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

The Regulatory Powers (Standardisation Reform) Bill 2020 is based on an initiative of the former Labor government called the Clearer Laws Project. The purpose of that project was to simplify and streamline the Commonwealth's statute books to make it easier for individuals and businesses to access and understand the law. Another key objective of the standardisation project that we commenced when last in government was to reduce the compliance burden for individuals and businesses subject to multiple regulatory regimes by reducing unnecessary differences in equivalent provisions of multiple Commonwealth acts.

The Clearer Laws Project was given effect in legislation prepared and introduced by Labor in 2012 and was finally passed in 2014 in legislation called the Regulatory Powers (Standard Provisions) Act. The fact that this Labor project was passed by a government that was notoriously hostile to just about everything Labor sought to achieve, even if they now claim it as their own, says a lot about just how worthy and beneficial this project has been.

Under this regime, the standardised powers set out in the 2014 act are only available to a regulatory agency if their governing legislation expressly engages those powers in whole or in part. That's what this bill achieves, by amending the following six Commonwealth acts to apply the standardised regulatory provisions: 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.

When the 2014 act was introduced, Labor noted that, while there are clear benefits in standardising regulatory regimes across the Commonwealth statute book, not all of the standardised regulatory powers set out in the bill are required for all regimes. And there are other Commonwealth agencies with specialised roles, such as ASIO, which will not use the standardised regime, because of their need for specialised powers unique to their particular roles.

Given the importance of ensuring that regulatory regimes under any given act are fit for purpose and that no unintended adverse consequences arise from the replacement of the specific regime in the relevant act with the standardised regime, this bill was rightly the subject of an inquiry by the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee. It was through that inquiry that some problems with this bill came to light. The Law Council raised a particular concern about the manner in which schedule 1 of the present bill extends the circumstances for which the monitoring provisions of the standardised regime may be exercised in relation to 'other matters to which an act or legislative instrument relates'. The Law Council suggested that the term 'other matters' is too broadly worded and that this could lead to significantly broadening the scope of standardised regulatory monitoring powers. We endorse these suggestions of the Law Council in this regard and restate the view of the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee that the government should clearly define which 'matters' are subject to the powers in triggering acts so as to ensure that there is certainty regarding their scope and application. These concerns were acknowledged by the committee, which, while declining to make a specific recommendation, said that it 'encourages the government to clearly define … matters … the subject of these powers in triggering acts to ensure that there is certainty in their scope and application'.

Labor endorses that statement and the Law Council's recommendations that the government provide a greater degree of transparency and clarity around any amendments to the standard provisions of the Regulatory Powers (Standard Provisions) Act 2014. This is particularly important because any change to the 2014 act impacts all the subordinate regimes that engage that standardised regime.

I also note that the Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills sought further information from the Attorney-General in relation to a number of aspects of this bill, including the issue I have just discussed. These questions included, firstly, the justification for expanding the application of the monitoring powers in the Regulatory Powers (Standing Provisions) Act 2014 to allow them to be exercised in relation to 'a matter'; secondly, the justification for the proposed amendment to section 93 of the Fisheries Management Act 1991 to provide that the offence will be a strict liability offence with reference to the principles set out in the Guide to framing Commonwealth offences; thirdly, the training, qualifications or experience of the various authorised officers who are authorised to use force against things under the bill; fourthly, why it is necessary to confer powers to use force against things on any other person to assist an authorised person; fifthly, whether the bill can be amended to require that all persons authorised to use force must have appropriate expertise and training; sixthly, why it is considered necessary and appropriate to allow any other person to assist an authorised person in exercising monitoring and investigatory powers; and, seventhly, whether the bill can be amended to require that any person assisting an authorised person have the expertise appropriate to the function or power being carried out.

Despite this bill being scheduled for debate last week, I note that at the time the committee finalised its report last week the Attorney-General had not provided a response to these questions. For the reasons I have discussed, Labor is concerned at the potential for the changes to the Regulatory Powers (Standard Provisions) Act 2014 made by schedule 1 of this bill to extend the scope of regulatory powers under Commonwealth legislation in a manner that appears to be unnecessary in scope and uncertain in effect. In doing so, this bill has the potential to work against a key purpose of the standardisation regime, which is to harmonise and simplify Commonwealth laws and thereby reduce the regulatory burden imposed by those laws. As I have said, the aim of the Regulatory Powers (Standard Provisions) Act 2014 is to harmonise Commonwealth regulatory regimes and, in so doing, to provide greater clarity for agencies that utilise regulatory powers and greater clarity to Australians and Australian businesses that are the subject of those regimes.

Other than the concerns I have expressed today regarding the need for better justification and clarity regarding some of the changes to the standardised regime made by schedule 1 of the current bill and the need for the government to respond to these concerns, Labor supports the process of regulatory standardisation under the 2014 act and we support the changes to the six acts made by this bill as appropriate to that purpose.

