Senate debates

Tuesday, 13 February 2018

Bills

Prime Minister and Cabinet Legislation Amendment (2017 Measures No. 1) Bill 2017; In Committee

12:46 pm

Photo of David LeyonhjelmDavid Leyonhjelm (NSW, Liberal Democratic Party) Share this | | Hansard source

by leave—I move items (1) to (7) on sheet 8195 in my name together:

(1) Schedule 5, item 4, page 9 (line 20), omit "2 years", substitute "6 months".

(2) Schedule 5, item 7, page 10 (line 4), omit "2 years", substitute "6 months".

(3) Schedule 5, item 10, page 10 (line 12), omit "2 years", substitute "6 months".

(4) Schedule 5, item 11, page 10 (line 19), omit "2 years", substitute "6 months".

(5) Schedule 5, item 13, page 11 (line 6), omit "2 years", substitute "6 months".

(6) Schedule 5, item 15, page 11 (line 11), omit "2 years", substitute "6 months".

(7) Schedule 5, item 16, page 11 (line 14), omit "2 years", substitute "6 months".

The bill before the Senate, the Prime Minister and Cabinet Legislation Amendment (2017 Measures No. 1) Bill 2017, is largely uncontroversial, dealing with things like annual reporting rules. It also includes a schedule dealing with royal commissions. This schedule adopts a recommendation from the Royal Commission into the Home Insulation Program to empower a royal commission to compel the provision of a statement by a potential witness. This is reasonable. After all, royal commissions already have powers to compel the giving of a document and the giving of oral evidence.

However, the schedule also seeks to adopt a recommendation from the Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption to increase the penalties for various failures to comply with directions from royal commissions from a maximum of six months imprisonment to a maximum of two years imprisonment. There is no case for such an increase. People aren't being imprisoned for failing to comply with the directions of royal commissions let alone being imprisoned for six months. So, there is no evidence that the current six-months rule is a constraint that needs loosening. Increasing the penalty will not deter people from ignoring the directions of royal commissions, because people are not being convicted of ignoring those directions in the first place. If there is to be deterrence there need to be convictions.

We should also remember that failure to comply with a direction of a royal commission is less serious than failure to comply with a direction of a court. It is the judiciary that considers individual violations of the law of the land, and it is the judiciary that ensures that justice is done. By contrast, a royal commission is essentially advisory. It is neither necessary to ensure that justice is done nor directly involved in ensuring that justice is done.

Indeed, as a creation of executive government, a royal commission can be created to serve a partisan purpose, and every party in this place knows it.

My amendments ensure that for the existing offences of failing to comply with various directions of royal commissions the maximum penalties remain at six months imprisonment, instead of being lifted to two years imprisonment. The amendments also ensure that for the new offence of failing to provide a statement requested by a royal commission the maximum penalty is set at six months imprisonment, rather than two years imprisonment. I commend my amendments to the Senate.

12:50 pm

Photo of Patrick DodsonPatrick Dodson (WA, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Indigenous Affairs and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders (Senate)) Share this | | Hansard source

Labor will not be supporting these amendments, as we are committed to assisting the operations of future royal commissions, consistent with the relevant recommendations of the Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption.

Photo of Nigel ScullionNigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Minister for Indigenous Affairs) Share this | | Hansard source

I thank Senator Leyonhjelm for the amendments. We won't be supporting the amendments as we, as with those opposite, are committed to assisting the operation of future royal commissions, consistent with the recommendations of the Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption.

The bill actually increases the penalties for failure to comply with compulsory notices to attend or produce documents to a commission, which implements recommendations 78 of the final report of the Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption. In making the recommendations, Commissioner Dyson Heydon observed that the existing penalties were manifestly inadequate. Currently a penalty of up to two years imprisonment is consistent with penalties for failure to comply with similar processes like those of ATSIC or the Law Enforcement Integrity Commission, so penalties for these offences will increase.

I don't have data, Senator, on how many people necessarily had been fined. You've indicated that you haven't seen anyone be imprisoned for six months, but it is actually $1,000 or a six-month imprisonment, and it goes to two years imprisonment. There's no reference to a pecuniary penalty in the bill, because the court has the discretion to impose a pecuniary penalty instead of or in addition to imprisonment, which is in section 4B of the Crimes Act. For two years in imprisonment, the complementary pecuniary penalty is an amount of up to $25,200 for a natural person—currently the value of a penalty unit. I note that, since the bill was introduced, the amount of a penalty unit has increased from $180 for each penalty unit, as reflected in the explanatory memorandum, to $210 per unit from 1 July 2017. Other changes to penalties proposed in this bill do not increase the penalty but just convert the dollar amount to a penalty unit amount consistent with current Commonwealth drafting practice.

Question negatived.

Bill agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment; report adopted.