Allegra Spender (Wentworth, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I have three key questions for the Attorney-General. The first is in regard to the Safer Communities Fund, which I note from the budget was defunded in the current budget. I note that the Executive Council of Australian Jewry's Report on Antisemitism in Australia 2021 estimated that antisemitic incidents, including assaults, verbal abuse and vandalism, increased by 35 per cent over the previous year, a worrying trend that is mirrored around the world. One particularly disturbing example from my area was the story of a young Jewish student being pushed into a school locker and sprayed with aerosol to simulate gas chambers. The Safer Communities Fund has played a critical role in giving the local Jewish community across Wentworth and across the country vital infrastructure to protect residents. This includes protection for synagogues, schools and other community centres as well as monitoring of digital threats. These grants have only partly covered physical infrastructure and the community themselves have invested millions to supplement this with their own funds. I would also like to note that the work of the Community Security Group, which has been partly funded by the Safer Communities Fund as well as by the Jewish community, also provides vital information to the New South Wales police and others by working together and sharing intelligence. I would like to understand from the Attorney-General what the government is going to do in terms of ensuring the safety of communities that have been supported by the Safer Communities Fund.

The second question I have for the Attorney-General relates to respect at work support. I acknowledge the good work that the government has done in implementing the respect at work bill in full, and I support that. However, I have real concerns from the LGBTQ community that they are not covered by the respect at work legislation. The respect at work legislation has a very narrow definition in terms of sex and doesn't even reflect the full range of characteristics protected under the Sex Discrimination Act, including sexual orientation, gender identity, intersex status, pregnancy or relationship status. This means that the bill does not provide appropriate protection for the LGBTQ community. It also creates inconsistency in terms of what we are asking from businesses, who must already comply with antidiscrimination law which relates to all the protected characteristics under the Sex Discrimination Act. I know the Attorney-General is committed to supporting the LGBTQ community and I appreciate his words to that effect. I would like to understand how he is going to ensure that the LGBTQ community can get the benefit of the protection that has been allowed under the respect at work legislation.

My final question relates to the National Anti-Corruption Commission, the proposed legislation for which is before parliament as we speak. Again I would like to acknowledge the government's good work in bringing a strong and robust NACC to the parliament; it is something that my community in Wentworth wholeheartedly supports. However, I am concerned with the oversight of this NACC and particularly the fact that the government of the day is able to appoint a commissioner, deputy commissioner and inspector on political or party lines if it wishes to, without any need to get support from across the parliament. I understand the government's desire to retain control of parliamentary committees. It's the way that things have always been done in this place. But, if May's election has told us anything, it's that things need to change. For the NACC bills, and the commission itself, to succeed, the parliamentary committee that oversees it must act and be perceived to act without partisan motive. This is particularly important when it comes to the committee's role in confirming the appointments of these people. I've heard the Attorney-General acknowledge that the commissioner's appointment is absolutely critical in terms of how the NACC will be perceived and how effective the NACC will be. And I believe that that appointment is so absolutely critical that it must not be seen to be politicised—even if that is only a perception. There must be a mechanism to get broader support across the parliament and to ensure that it is not seen as a political piece. The perception that this could be a political appointment could undermine the NACC from the start, and that would be a great travesty for the people who invested, and who are saying that we need to invest, in the quality of our democracy and in the institutions of our democracy to protect against bad actors. I will be moving an amendment in this space. I seek to understand, from the government's point of view, how the Attorney-General is going to ensure that the appointment of the commissioner cannot be partisan and bring the NACC into disrepute.

See this speech in context