James Stevens (Sturt, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to support the second reading of the Australian Crime Commission Amendment (Special Operations and Special Investigations) Bill 2022. As the shadow minister for home affairs indicated in the House earlier today, the coalition indeed supports the passage of this bill. I commend the comments that she made on behalf of the coalition, and I will just add some of my own to finalise the debate.

The Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission—formerly known as the Australian Crime Commission—performs a really vital function for our law enforcement agencies. State and Commonwealth agency heads come together to form the board that provides input and directions around special operations and special investigations. The Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission does excellent work in looking at some of the really serious systemic criminal issues. They are given extraordinary powers, and we should always be apprehensive and cautious that, when we give agencies particularly coercive powers, we're doing so for good reason. I certainly think it has been evidenced by the performance of the commission over a number of years now that these powers that they have are very important and do assist the commission in undertaking some of their special operations and investigations. These investigations have been into some very significant areas around issues with drug trafficking, issues with the migration system and issues with organised crime, to name but a few. We want to support the ACIC, which this amendment does, by making sure that the proper legislative framework is in place for them to continue to do the important work that they do, with important oversight and restraint of power.

Coercive powers are obviously very significant because, in some cases, they provide evidentiary discovery capacity well beyond what could ever be admissible in a trial—things like compelling the giving of evidence and not allowing for the right to silence et cetera. Some of those issues may or may not come up at another time in a debate on another bill regarding corruption. These powers that are given to the ACIC inform the work that they do and allow them to stop bad criminal activity in our nation. So, where it is justified and appropriate and we have the proper protections and safeguards in place, we accept the need for that, and we are happy to support improving the framework.

Without being a lawyer—and without having any experience in the criminal justice system, thankfully—my understanding is that this is just about making sure that there is a lot more consistency between various acts that operate and inform the powers that the ACIC use for their special operations and special investigations. I do accept that, if there is inconsistency between different acts and different terminology used around the powers that the ACIC call upon to undertake their operations and investigations, we run the risk of lawyers being able to potentially call into question the important work that the ACIC is doing. By cleaning up the interpretation between the different acts and the terminology used, we make sure that there is a lower risk of that occurring, when the principle of the legislative framework that we have is being honoured by the ACIC. It seems quite clear that what is being proposed in this bill is merely seeking to do that. We certainly support those elements of the bill, and we support the work of the ACIC.

We also understand that this type of legislative change is necessary on a fairly regular basis, or other changes to the framework, because criminal activity is developing, changing, particularly with technology and, regrettably, criminals will always look for opportunity and new avenues to exploit people and break the law. That is a simple unfortunate reality of human nature for a small percentage of people in our population. So it is going to be necessary to make sure we are equipping our agencies not only with the resources that they need but also the legislative framework they need to discharge the purpose of their role.

Where new forms of criminal enterprise and activity may be identified, new technology provides an opportunity for criminal activity that was not envisaged within legislation. Due to that, we find ourselves in a situation where the proper powers are not in place for entities like the ACIC to do the job we need them to do. We as a parliament should always be responding to that and making those changes where we are comfortable that they are quite reasonable and legitimate. Indeed, in the case of this bill, it is the position of the opposition very much so that these are appropriate changes that do support the ACIC to do the work that they need to do in the modern world that we live in. We commend the work they do, we wish them well and we very happily support the second reading of this bill. I commend the bill to the chamber.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

Ordered that this bill be reported to the House without amendment.

See this speech in context