Carol Brown (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The speech read as follows—

The Royal Commissions Amendment (Private Sessions) Bill proposes to amend the Royal Commissions Act 1902 to enable a sole Commissioner or the Chair of a multi-member royal commission that is permitted to hold private sessions to authorise, in writing, a suitably qualified, experienced and senior member of staff of the royal commission to hold private sessions. A member of staff who is authorised for this purpose will be called an Assistant Commissioner.

Private sessions

Part 4 of the Royal Commissions Act enables certain royal commissions to hold private sessions. Private sessions were first established for the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse to enable individuals to tell their experience about the highly sensitive and personal matters into which the Royal Commission was inquiring, in a trauma-informed and less formal setting than a hearing. Subsequently, royal commissions prescribed by the Royal Commissions Regulations 2019 have been able to utilise private sessions. This includes the two current royal commissions, the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide and the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability.

Participation in a private session is voluntary and participants have similar protections to witnesses. The information that participants give is not considered as evidence and it is not taken on oath or affirmation. There are strict limitations on the use and disclosure of that information, which apply both during and after a royal commission's inquiries.

Currently under the Act, only a sole Commissioner, the Chair of a multi-member royal commission, or another Commissioner who is authorised in writing by the Chair, may conduct private sessions.

Resourcing and cost implications of private sessions

Private sessions have implications for the resourcing, cost and constitution of a royal commission. Amending the Act to enable a suitably qualified, experienced and senior staff member to be authorised as an Assistant Commissioner to conduct private sessions will provide more flexibility to royal commissions to conduct their inquiry. It will assist the sole Commissioner or Chair of a multi-member royal commission to ensure resources are used appropriately and that the inquiry is conducted in an effective and efficient manner, while still enabling a private session participant to have their private session conducted by a suitably qualified, experienced and senior member of staff.

The amendments

The Bill proposes amendments to Part 4 of the Act to introduce a new definition of 'Assistant Commissioner' into the Act and related amendments to enable an Assistant Commissioner to hold private sessions for royal commissions, whether they are constituted by a sole Commissioner or multiple Commissioners.

The proposed role of an Assistant Commissioner is solely to hold private sessions, as authorised in writing by the sole Commissioner or Chair of the royal commission. An Assistant Commissioner will not be authorised to undertake any other role or to exercise any powers of a Commissioner for the royal commission.

The proposed amendments outline how and when an Assistant Commissioner can be authorised to hold private sessions. They provide that the Chair of a royal commission or a sole Commissioner may authorise a person to be an Assistant Commissioner for the sole purpose of holding private sessions for the royal commission. The person must be a member of staff of the royal commission and the authorisation must be in writing. The Chair or a sole Commissioner of a royal commission can authorise a person to be an Assistant Commissioner if they consider that:

The sole Commissioner or Chair of a royal commission will determine whether circumstances exist that justify authorising an Assistant Commissioner for the purpose of holding private sessions for the royal commission. The sole Commissioner or Chair of a royal commission will also decide if the person to be authorised has suitable qualifications and experience and an appropriate level of seniority. The sole Commissioner or Chair should ensure that individuals who share their personal accounts in a private session feel confident in the process.

The proposed amendments make it clear that an Assistant Commissioner will only be appointed where such an appointment is justified. The provision may enable a royal commission to hold more private sessions over the duration of its inquiry than it otherwise might have, and therefore allow more people to engage with a royal commission and have their experience heard.

It may be that some individuals who wish to participate in a private session would prefer to share their personal accounts with the Chair of a royal commission or with a sole Commissioner—rather than with an Assistant Commissioner. By contrast, there may be individuals who would feel more comfortable participating in private sessions held by experienced members of a royal commission's staff who have specialist training in engaging with vulnerable people.

The proposed amendments would enable the Chair or sole Commissioner to take these preferences into account in determining whether circumstances exist that justify authorising an Assistant Commissioner to hold private sessions.

Protections

The amendments also provide that an Assistant Commissioner for a royal commission who holds private sessions for the royal commission has the same protection and immunity as a Justice of the High Court.

An Assistant Commissioner will be performing the same role as a Commissioner when conducting a private session. As such, an Assistant Commissioner should be provided the same level of protection and immunity as a Commissioner. Subsection 7(1) of the Royal Commissions Act provides that a Commissioner shall have the same protection and immunity as a Justice of the High Court in the exercise of his or her duty as a Commissioner.

