Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and you are right—it is good to hear that spirit of bipartisanship. The purpose of the Crime Legislation Amendment (Unexplained Wealth and Other Measures) Bill 2014 is to amend the act to revise the procedures and requirements relating to unexplained wealth, and to allow information obtained using coercive powers under the act to be shared with state and foreign authorities for the purposes of proceeds of crime investigation and litigation.

By way of background, a definition of unexplained wealth by the former Attorney-General is as follows:

'Unexplained wealth' laws enable a court to issue an order unless the subject of proceedings can establish, on the balance of probabilities, that his or her wealth was lawfully acquired. An assessment is made of the quantum of unexplained wealth (the difference between the person's total wealth and that shown to be derived lawfully), and the subject of the order must pay the amount to the relevant jurisdiction.

Unexplained wealth laws are designed to target the wealth of senior organised crime figures, …

The libertarian streak in me, at first blush, gives me some concern that private citizens might have to explain to a government bureaucrat how they obtained their assets. However, the first order of any government is to preserve the public order, and in this environment such laws are not only necessary; they are essential. For there is a clear link between terrorism and terrorist activities and their funding through illegal and illicit activities. That is why, if we are able to disrupt that business model—if we are able to use these laws such that people know that if they attempt to engage in an illegal activity they will have no financial benefit—then that will also help us defeat terrorism. These laws turn the tables on those who seek to live off the benefits of their illegal activities. In doing so, they are living off the benefits of other, hardworking Australians.

The connection, as I said, between terrorist activities and their funding through illicit activities has been well documented and well detailed. First, we have seen that many of the people who have been recruited to fight in Syria and in northern Iraq and recruited for ISIS are actually former criminals themselves. Many of them have been involved in drug trade and drug trafficking and have been taking drugs themselves—and that perhaps explains the damage to their brains. We have also seen a recent case of a business in Lakemba—an old stomping ground of mine—which this year has transferred $21.3 million to the Middle East but is able to account for only $12.3 million. So, there is a $9 million discrepancy—$9 million has come out of the Australian community, from hardworking Australians, and has been inexplicably transferred across to the Middle East, from a firm with links through their relatives to known terrorists. That is why this bill has bipartisan support, and I am glad to hear that from both sides and the many speakers who have spoken on this bill.

I will not take too much of the House's time, but I would like to quickly go through the three specific measures of the bill, which are to ensure the most effective framework for law enforcement to investigate and take action to target unexplained wealth; to streamline the processes for obtaining unexplained wealth orders while ensuring appropriate safeguards—and those safeguards are important; and, finally, to close loopholes in the Proceeds of Crime Act that potentially make it easier to escape unexplained-wealth actions and frustrate court processes. I am glad this bill has bipartisan support, and I commend it to the House.

See this speech in context