Paul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration) Share this | Hansard source

I listened very closely to Senator Brown's comments and remarks in relation to the Commonwealth Parole Board Bill 2025, as I have listened to the remarks of other senators in this place. At the outset, I'd like to state that the position of attorney-general is quite unique in Australia's political system. The Attorney-General is not just an elected official appointed as a minister; they also have all sorts of responsibilities connected with their role as the first law officer of the country. That brings significant obligations upon the Attorney-General with respect to our system of justice, with respect to rule of law and with respect to different discretions that they're required to consider very carefully as to whether or not they exercise them. So I think the first point that needs to be made in this debate is that the position of attorney-general is quite unique in terms of ministerial status and responsibilities linked to their role as the first law officer of the country.

The second point I want to make is this: I have no doubt that attorneys-general from both of the parties of government, supported by experts within the Attorney-General's Department, have been operating to make the best possible parole decisions they can in all the circumstances. Whilst people can allege that decisions were being made, or may be made, for political reasons, I haven't heard any evidence of that. I haven't heard any evidence that any attorney-general, from any party, in any government—certainly during my time in this place—has made a parole decision on the basis of political considerations. Not one example has been given. I have no doubt that my friend and colleague Senator Cash, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, when she had those responsibilities as Attorney-General, would have carefully considered, in her diligent way, the evidence given to her by the departmental officials—by the experts—and made a decision in accordance with the law with respect to parole. I have absolutely no doubt about it, and we have not heard any example of political interference or the exercise of decision-making power with respect to parole being influenced by political considerations. We haven't heard one example of it—not one during the whole debate. That's a good thing, because there shouldn't be political considerations with respect to parole. So I really think people need to be careful before alleging that colleagues in this place have exercised powers for political considerations. I underline the fact that I am sure my friend and colleague Senator Cash would have exercised these powers extremely diligently, as her predecessors would have.

There's a corollary. You want to take the power away from the Attorney-General and give it to an independent board. Well, let's look at the independent board that you're proposing. Let's consider what's actually being proposed here, because there is a benefit in the Attorney-General, an elected official, having this power and being responsible for the exercise of this power in this place and in the other place. There is a benefit in that, in terms of that public accountability, because when they make the wrong decision they can be held accountable for that decision in this place. You want to move it to an independent board. Okay, let's look at the mechanics with respect to this independent board.

The first point I want to make is that I think the position of chair of this parole board under this piece of legislation is extraordinarily powerful. This will be an official who is appointed once and will be in this position for five years, and it is an extraordinarily important professional position. If you were to think about the sort of qualifications you would expect the chair of the parole board to have, I would have thought most reasonable people listening to this debate would think there would need to be something more than someone having been enrolled for at least five years as a practising lawyer. Five years? I wouldn't feel confident to do this job as someone who was admitted some 25 years ago.