House debates
Wednesday, 13 September 2006
Maritime Transport and Offshore Facilities Security Amendment (Maritime Security Guards and Other Measures) Bill 2005
Second Reading
12:10 pm
Warren Truss (Wide Bay, National Party, Minister for Transport and Regional Services) Share this | Hansard source
and I welcome her latest statement. The reality is that everyone going into secure areas at ports will be required to have a maritime security identification card or alternatively they will have to be accompanied by somebody who does; that will apply irrespective of their nationality. I need to also point out that vessels coming into Australia are assessed for their security risk and there are checks of those on board the vessels. The security risk assessment takes account of all the relevant information about the ship, including its cargo, irrespective of which flag it flies and that assessment is independent of the Customs cargo manifest reporting requirements.
I am pleased to be able to report to the Main Committee that overseas vessels coming to Australia have been overwhelmingly compliant with those requirements. In another debate—I have not heard it in the context of this one—there were suggestions that as many as 15 per cent of ships were not complying with the law. My advice is that in the last year 100 per cent of ships have complied. There were some in the previous year—half a dozen or so—that did not and appropriate measures were taken to deal with those vessels. But the reality is that ships have been compliant with the crew reporting requirements and I think that that system, whilst it naturally took a little time to be settled into place, is now working well.
The honourable member for Holt raised some questions about whether it was appropriate to give powers to maritime security guards and suggested that it would be better if there were specialised law enforcement officers at the ports. The Australian government decided to give maritime security guards the move-on powers to enable them to deal with incursions into maritime security zones promptly in facilities which are sometimes distant from the nearest police presence. The powers are balanced with safeguards to limit any capacity to abuse that power. For instance, when requesting information from a person a maritime security guard must identify himself or herself, tell the person that they are authorised to request the information and advise the person that noncompliance is an offence.
It is reasonable to give maritime security guards these new powers to prevent unlawful access to maritime security zones at Australian ports, port facilities and on board ships. Their powers are limited and where more substantial action is required clearly police or other appropriately empowered people will be required to be called upon. So there is a role for police but we think that there are some responsibilities which can be effectively done by maritime security guards, and this legislation is putting in place arrangements to ensure that that kind of service can be provided in this way.
The bill strengthens the maritime transport and offshore facilities act by empowering maritime security guards to respond to unauthorised incursions into maritime security zones by persons, vehicles or vessels; authorising maritime security guards to seek information from persons found in maritime security zones, while placing safeguards on the exercise of these information-seeking powers; providing an appropriate offence regime to encourage compliance with maritime security guards’ requests; and providing new arrangements for directing a regulated Australian ship to operate at a higher security level when it is in waters identified as high risk.
The need for the additional powers for maritime security guards to remove unauthorised persons, vehicles and vessels from maritime security zones was identified during the government’s comprehensive assessment of Australia’s maritime security policy settings in 2004, and has been agreed by key industry leaders. Further consultation undertaken by my department with the maritime industry security companies, state and territory police, maritime unions and relevant Australian government agencies helped to refine and strengthen the framework for the move-on powers.
The Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee has conducted an inquiry into the bill. In its report, tabled on 5 September 2005, it accepted the need for the bill and has recommended that it be passed. The regulations to accompany the bill are currently being developed in consultation with the industry, unions and security guard providers. The government looks forward to the passage of this bill to enable the maritime industry to draw upon these powers as soon as possible to enhance the safeguarding of Australian ports and ships. I thank those members who have made constructive contributions to the debate. I commend the bill to the Main Committee.
No comments