Julian Leeser (Berowra, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

It is such a privilege to follow my friend the member for Fisher, who is a veritable Demosthenes in this House. Demosthenes, of course, was a famous Greek statesman who was known for his eloquence and his ability to go and proclaim by the sea with his mouth filled with marbles. His eloquence went right through the ages, such that the only person in the ancient world that rivalled him in relation to his eloquence was Cicero himself. So it is always a humbling privilege to follow my friend the member for Fisher.

Let me say, though, on the member for Fisher's comments on the Regulatory Powers (Standardisation Reform) Bill 2020, that I wanted to address a couple of things. He has demonstrated that he is at times the wowser-in-chief in this place. He demonstrated he is against tobacco and gambling. I'm pleased he was for Anzac Day—he underscored this fact—because I may well have referred to him as un-Australian had he not been for Anzac Day in his comments.

But, like the member for Fisher, I am delighted to speak on this bill. We do pass lots of bills like this in this place that are effectively machinery bills that are engaged in the tightening up of statutes that deal with regulatory reform and that to many people seem quite technical and not a subject that would excite members to get up and volunteer to speak. But I was excited when I saw this bill because I believe in red tape reduction. I believe in regulatory reform. I'm proud that I'm part of a government that is pursuing such reforms and has done so since it was elected in 2013.

This is an important piece of legislation because, if you've ever engaged in a regulated industry or an industry that's heavily regulated, whether it's the university sector, fisheries, products like tobacco or the telecommunications sector, you will know that the level of regulatory compliance that you need to deal with is a real issue. And so it is good to have a regime where those regulations are standardised and where the powers of the regulator are clear. Where that standardisation across a range of different fields means acts sometimes intersect with other—like, in the case of this bill, the Education Services for Overseas Students Act and the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act—it is good to have legislation that is similar and that is complementary. So if you as a university administrator—and I was, before I became a member in this House, a senior executive at Australian Catholic university and somebody who did have to deal particularly which the TEQSA Act—have a situation where you are able to comply with two different pieces of legislation in a similar manner that can really be of great benefit.

I heard the member for Isaacs in his contribution say that this was originally a Labor project and that he was very pleased that we had carried on this particular project. I would say to the member for Isaacs that my experience with TEQSA during the Labor years was that they needed a piece of legislation like this because, frankly, the regulation of TEQSA had got out of control. I think it's important to provide context there. TEQSA was established during the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd years in response to the establishment of a demand driven university system to be a national regulator. It was exercising its powers in relation to the oversight of universities using third parties. TEQSA realised there was an issue. But rather than, as a modern and sophisticated regulator might do, going and talking to those who were affected by the regulation to get a real sense of what the issue was—and in this case the issue they were looking at was where effectively TAFEs and non-university higher education providers were being contracted by universities to teach students and this was something that they thought should come to an end—and seeing how they might address it, they sent out this blanket regulatory request of universities to basically list every single contract that they had with a third-party provider.

So you had everyone from security guards to the people who were supplying the catering to the people who were engaged in doing research work or teaching work. It was a ridiculous regulatory overreach. I think that during the time that TEQSA was doing this there came from the sector a very strong view that TEQSA had overreached and perhaps should no longer exist as a regulator. There was bit of a campaign run by Universities Australia—quite a successful campaign—to bring TEQSA to heel and clip its wings. So the fact that this piece of legislation, this project, was started under the Labor years really is in response to the regulatory overreach that has run amok in so many areas. I speak with some knowledge of the education sector. This is why a project like this needed to commence.

The importance of standardising regulations shouldn't be underestimated. Standardising procedures makes the job of administrators easier, it provides regulatory certainty and it means that the regulated have a much easier time with compliance. There are a range of different pieces of legislation that these amendments to the Regulatory Powers (Standard Provisions) Act 2014 are particularly engaging with. I think it's worthwhile talking a little bit about some of those acts. There's the Defence Force Discipline Act 1982, the Education Services for Overseas Students Act 2000, the Fisheries Management Act 1991, the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011, the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Act 1992 and the Tobacco Plain Packaging Act 2011.

I'd particularly like to look at the Fisheries Management Act for a moment. Like the member for Fisher, I have commercial fishing in the electorate of Berowra, on the Hawkesbury River. Deputy Speaker Wicks, you and I share a boundary on the Hawkesbury River, and I know that you too are a supporter of the commercial fishing industry on our river. I think it is a mark of the health of the Hawkesbury that commercial fishing—the farming of oysters, prawns, squid, crayfish and crabs—can occur in the broader Hawkesbury basin. I think particularly of Gary Howard, one of the great prawn fishermen of my community, who took me out on a prawn trawler early one morning. We set off from Lower Portland at about 3.45 and came back at about 1.00, and I don't think Gary drew the breath the entire time. He is so passionate about his industry, both the regulation of his industry and the need to ensure that in an urban river like the Hawkesbury people can continue to make a living from the river, as they have done, if you take into account our Indigenous past, since time immemorial. I think it is a mark of the health of the river that people can do that. If the health of a river like the Hawkesbury is threatened because of developments that are occurring in the Hawkesbury basin more generally and you can no longer engage in fishing activities, that is a very bad thing.