A judge of the High Court enjoys judicial immunity, which means that no criminal or civil action can be brought against them for acts done within jurisdiction in the course of hearing and deciding a case that is before them. A judge of the High Court is also immune from being compelled to give evidence or disclose their decision making. This immunity will be extended to Assistant Commissioners under proposed section 6OEA.

Limitations and protections

This power to authorise an Assistant Commissioner is not able to be delegated and can only be used where the sole Commissioner or Chair considers that circumstances exist that justify the person holding private sessions.

Compatibility with Human Rights

This Bill is compatible with the human rights and freedoms recognised or declared in the international instruments listed in section 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011. The Bill promotes the right to privacy, the right to effective access to justice and the right to freedom of expression. It does not engage or limit the right to a fair trial and hearing.

Conclusion

This Bill will provide more flexibility to royal commissions to conduct their inquiry, and ensure resources are used appropriately and that the inquiry is conducted in an effective and efficient manner, while ensuring that individuals who wish to participate in private sessions in a less formal and trauma-informed setting are able to do so.

Claire Chandler (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Royal Commissions Amendment (Private Sessions) Bill 2023. This bill amends the Royal Commissions Act 1902. If passed by this parliament, it will change the act so that a royal commission could appoint an assistant commissioner to conduct private sessions with people who want to tell their story. This is a bill that will affect every current and future royal commission. If passed by the parliament, it will allow every royal commission that conducts private sessions to appoint an assistant commissioner.

In reality, this bill came about as a result of the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide, and the community that it affects first and foremost will be our defence and veteran community. Each death by suicide in our defence and veteran community is a tragedy and the effects are far-reaching. We know that the effects of every death by suicide are felt by families, friends, parents, children, those who served alongside them and others in the community, and we know that the problem is far too prevalent in our defence and veteran community. Too many of our veterans and service men and women are dying. We owe it to them and to their families to hear their stories and to make the changes that will make a difference in the long-term. This bill goes some way to doing that, and we in the coalition will be supporting this bill.

If serving and ex-serving personnel who have lived with suicidality want to tell their stories to the royal commission, we will support them to do so. If the friends and families of those who have died are happy to talk in a private session and they're happy doing so with the assistant commissioner that this bill will create, they should be allowed to do so. We will do what we can in this place to ensure that they have that opportunity as soon as possible.

I would like to take a minute to reflect on what private sessions are and how this bill would affect them. Private sessions are a relatively recent addition to the Royal Commissions Act. The private sessions regime was introduced to support the work of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. In 2019 the coalition amended the Royal Commissions Act to allow private sessions to be used in any other royal commission prescribed by regulations.

Private sessions are not a hearing of a royal commission and a person who appears at a private session for a royal commission is not a witness. The information that they provide is not part of the evidence given to the commission and commissioners cannot use the stories told in private sessions to make findings and recommendations. They are, as I have said, private.

There are strong protections in the Royal Commissions Act to ensure that the information given in a private session cannot be disclosed. The restrictions on the disclosure of information given in a private session allow people to come forward confidentially and without fear of reprisals. They mean that people who want to share their story can choose to remain anonymous. Importantly, the legislation ensures that the restrictions continue after the expiry of the royal commission. This legislative framework is designed to support a person in telling their story to a royal commission in a way that is beneficial to them. We recognise and acknowledge that these stories often include significant personal trauma and details that are difficult to speak about publicly.

So what does this bill do? Currently only a sole commissioner, the chair of a multimember royal commission or another commissioner who is authorised in writing by the chair may conduct private sessions. The idea of this bill is that it will authorise a person who is not a royal commissioner to hold a private session, and the person authorised to do so will be called an assistant commissioner. This is a senior member of staff who will be required to be suitably qualified and have the necessary experience, at the discretion of the sole commissioner or chair of the multimember royal commission. The commissioner or the chair of the royal commission must also consider the circumstances that exist that justify the person holding private sessions before the commission, and the bill gives the assistant commissioner the same protections and immunities that are provided to a justice of the High Court.

I think it's appropriate that we take a moment to reflect on the way that this bill came to be before this chamber today. The genesis of this bill was a request from the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide. On 15 May this year, the royal commission revealed that it had received more than 1,140 requests for private sessions prior to the closing date, which was 28 April this year. It's not surprising that they have been flooded with requests. As the royal commission itself noted, sitting down with current and former ADF members, their loved ones and their mates had been incredibly powerful. We know that at the time the royal commission released that information they had completed more than 470 one-on-one sessions with people with lived experience of suicide and suicidality, which helped to identify common issues, themes, risks and protective factors.

