Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Commonwealth Parole Board Bill 2025 and the Commonwealth Parole Board (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2025. Let's be very clear about what the Senate is now debating. These bills are not a technical reform, they are not administrative tidying up, and they are certainly not about independence. They are about one thing and one thing only: the Albanese government, as it so often does, walking away from its responsibility for the safety of the Australian public. At the very moment, Australians expect their government to be stronger, clearer and more accountable. Labor has brought forward legislation designed to blur responsibility, shift blame and, worse still, insulate ministers from actual consequences of decisions. That is exactly what this bill does, and that is why the coalition will oppose it.

Every Australian understands the basic question at the heart of this debate. When the Commonwealth decides whether a convicted offender should be released back into the community, who should answer for that decision? At present, the answer is clear: it is the Attorney-General, an elected minister answerable to this parliament and accountable to the Australian people. Labor's answer, though, is of course different. Labor's answer is, 'Well, no-one in the Albanese government could possibly be held accountable for any of these decisions.' Instead, with this bill, Albanese Labor wants to hand that responsibility to an unelected board, appointed behind closed doors, operating at arm's length and perfectly positioned to absorb blame when something inevitably goes wrong.

This bill is not about improving decision-making; it is about removing ministers from the line of fire. Under this bill, the Albanese government strips the Attorney-General of direct responsibility for parole decisions relating to federal offenders and transfers that power to a new statutory authority, the Commonwealth Parole Board. Now, the government will say that this is de-politicisation. We've got to be honest in this chamber: there is nothing political about taking responsibility as you should, as the Attorney-General and the government, for public safety. There is nothing improper about ministerial accountability. And there is nothing outdated about expecting an elected government to own its own decisions.

What is political, though, is designing a system so that when the worst happens ministers can say, 'Well, don't look at us; it wasn't our call.' That is the architecture in this bill, and Labor is building it here. This bill creates what I can only describe as an accountability dead zone. Here's how it'll work in practice. The board makes a parole decision. A serious offender is released. The offender reoffends—violently. Victims demand answers. The public demands answers. And this is what the Albanese government says, 'Well, the board is independent; it's got nothing to do with us.' The board then says, 'All we did was follow the statutory framework.' And suddenly no-one elected, no-one answerable, stands in this place to explain why a dangerous person was allowed back into the Australian community. That is not an accident. That is the whole point of this bill. Labor is legislating a system where failure is anonymous.

The government also wants this chamber to believe that federal parole decisions are just another administrative task, something that can be safely delegated to a board just like any other. That is simply not true. As a former attorney-general I can assure you that they are anything but. I know this is the reality, because I dealt with them. Federal offenders include terrorists. They include child sex offenders. They include people smugglers. They include serious organised crime figures. They include cybercriminals and foreign interference actors. These are not low-risk cases. That's why they're federal offences. They are cases that can involve classified intelligence, national security assessments, cross-border implications and serious risks to the Australian community. These are precisely the cases where Australians can expect a clear chain of responsibility, not a diffusion of accountability across a committee table.

The Attorney-General is the first law officer of the Commonwealth. The public expects that when decisions carry grave consequences a minister, in this case the Attorney-General of Australia, is responsible. Labor, with this bill, is going to break that expectation. The government points to language in the bill saying that public safety is paramount. Every failed system says that, quite frankly. Every parole failure comes with the same words after the fact: 'Oh well, the risk was assessed, the process was followed.' But we can assure the public lessons will be learned. Quite frankly, the Australian public are sick and tired of hearing excuses from the Albanese government. Words do not protect communities. Accountability does, and this bill is designed to do one thing, and that is remove it.

Then, of course, there's the cost. The Albanese government is proposing to spend $28.3 million establishing the new parole board, with $7.3 million every single year ongoing. This is at a time when mum and dad Australia are struggling with groceries bills, power bills, rents and mortgages. Labor says that there's no money for relief. There's no money for restraint. There's no money for discipline. But they've got to abrogate responsibility here, and, in particular, in relation to terrorists and sex offenders. So guess what they'll do. They'll spend a bit of money—plenty of it, in fact—and they'll will build a new bureaucracy whose primary function is to shield ministers from blame. Australians are asked to fund Labor's accountability escape hatch.

This, quite frankly, is an insult to Australian taxpayers, but the bill also reveals Labor's ideological priorities. Clause 29 requires the board membership to reflect 'as closely as possible the composition of the Australian community'. Let me be very clear about that. I hate to tell the Albanese Labor government that parole boards are not symbolic institutions. They are not representative forums. They are definitely not exercises in social engineering. They are bodies that decide when dangerous people are released back into the community. I will say it again: as a former attorney-general, I dealt with this. I dealt with terrorists, child sex offenders, people smugglers, serious organised crime figures, cyber criminals and foreign interference actors. Appointments should be made on merit, experience, judgement and integrity, with particular experience in law enforcement, corrections, intelligence and victim advocacy.

Remember, this is the body that is likely to go through this chamber and will decide whether those federal offenders are indeed released back into the community. The fact that Labor has inserted demographic considerations—you have to be kidding me!—into the statutory framework for parole decision-making speaks volumes about where their priorities lie. Let us be clear that, just like with the ISIS brides, it's not safety first. Just like with the ISIS brides, it's ideology first, and, once again, under Labor, the victims of these federal offences—the victims of the terrorists, the victims of the sex offences, the victims of the people smugglers, the victims of the serious organised crime figures, the victims of the cyber criminals and the victims of the foreign interference actors—are just an afterthought.

What is worse is that, when you read this bill, it does not require mandatory consultation. It does not guarantee mandatory notification. It does not even guarantee—and this is utterly despicable—enforceable rights for the victims to be heard. Victims are offered sympathy and process language but not power. Quite frankly, that is not good enough. Victims do not experience parole as an abstract policy debate. They experience it as fear, anxiety and permanent trauma. Labor's bill treats victims as a procedural consideration, not as people whose safety and dignity must come first. But this fits Labor's broader pattern. This bill is not an aberration; it fits a clear pattern. When faced with hard decisions, Labor outsources them. When faced with risk, Labor creates distance. When faced with accountability, Labor builds a buffer. Boards, authorities, panels and reviews—they are always one step away from responsibility. And, when something goes wrong, Labor's response is always the same: 'Oh well, it wasn't us.'

I hate to tell the Australian Labor Party, but Australians aren't stupid. They can see exactly what is happening here. The coalition believes in something very simple. If you exercise power, you own the consequences. We believe that decisions about releasing federal offenders should be made by someone who can be questioned by this parliament, held to account and judged by the Australian people, and that person is the Attorney-General of Australia. This is not because parole should be political but because parole should be accountable.

The bill does not make Australians safer; it makes ministers safer from scrutiny. It strips accountability from elected government. It creates a bureaucratic shield. It costs tens of millions of dollars, it sidelines victims and it weakens confidence in the justice system. Australians don't want a government that hides behind boards; they want a government that takes responsibility. The Albanese government has yet again failed that test, and for those reasons and so many more the coalition will oppose the bill.

Debate interrupted.