Jason Wood (La Trobe, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Community Safety, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

When it comes to having an understanding of counterterrorism, we on this side of the House we have a very good understanding. My background was with the Victoria Police counterterrorism coordination unit; I got to see and hear firsthand from other agencies what was happening in this space when it comes to money laundering, especially when it comes to counterterrorism. I acknowledge the member for Herbert, who went over to Afghanistan and served Australia in taking on the Taliban, the terrorist organisation group. On this side we very much understand the importance of doing everything we possibly can to counter terrorism and make sure we don't have terrorist attacks committed in Australia.

I congratulate all our law enforcement agencies, who, over the years, have done such an incredible job in having such an amazing success rate when it comes to stopping and preventing terrorist attacks in Australia. Also, our Australian agencies have played a role overseas in taking on terrorists—as I said before, when it comes to Afghanistan. One very important factor—this is something I learned in the Victorian police force—is that you always have to follow the money. That's what this bill, the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Amendment Bill 2024, is all about. The bill expands the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act, the AML/CTF Act, which AUSTRAC looks after.

Money laundering undermines Australia's national security, economy and social security system. Billions of dollars in illicit funds are transferred annually, causing substantial economic harm to Australia. Money laundering is prohibited under part 10.2 of the Criminal Code Act 1995, with penalties ranging from life imprisonment to six months depending on the offence. Money laundering syndicates create a shadow economy, enabling further criminal activities. While law-abiding Australians pay taxes, organised crime gangs use illicit funds to grow their wealth and fund crimes like drug trafficking et cetera.

When it comes to money laundering and what the criminal networks do—in this case, it can be terrorists or those supporting terrorists—to commit a terrorist act, you need money. Money can be transferred to Australia overseas. This is where the anti-money-laundering and counterterrorism legislation comes into effect, with transactions over $10,000 being tracked by AUSTRAC. The first tranche of the anti-money-laundering legislation under the Howard government was very much focused on making sure that banks and financial institutions report those transactions. When it comes to fines being issued, for example, a massive fine of $1.3 billion was imposed on Westpac when they were not complying with what was required. Crown Melbourne and Crown Perth received penalties of $450 million, and the Commonwealth Bank was fined $700 million. It's very important that, if institutions don't do the right thing, they are penalised and punished.

This bill aims to create a regulatory environment for money-laundering and terrorism finance. The act currently applies to entities providing a range of designated services, including banks, credit unions, casinos and other high-risk sectors. This bill seeks to extend the regime further. When it comes to lawyers, real estate agents, accountants and gemstone dealers and other designated non-financial businesses and professions, we on this side of the House are not opposed to the bill at this stage.

What we want to do is make sure that we understand what measures real estate agents and other small businesses need to have in place, because there will be a big financial burden—$13.9 billion over the next 10 years, based on the government's own information. The Attorney-General was asked by the shadow attorney-general to release an exposure draft so that everyone could have a look at it beforehand. Instead, the bill was put before the parliament, and now we're speaking about it today. It must go off to a Senate inquiry so that we can find out how this is actually going to work and what measures will be put in place for small businesses to ensure that they can actually meet all the requirements of this bill.

In terms of the coalition's history on this, the Howard government's initiative had its roots in international cooperative efforts to combat terrorism after September 11. In 2002 the coalition criminalised terrorism financing as part of the Criminal Code, and then moved money-laundering into the Criminal Code. In 2006, the coalition introduced and passed the AML/CTF Act, conferring AUSTRAC with the significant powers that it has today, and I mentioned before the massive penalties that have been given out.

The concern for those on this side of the House is that we need to understand the effect of the $13.9 billion impost on businesses. The real estate sector will face extra costs of $5.9 billion; accountants, $3.6 billion; legal services, $2.8 billion; bullion traders, $136 million; and gambling services, $99 million—not that that bothers me at all. That amounts to $13 billion over the next 10 years. We really want to get to the bottom of this. We know the Real Estate Institute of Australia is concerned that the effect of the bill will be to slug a business between $30,000 and $60,000. The Law Council of Australia is concerned about the impact of increased regulatory costs.

When it comes to counterterrorism, I would say that all members of parliament would be very supportive of doing everything we can to prevent terrorist attacks here in Australia. AUSTRAC has done an amazing job over the years of notifying law enforcement in relation to those who use international trading firms to transfer money. When AUSTRAC are concerned about the number of transactions to individuals or to a company overseas, they step in and provide the intelligence to law enforcement, who then take action. As I said, on this side, we want to know where that $13 billion impost on small business is going to be spent. We also want to know, precisely, what information a small business needs to provide. Obviously, the best way to get to the bottom of this is to go to a Senate inquiry.

See this speech in context