Carol Brown (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

For serious offenders, community safety is non-negotiable. The question is not whether we take risks seriously; the question is how we manage that risk when release occurs. That requires judgement; it requires experience, and above all it requires independence. That is why the legislation before the Senate matters. The Commonwealth Parole Board Bill 2025 and the Commonwealth Parole Board (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2025 establish an independent Commonwealth Parole Board and transfer federal parole decision-making to an expert statutory body, replacing the current ministerial decision-making framework with an independent statutory model.

At its core, this reform is about aligning the Commonwealth with what Australians already expect. Decisions about whether a convicted federal offender is released into the community and on what conditions should be made carefully, consistently and based on evidence and risk. At the moment, parole decisions for federal offenders are made by the Attorney-General, working with delegates within the Commonwealth Parole Office inside the Attorney-General's department. That arrangement has existed for a long time. It developed in a very different context when the federal offender cohort was small, relatively narrow and largely made up of offences like social security fraud and regulatory breaches. That context has changed.

The number of federal offenders has grown. There are now around 1,200 federal offenders serving sentences across Australia. That is more than the combined prison populations of the ACT and Tasmania. More importantly, the nature of federal funding has changed. The cohort now includes people convicted of terrorism offences, serious organised crime and child sexual abuse material offences. These are complex cases. They involve real risks and they demand deep expertise, yet until now the structures for making those decisions has not kept pace.

Every state and territory in Australia has an independent parole board. The Commonwealth is the only jurisdiction that does not. That makes us the exception, not the standard. Australians expect parole decisions to be made independently of politics. They expect consistency, they expect transparency and they expect community safety to be taken seriously at every stage. This reform responds directly to those expectations.

The Albanese Labor government is establishing a statutory, independent, Commonwealth parole board made up of people with experience across law, law enforcement, corrections, psychology, psychiatry, social work, rehabilitation and working with victims of crime. This matters because parole is not a box-ticking exercise. Assessing risks requires understanding patterns of offending. Understanding rehabilitation requires insight into treatment, behaviour and support structures. Understudy community impact requires listening to victims and considering the broader consequences of release. These are not skills developed through politics; they are developed through practice.

This reform reflects Labor's values of fairness, security and responsibility. Fairness means decisions should be made on the merits of each case, not shaped by political pressure, media attention or fear of criticism. Security means putting community protection first. Parole is not a concession; it is a control mechanism. It allows authorities to impose strict conditions, monitor behaviour and act immediately if those conditions are breached. Responsibility means government has a duty to modernise systems when they no longer reflect best practice. Parole is often misunderstood in public debate. It's not an automatic release. It's not a reward. It is not leniency. Parole is a conditional release under strict control. It allows enforceable conditions to be imposed. It allows supervision. It allows authorities to monitor behaviour closely. If those conditions are breached, parole can be suspended or revoked and the person returned to custody. It's structured oversight.

A system that manages the transition from custody to community is safer than one that ignores it. That is why parole decisions matter so deeply and that is why who makes those decisions matters just as much. Under the current system, the Attorney-General is the decision-maker. This is a question of system design. Ministers are elected to make laws, set policy and be accountable to parliament and the public. Individual parole decisions should sit with an independent expert body. The current arrangement potentially exposes decisions to political pressure and undermines confidence even when decisions are made carefully and in good faith. This legislation draws a clear and appropriate line. Ministers set the laws; experts apply it. The Commonwealth Parole Board will make decisions independently. The board will not be subject to direction. Members will be statutory officeholders. Decisions will be made collectively, with reasons recorded. The board will be required to report annually to parliament, and its operations will be reviewed after commencement. Importantly, decisions will remain subject to judicial review and existing procedural fairness obligations will continue to apply. That is accountability built into the system, not bolted on after the fact.

The board will also have the flexibility to make better decisions. This legislation allows the board to defer decisions in limited circumstances where more information is genuinely needed. It allows reconsideration periods to be set in a way that reflects the time required to complete rehabilitation programs or secure stable accommodation. That flexibility is not about delay for its own sake; it's about making decisions at the right time rather than the wrong time. Good decisions made later are better than poor decisions made early.

This reform does not make it easier for serious offenders to be released. It does not weaken the law. It does not lower the threshold for release, and it does not reduce protections for the community. The bill strengthens the integrity of the system by ensuring decisions are made independently, consistently and on the basis of evidence. The legal framework for parole remains in place. The criteria remain the same. The standards remain high. The purposes of parole are unchanged—rehabilitation and reintegration, where appropriate, and the protection of the community.

Community safety is not a secondary consideration here; it is central to the system. It always has been, and it remains so under this legislation. The statutory prohibition on parole for terrorist offenders remains unchanged. The threshold for release remains extremely high. Nothing in this bill alters that. What changes is not the standard; what changes is the decision-maker. Decisions will be made with greater independence, greater consistency and greater credibility.

This reform also stands in sharp contrast to the former coalition government's approach. For years, they resisted the establishment of an independent Commonwealth parole board—and it appears they still will—despite repeated calls from the Law Council of Australia, the Australian Law Reform Commission, National Legal Aid and victim-advocacy groups. They were content to leave parole decisions with ministers while criticising outcomes they disagreed with from the sidelines. Labor has chosen a different path. We have listened to experts. We have listened to victim advocates, and we have acted. This legislation is the product of extensive consultation with various stakeholders across Australia, including state and territory justice agencies, correction authorities, legal bodies and advocacy groups. It reflects best practice, not political theatre.

For Tasmania, this reform has real and practical significance. Federal offenders are held in Tasmanian prisons. They are supervised by Tasmanian correctional staff. Decisions made at the Commonwealth level have direct consequences for the Tasmanian community. Tasmania already operates under an independent parole board model at the state level. We understand the value of independence in maintaining consistency and public trust.

The government has committed $28.3 million over four years to establish and operate the Commonwealth Parole Board with ongoing funding of around $7 million per year. That is a serious investment. It reflects the seriousness of the task and the importance of getting it right. Success will not be measured by headlines or slogans. It will be measured by better decisions, safer communities and greater confidence in the justice system.

At its heart, this reform is about responsibility. This includes responsibility to victims, who deserve a system that takes their safety seriously and treats their experiences with respect; responsibility to the community, which expects decisions about release from custody to be made carefully and, I'll say it again, independently and, again, on the basis of evidence; and responsibility to the integrity of our institutions, which depends on power being exercised properly, not politically. This is careful reform. It's overdue reform, and it's the right reform. I commend the bill to the Senate.