We also know from reports in the Guardian about four weeks ago that, several days before releasing that information, they'd written to the Prime Minister. The royal commission wrote to the Prime Minister on 11 May asking for its reporting date to be extended by 12 months, and that was not a request that was made lightly. The royal commission made a careful, considered and balanced request to seek more time so that they could do their job properly. It's not the first time that they have done this. When the royal commission first requested an extension to their reporting date, the coalition granted that extension.

We on this side of the chamber recognise that the royal commission's final report will not make good reading. It will be hard, it will be uncomfortable and it will call for change. We didn't establish the royal commission to avoid scrutiny. We established the royal commission so that it would do a job. When they asked for an extension to do that job properly, we gave it to them, because the issues here are too important to be treated lightly. In granting the extension, we recognised that, regardless of politics, it is in the interests of every Australian serving member and veteran and their families, and that must be prioritised. But the current government has taken a different approach. There was a significant delay in responding to that letter from the royal commission, and then the request for an extension was denied. So, as a fallback, this commission has resorted to working on 'alternative initiatives' to meet its original reporting date, and this bill is one of those alternative initiatives.

We absolutely recognise that this bill is intended to do some good, but we should reflect on the circumstances in which it has come to this place. We don't know whether the Prime Minister ever responded to the royal commission's letter, but we know what the royal commission put into its own statement on the issue:

On 1 August, we were informed that the extension had not been granted and the Royal Commission's final report is expected to be handed down, as planned, by 17 June 2024.

In the spirit of charity and decency, we will give the Prime Minister and the Attorney-General the benefit of the doubt and assume that they did respond appropriately to the commission, but for the benefit of the Hansard and everyone in this chamber, on behalf of the opposition, let me use this opportunity to say what is not appropriate.

It is not appropriate to sit on a letter from a royal commission that asks for more time to hear from veterans and their families. It is not appropriate to wait for three months before saying no and then turn to this chamber and ask for a bill to be rushed through in a single sitting. This bill is a matter of urgency, and we are now asked by the Attorney-General's office to pass it in a week, but the urgency is of the government's making. It is a direct result of their own delay in not answering the commission's request for almost three months. The government has asked the commission to accept this bill that we're debating here today as an alternative, and I think it is suffice to say that it didn't have to be this way. This bill could have been brought on much earlier. An agreement could have been made to extend the time frame of the commission. But these are the choices that this government has made.

We in the opposition will take a different approach. We will let the record show that we support this bill, but we also would have supported the extension of time requested by the commission. We would do so because, as I said in my initial remarks on this bill, we recognise that it is veterans and their families who must come first. I certainly hope that this bill does the good that it is intended to do. As I said on behalf of the opposition, we will be supporting this bill today. I do commend it to the Senate.

Carol Brown (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Chandler for her contribution on this bill. The Royal Commissions Amendment (Private Sessions) Bill 2023 amends the Royal Commissions Act 1902 to enable a sole commissioner or the chair of a multimember royal commission that is permitted to hold private sessions to authorise in writing a suitably qualified, experienced and senior member of staff of the royal commission to hold private sessions. A member of staff who is authorised for this purpose will be called an assistant commissioner.

The bill introduces a new definition of 'assistant commissioner' into the act and makes related amendments to enable an assistant commissioner to hold private sessions for royal commissions, whether they are constituted by a sole commissioner or multiple commissioners. The amendments make it clear that an assistant commissioner will only be appointed where such an appointment is justified. This may enable a royal commission to hold more private sessions over the duration of its inquiry than it otherwise might have and therefore allow more people to engage with the royal commission and have their experience heard. The role of an assistant commissioner is solely to hold private sessions as authorised in writing by the sole commissioner or chair of the royal commission. An assistant commissioner will not be authorised to undertake any other role or to exercise any powers of a commissioner for the royal commission.

This bill will provide more flexibility to royal commissions to conduct their inquiry, enabling more people to tell their stories in private session. It will also ensure that individuals who wish to participate in private sessions can do so with a person with whom they feel most comfortable sharing their experience. I commend the bill to the Senate.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.