This particular piece of legislation looks to standardise some of the regulations engaged by the Fisheries Management Act. The Fisheries Management Act provides the statutory framework for the regulation and management of Commonwealth fisheries. The act establishes management plans for fisheries and sets out the legislative basis for statutory fishing rights, licences and permits. The Fisheries Management Act defines the Australian fishing zone and provides for the majority of Commonwealth fisheries offences. It underpins Australia's domestic and foreign compliance work and provides enforcement powers to protect Australia's fishery resources. Currently the Fisheries Management Act provides for an infringement notice scheme of alleged contraventions of a range of sections—sections 93, 95 and 100—or a determination made under section 42 through the Fisheries Management Regulations 2019. While the Fisheries Management Regulations 2019 does not trigger the Regulatory Powers (Standard Provisions) Act, the infringement notices provisions are identical to the standard provisions contained in part 5 of the regulatory powers act.

Schedule 4 of the bill that we are now discussing amends that Fisheries Management Act to trigger the infringement notice provisions contained in part 5 of the regulatory powers act. The amendments contained in schedule 4 restrict the application of the infringement notices scheme to two offences in the Fisheries Management Act and place the infringement notices scheme within the principal legislation. This will enable an AFMA—Australian Fisheries Management Authority—staff member appointed under section 83 of the Fisheries Management Act to issue an infringement notice under part 5, where they believe on reasonable grounds that an offence under subsection 93(1), which is a failure to give a return or information in relation to fish received, or subsection 95(5), which is being engaged in certain fishing without a licence or permit, has been committed. It's important for the health and ongoing survival of commercial fishing in our country that the people engaged in the industry have clarity and that the regulators in the sector have clarity. Commercial fishing, like other agriculture and aquaculture pursuits, is a particularly important industry in Australia. Australian seafood produce is known as among the cleanest in the world.

This is a consolidating piece of legislation that touches on a range of different aspects of Commonwealth regulatory activity. It's important that from time to time we pass pieces of legislation like this in order to simplify and streamline the Commonwealth's regulatory powers across the statute book, because some of those powers vary in breadth and in detail. There are inconsistencies and unnecessary duplication. I think duplication across a whole range of regimes produces results that are really unsatisfactory, and it ends up with people who are trying to run a business that is being regulated having to comply with additional forms and additional paperwork and fill out additional boxes that don't actually the provide the Commonwealth with any more important information. Indeed, if agencies worked together more, if they were able to share information more, the businesses that are trying to get on with doing their business would be able to get on with their business without the burden of red tape which is imposed by unnecessary regulation or regulations that are incongruent with each other.

This is the second time that we have put forward amendments to Commonwealth acts to trigger the operation of the regulatory powers act. This act provides for a standard suite of provisions in relation to monitoring and investigation powers as well as provisions relating to the use of civil penalties, to the use of infringement notices, to the use of enforceable undertakings and to injunctions. These are all powers the different regulators use from time to time, and the way in which those regulators use them will be different. They will be differently exercised depending on the particular philosophy of the regulator. To have a standardised set of provisions means people who are operating across a different range of industries or are in an industry that has multiple regulators will be better able to comply with that regulation.

By standardising regulatory powers across the Commonwealth, this act is intended to significantly reduce the length of legislation governing each regulatory regime. This is something that we said we would do when we came to government in 2013; we were looking at a whole range of unnecessary acts and a whole range of regulation that we were going to get rid of. I remember the now Treasurer—I think he was then what was called the Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister—being responsible for 'regulation reduction day', where he brought in hundreds and hundreds of pages of regulation that we were able to remove. This bill carries on that tradition. This bill is a red tape reform bill.

By standardising regulatory powers across the Commonwealth, the act is intended to significantly reduce the length of legislation governing each regime. It's also there to provide greater clarity and consistency for those agencies that need to exercise powers with respect to multiple regulatory regimes. It's there to make it easier for businesses—and that includes businesses in my electorate and businesses right across the country—that are subject to multiple regimes to understand and comply with the law. I think, as the growth of the regulatory state continues almost unabated, it is so important that people know the law and comply with the law with relative ease. Legislation like this, which is designed and directed specifically to making compliance easier, is so vital in our modern world, so vital when the regulatory regimes that people are forced to comply with are becoming more and more complex. We as a government say, 'No, we want to make it easier; we want to standardise things.'

We want to encourage people to get on with their business, and that's what the regulatory powers act is designed to deal with. The standard provisions in the act represent best practice in regulation in relation to regulatory powers of general application. Implementing the regulatory powers act supports the government's regulatory reform agenda, as this act will streamline so much of the Commonwealth's regulation. I want to congratulate the Attorney on bringing forward this landmark piece of legislation which will make all Australians' lives easier.

See this speech in context