Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs, I present the committee's advisory report on the Do Not Knock Register Bill 2012, together with the minutes of proceedings and evidence received by the committee. The Do Not Knock Register Bill 2012 is a private member's bill introduced into the House of Representatives on 21 May 2012 by the member for Hindmarsh, the ever hardworking Mr Steve Georganas.

The bill would set up a scheme enabling individuals to opt out of receiving unsolicited marketing calls to residential and government addresses. Unsolicited marketing calls would be prohibited to addresses registered on the Do Not Knock Register. The bill would permit 'designated marketing calls' from certain organisations and individuals including government bodies, charities, religious organisations, politicians—and I am sure from the hard work you did on the Do Not Call Register, Madam Deputy Speaker Burke, you would be familiar with this—and also political candidates.

The Selection Committee referred the bill to the Social Policy and Legal Affairs Committee for reasons of constitutionality. The committee considers it would be inappropriate for this committee to attempt to advise the parliament on the constitutionality of a bill.

Should a member of the House question the constitutionality of a bill, then that question should be put to the Attorney-General and it is for the House to determine if it will consider the bill, and ultimately for the High Court to determine the validity of a bill if passed—a river currently higher than its source, I think is the legal concept at play here. In its report, the committee presents evidence received regarding the constitutionality of the bill, but the committee draws no conclusions and makes no comment on that evidence.

The committee thought that consideration was required regarding the proposed operation of the bill and its capacity to address its policy intent. As such, the committee took evidence from consumer advocacy groups and affected industry groups.

The driving force behind the bill is the protection of vulnerable consumers, such as the elderly, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, migrants and the disabled. We heard evidence about them suffering through people calling on them at home unannounced throughout.

There are existing protections put in place by the Australian consumer law, which is a single, national law concerning consumer protection and fair trading which only came into effect in January last year. The Australian Consumer and Competition Commission recently launched a campaign to improve consumer awareness of rights relating to door-to-door sales. Consumer advocacy groups launched a 'Do not knock' sticker campaign earlier this year. The legal protection provided to consumers by this sticker is currently being tested in the courts by the ACCC.

Affected industry groups objected to the bill, pointing to the adequacy of the existing protections and protesting the lack of consultation. They also claimed that the bill would create excessive implementation and compliance costs and would also be difficult to administer. The Australian Treasury advised against the bill, describing it as a disproportionate response which might attract significant costs.

The committee deeply sympathises with vulnerable consumers who are confronted by unscrupulous door-to-door sales practices but views educating consumers about their ACL rights and continued promotion of the do not knock sticker as the best option to address this problem. I know this myself, having come home one day to find my wife talking to a salesman despite a do not knock sticker on our mailbox, the salesman then proceeded to explain that he had a right to be there, and I proceeded to explain to him that actually he did not. My wife is a lawyer and I am a lawyer so we understand the law a bit, but more vulnerable people can be taken advantage of.

Noting the recent implementation of the ACL, the committee considers that any further regulation at this stage is premature. Further regulation would only be merited if efforts to educate consumers about the ACL prove ineffective and if courts do not uphold the legal protections provided by the do not knock sticker—the law of trespass, et cetera. If these two outcomes were to pass, the committee considers that the scheduled review of the ACL in 2015 would be an appropriate forum to consider further regulation. Therefore the committee recommends that the House of Representatives not pass the Do Not Knock Register Bill 2012 at this time.

I thank the committee for their work and particularly thank the secretariat for their energetic assistance and frank and fearless advice—sometimes a little too frank, but never too fearless. I commend the report to the House.

See this speech in context