I commend this bill to the House and I move the second reading amendment circulated in my name:

That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:

"while not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House calls on the Government to:

(1) ensure that:

(a) there is certainty around the scope and application of the standardised regime set out in the Regulatory Powers (Standard Provisions) Act 2014, particularly with respect to the changes that Schedule 1 of this bill makes to that Act;

(b) any future changes to the Regulatory Powers (Standard Provisions) Act 2014 are carried out following appropriate consultation with relevant stakeholders, are drafted so as to ensure certainty regarding their scope and application, and are properly justified by the Government in the explanatory memorandum to any future bill; and

(c) all Commonwealth regulations are fit for purpose and that all Commonwealth regulators are properly resourced; and

(2) monitor the impact of the changes to the regulatory regimes affected by this bill to ensure there are no adverse unintended consequences".

David Gillespie (Lyne, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the amendment seconded?

Julie Collins (Franklin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is seconded, and I reserve my right to speak, Speaker.

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak in support of this bill, the Regulatory Powers (Standardisation Reform) Bill 2020. When it comes to legislation, it doesn't get much better than this. I'll give a general warning to anybody who may be watching or listening to this: you should probably pull over to the side of the road, lest you fall asleep. There's the general warning!

This is not what you would call the most exciting piece of legislation, but it's an important piece of legislation nonetheless, and I don't want to diminish it. There are some very important aspects of this. The Regulatory Powers (Standard Provisions) Act provides for a standard suite of provisions in relation to monitoring and investigation powers as well as enforcement provisions through the use of civil penalties, infringement notices, enforceable undertakings and injunctions. These provisions are designed to simplify and streamline regulatory powers across the Commonwealth statute book, and they represent best-practice legislation. The Regulatory Powers (Standard Provisions) Act commenced on 1 October 2014. It only has effect where Commonwealth acts are drafted or amended to trigger its provisions. This standardisation project is the second of its kind. It follows the Regulatory Powers (Standardisation Reform) Act 2017, which amended 15 Commonwealth acts to repeal existing provisions providing for regulatory regimes in those acts and instead trigger the standard provisions of the regulatory powers act. It's all very fascinating.

The bill amends the following Commonwealth acts to trigger the standard provisions: the Defence Force Discipline Act, the Education Services for Overseas Students Act, the Fisheries Management Act, the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act, the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Act and the Tobacco Plain Packaging Act. Some of these acts contain existing regulatory regimes. This bill replaces these with the standard provisions to align the acts' regulatory regimes with the standard provisions. I note that the member for Berowra has come into the chamber. He also wants a piece of the action, to talk about this extremely important piece of legislation. The bill provides additional powers for current regulatory regimes in some acts to ensure that they are robust and align with best practice. The bill also provides some regulatory powers to acts which do not currently contain regulatory regimes but require regulatory powers to ensure a robust compliance and enforcement scheme. Modifications to the standard powers are included where necessary for effective regulation in the context of each act. The bill also makes minor amendments to the regulatory powers act to ensure that the regulatory requirements and underlying penalty and offence provisions of acts that trigger the regulatory powers act can be effectively enforced.

I want to talk a little bit about the specific acts that this bill impacts upon. The Fisheries Management Act is a very, very important piece of legislation. It's very important for my constituents and for the commercial fishers in Fisher. It's not a particularly well-known fact that the good seat of Fisher, on the glorious Sunshine Coast, is home to the largest commercial fishing fleet on the eastern seaboard of Australia for tuna and prawns. We have some absolutely fantastic local businesses in Fisher, like Walker Seafoods, which operates out of Mooloolaba. At the end of the day, what this government is all about is deregulation and making life simpler for small businesses. I get very excited when I can point to legislation—the member for Berowra is going to throw me off track here—which makes life easier for the businesses in my electorate and reduces the legislative burden upon them. This bill will do just that. The commercial fishers in the seat of Fisher, operating out of the Mooloolaba harbour, are all extremely hardworking men and women. They employ hundreds of locals. It's a tough gig to be a commercial fisherperson. I've spent a lot of time working with people at the wharf. The good people of Fisher working as fishers out of Mooloolaba will directly benefit from this revolutionary piece of legislation.

We often talk about how this place can be very hostile and about the politics of the day. I want to do a bit of a shout-out to those opposite. I'm hoping that the shadow minister at the table will look at me because I'm going to say something nice. The Tobacco Plain Packaging Act—introduced when Nicola Roxon, I think, was Attorney-General at the time—was a world-leading piece of legislation, which, as we all know, removed the branding from cigarette packets. I think that was a world first and it has made a fairly significant impact, particularly on young people's smoking rates. We all know that for many years, on both sides of politics, we have not allowed cigarette advertising on television and in newspapers. To go off on a tangent for one moment, it's my fervent hope, desire and wish that we follow the same approach to gambling as we have with cigarettes. But that's for another day.

The other act that I want to go to in relation to this bill is the Defence Force Discipline Act. The good seat of Fisher, and probably the Sunshine Coast more particularly, is home to around about 15,000 veterans. If you are going to discharge from the ADF, there's no better place to discharge to than the glorious Sunshine Coast. We have one of the largest veteran populations on the Sunshine Coast. The Defence Force Discipline Act is a very, very important piece of legislation which administers discipline to members of the ADF. Speaking of the ADF, I was very saddened to see today that the Victorian state government has cancelled Anzac Day marches. It's okay for the Victorian state government to have the Australian Open and for them to allow all sorts of demonstrations on the streets of Melbourne, but, for some absolutely bizarre reason, the Victorian state government have come out today and said that they will not allow marches on Anzac Day. Member for Berowra, you're perhaps a lot smarter than me. When you come up to the microphone, you might be able to tell us why you think that might be. I don't understand why it would be.

