Michael Keenan (Stirling, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Justice, Customs and Border Protection) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The purpose of this bill is to provide a framework of standard regulatory powers exercised by Commonwealth agencies. These are the powers of agencies to enter and search premises, require the production of documents and compel attendance for examination under oath. Familiar examples include the powers in part 3 of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001 and section 155 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010, although many regulatory, security and law enforcement agencies have similar powers of entry, search and investigation.

The matters to be subject to the framework are monitoring, investigation, civil penalties, infringement notices, enforceable undertakings and injunctions. The framework has no immediate effect. Rather, it is intended that any new or amended legislation affecting the coercive powers of agencies will be expressed by reference to this bill. Should the framework be inappropriate for a particular agency—for example, security agencies—there is no requirement to adopt it.

The coalition has reservations about the extent and use of coercive powers by Commonwealth agencies and particularly about their increasingly arbitrary use and the impositions that they place on business. This bill does nothing to alleviate those concerns. Important matters such as the right to legal representation under coercive questioning have not been addressed. The framework template in relation to investigation, enforceable undertakings and injunctions appears to have been largely lifted from the Competition and Consumer Act, the relevant provisions of which have been unchanged for 15 years and are unlikely to be controversial.

Other components of the framework are also of familiar construction and relate to entry and seizure under warrant, infringement notices and concurrent liability for civil penalties and criminal prosecution. However, there is some concern that the existence of this framework legislation may facilitate the proliferation of the use of coercive powers by ever more Commonwealth agencies and that the framework does nothing to constrain the use of these powers by agencies that already have them.

The government has introduced amendments today to this bill and the coalition is supportive of them. Therefore, we do not oppose the passage of this bill through the House, although, as ever, we reserve our right to have another look at it in the Senate should the need arise. This is one of the many bills that pass through this House that is not particularly controversial. Normally, we would deal with these sorts of issues within the Federation Chamber, but the fact that the government have moved their own amendments to it means that it did need to come back before the House. It is very difficult for me to use up much more of the 30 minutes that I am allocated as the first opposition speaker and the only contributor in this debate. Clearly, it is one of the mechanical things that governments need to do. In light of that, the bill is not opposed by the coalition.

Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Stirling for his contribution to this debate. In 2012, this parliament had 188 bills, totalling 8,203 pages, introduced to this chamber. If it were not for bills such as this, a bill which cuts legal red tape, the number of pages that we would have to consider would be significantly larger. A primary function of the Regulatory Powers (Standard Provisions) Bill 2012 is to provide a statutory framework that will reduce the size of legislation by standardising common regulatory powers provisions across Commonwealth legislation.

The 2003 report of the Australian Law Reform Commission Principled regulation: federal, civil and administrative penalties in Australia, ALRC 95, recommended that a bill of general application should be enacted to govern non-criminal contraventions of federal law and led to the provisions in this bill. Over the years, regulatory powers provisions have been amended or new provisions added without particular regard to the overall clarity of this legislation. Many of the provisions also retained the old drafting style of the early to mid 1900s and are no longer appropriate to the work of the regulatory agency.

This bill addresses these issues by providing a consistent and central framework of regulatory powers so that regulatory laws affecting agency performance are both consistent and flexible. This will mean that the law is sufficiently certain and predictable but still flexible enough to take into account differences in the functions of regulatory agencies. This bill represents an important step for the government in improving Australia's law and justice system. It is a key achievement of the Attorney-General's Department clearer laws project. By improving the accessibility and consistency of the Commonwealth statute book, the law can be better understood, complied with and administered.

The standardisation of Commonwealth regulatory powers will help to reduce the complexity and inconsistency of legislation that has developed since Federation. Complex and inconsistent legislation makes it difficult, expensive and time-consuming for people to understand their legal rights and obligations. This creates burdens for business and restricts access to justice. Lack of knowledge about the law often means that individuals and families do not get a fair go under the law. This bill is therefore an indication of the government's ongoing commitment to take measures to improve the clarity and accessibility of laws. I thank the Office of Parliamentary Counsel for the significant time and effort that went into preparing this bill. I commend that office for the quality of the bill and its commitment to maintaining the accuracy and clarity of the Commonwealth statute book. I also thank the members of Parliamentary committees: the Senate Scrutiny of Bills Committee, the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights, the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Law Enforcement and the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee for their consideration of the bill. I commend this bill to the House.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.