed at protecting the Australian community from terrorist offenders.

Since September 2014, Australia's National Terrorism Threat Level has been set at 'probable'. This means that there is credible intelligence assessed by our security agencies indicating that individuals or groups continue to possess the intent and capability to conduct a terrorist attack in Australia. In this prevailing threat environment, it is critical that Australia's counterterrorism legislative framework remains effective and responsive to the constantly evolving threat of terrorism.

The measures in the bill strengthen the tools that law enforcement and intelligence agencies have to protect the Australian public from the threat of terrorism. This bill implements the commitment this government made at the Council of Australian Governments in the wake of the terrorist attack in Brighton, Victoria, to ensure that, at the federal level, there is a presumption against bail and parole for persons who have demonstrated support for or links to terrorist activity. Indeed, all of the states have subsequently passed their own legislation implementing the principles underpinning these presumptions in relation to state based offences. This bill makes it clear that anyone who has links with or who has shown support for terrorist activities will not be released on bail or parole unless they can show that there are exceptional circumstances that would justify their release into the community.

It is a disturbing reality that children are committing terrorist offences. Given that the impact of a child committing a terrorism offence on the victims and the community is no less than that by an adult, the presumptions against bail and parole apply to all offenders, regardless of their age. This bill includes safeguards for children in addition to those already afforded to all offenders under the relevant legislation. This ensures the potential of children for rehabilitation is taken into account at key steps in the justice process without compromising the security of the community.

The bill also makes two important amendments to improve the operation of the High Risk Terrorist Offenders Scheme in division 105A of the Criminal Code that allows for continuing detention orders for high-risk terrorist offenders. The first amendment will address a gap in the scheme to ensure that jailed terrorist offenders who are also serving time for non-terrorism offences remain eligible for a continuing detention order at the expiry of their prison sentences. This amendment will ensure that terrorist offenders remain eligible for a continuing detention order irrespective of whether the final day of their sentence is served for a terrorism offence or for another offence. This amendment supports the protective purpose of the High Risk Terrorist Offenders Scheme by ensuring that the Commonwealth can take effective action against dangerous terrorist offenders who are about to be released into the community.

The second amendment will bring the options for protecting national security information contained in continuing detention order applications into line with the information protections available in other contexts. These enhanced information protections allow the Commonwealth to limit the disclosure of such information to the terrorist offender by relying on protective court orders, such as public interest immunity and orders under the National Security Information (Criminal and Civil Proceedings) Act 2004.

The measures in this bill do not detract from the robust framework of safeguards already in the High Risk Terrorist Offenders Scheme. The measures are reasonable, necessary and proportionate, and ensure that the High Risk Terrorist Offenders Scheme can better achieve its principal objective, which is to protect the community from the threat posed by dangerous terrorists.

On 1 August 2019, the bill was referred to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security for inquiry and report. The advisory report of the committee was tabled on 14 October 2019. The committee recommended the passage of the bill, subject to a recommendation regarding the operation of public interest immunity in relation to continuing detention order applications. In response to this recommendation, the government has amended the bill to clarify that the provisions of the bill do not alter the way in which the ordinary doctrine of public interest immunity would operate in practice. I would like to thank the committee again for its detailed consideration of the bill. The work of the committee was invaluable in ensuring that the measures contained in the bill are necessary, reasonable and proportionate.

I will just address the second reading amendment that has been moved by Senator Whish-Wilson on behalf of the Australian Greens. The government will not be supporting the amendment moved by Senator Whish-Wilson on behalf of the Australian Greens. The Australian government is committed to continually improving Australia's anti-money-laundering and counterterrorism financing laws and to working with industry to ensure that Australia's financial system is hardened against criminals and terrorists without placing undue burden on industry. On 17 October 2019—in other words, recently—the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2019 was introduced into the Australian parliament. Additional reforms will be introduced into parliament in early 2020 which will further contribute to the government's effort to disrupt and dismantle the criminal business model.

I will also now address two other points that Senator Whish-Wilson raised in talking about the Australian Greens' second reading amendment. The first is in relation to presumptions against bail and parole. I advise the Senate that presumptions against bail and parole are necessary because, when it comes to terrorism—and we are talking about terrorism here—the risks to the community of further offending are so great that it is appropriate the starting position be that bail or parole is refused. This reflects the existing position in relation to terrorism offences, where a presumption against bail already applies. The presumptions will apply to persons who have demonstrated support for or have links to terrorism. I will just repeat that for the benefit of the chamber: the presumptions will apply to persons who have demonstrated support for or have links to terrorism.

The presumptions are not an arbitrary ban against bail or parole for these people. Decision-makers retain the discretion to grant bail or parole if the person can demonstrate that exceptional circumstances justify their release. The defendant also has the option to appeal the court's decision regarding bail. In accordance with the existing parole arrangements for all federal offenders, offenders subject to the presumption against parole would be afforded procedural fairness in relation to their consideration by the Attorney-General for parole. Further decisions of the Attorney-General in relation to parole are reviewable under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977.

I will also now address the second issue that was raised by Senator Whish-Wilson when talking about the Australian Greens' second reading amendment—that is, in relation to compliance with the rights of the child and Australia's obligations under the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The government is asking the parliament to amend section 19AG to ensure its compliance with the Convention on the Rights of the Child. In his children's report, the monitor concluded that, in its current form, section 19AG, as it applies to children, is in breach of Australia's obligations under the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Of significant concern to the monitor was that, in its current form, section 19AG precludes any judicial discretion in setting a child's non-parole period and was therefore not consistent with the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

The amendments to section 19AG make it consistent with the monitor's consideration of the presumption against bail found in section 15AA, which the monitor concluded met the obligations under the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The amendments to section 19AG are responsive to the issues raised by the monitor and facilitate discretion when setting a child's non-parole period. In its amended form, section 19AG will fully comply with the Convention on the Rights of the Child and will protect the rights of children who are being prosecuted and sentenced for terrorism offences. The amendment achieves this in a way consistent with the obligations upon government to protect the community from terrorist threats, whilst ensuring that the circumstances of children who commit terrorist offences are taken into account when fixing the minimum period they will spend in jail for their crimes.

Again, I thank my colleagues across this chamber for recognising the need for these important measures. The bill reflects the government's ongoing commitment to protecting the Australian community from terrorists and ensuring our law enforcement and security agencies have the powers they need to respond to the evolving threat of terrorism. I commend the bill to the chamber.