Lucy Wicks (Robertson, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Fisher is reminded to return to the substance of the bill.

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am speaking on one of the acts that the bill is going to trigger, in terms of the standard provisions of the regulatory powers act—the Defence Force Discipline Act. I accept that I may be straying just a little. The measures represent the second coordinated tranche, as I've said, of amendments to Commonwealth acts to trigger the operation of the regulatory powers act. Schedule 2 will make minor amendments to the regulatory powers act to ensure that the regulatory requirements and underlying penalty and offence provisions of acts that trigger the regulatory powers act can be effectively enforced. Those amendments would enable the use of monitoring powers in relation to matters, rather than only in relation to a provision—I am directly on point here—or information given in compliance with a provision, and update the description of offence provisions and the description of provisions relating to infringement notices which might apply to contravention of both a civil penalty and criminal offence provision to ensure consistency throughout the regulatory powers act and to respond to recent drafting practices.

Now—I'm sorry, that was schedule 1. Schedule 2 is in relation to the Defence Force Discipline Act. The Defence Force Discipline Act creates a system for the enforcement and maintenance of good order and discipline in the Australian Defence Force. The Defence Force Discipline Act also serves to ensure the effectiveness, efficiency and morale of the ADF, and consequently the defence of the nation and public confidence. The DFDA does this through creating a discipline system, which includes a disciplinary offence code—sometimes referred to as service offences. All ADF members are subject to the DFDA in certain situations. A specified category of civilian persons, defence civilians and prisoners of war are also subject to the DFDA. The DFDA currently establishes a framework that allows for the investigation of service offences under the DFDA. The framework includes extensive investigation powers that are appropriate and necessary within a military context. However, the exercise of many of these powers is confined to service land. This application limits the practical scope of the existing investigation powers. Further, many of the investigation powers themselves have not changed to take account of the evolving nature of military life and offending.

Schedule 2 amends the DFDA to trigger the investigation provisions in part 3 of the regulatory powers act, to enable investigation of alleged service offences on premises which are not service land—that is, civilian premises and public places. Triggering part 3 of the regulatory powers act provides a supplementary suite of investigation powers to those currently available under part 6 of the DFDA that are more appropriate for application on non-service land. The availability of investigation powers that can be used on civilian premises and in public places is necessary, as service offences and the evidence required to investigate those offences—bank statements, real estate records, CCTV footage and other things—may not be located on service land. The amendments in schedule 2 are necessary in order to ensure that evidential material can be obtained, wherever it is located, either with the consent of the occupier of the premises or the owner of the thing, or by executing a warrant.

I'm going to allow my learned friend to jump up shortly and speak to some of the other acts that this bill will impact upon. But I am very proud to stand here today in support of this bill, particularly because it will not just assist in the proper and effective discipline of those serving in the ADF; it will also help people like my fisherpeople—fishermen and fisherwomen operating in Fisher, out of fishing boats on the Sunshine Coast. This government is all about reducing regulatory red tape, and this bill does exactly that. I commend the bill to the House.

Julian Leeser (Berowra, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to 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.

Russell Broadbent (Monash, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On listening to the member for Berowra speak, and especially when he talks about regulatory oversight over businesses, I'm reminded of a woman who used to ring in to the Jon Faine program in Melbourne. She ran a very popular cafe cum restaurant down towards Port Phillip Bay, and all of a sudden she rang up one day and said, 'I'm not going on with this business.' I thought, 'This is an unusual phone call in to the Jon Faine program,' because it was about as Left as you could be in Melbourne. He's retired now, but it was certainly worth listening to him. Apparently, there were so many regulations on this woman's business and so many imposts on where the staff could go and what they could do, and there were so many parts to the legislation on this industry, that she literally could not continue in business with the regulatory oversight and the intersections of all of these regulations coming across her business. For instance, if a kitchenhand picked up something in the restaurant and carried it out, they had to be paid a different rate from what they would have been paid had they just been there. So she closed the business and said, 'I can't do this anymore,' because the award was so complicated. What the Regulatory Powers (Standardisation Reform) Bill 2020 will do, I hope, will be to streamline enormously.

I was also reminded of the number of people on our side of politics—and if I've missed any on the other side I'm sure I'll be advised about it—who I know have run a business. Just off the top of my head, I can pick the member for Grey, the member for Forrest, the member for Wright, the member for Barker, the member for Longman, the member for Hinkler, the member for Flynn, the member for Fisher, the member for Groom and, of course, myself, the member for Monash—just a few who actually know the rigours of employing people, running a business, making it work and making it profitable. These people can make a major contribution to this parliament because of their background. They've lived in the real world.

This bill amends the Defence Force Discipline Act 1992; the Education Services for Overseas Students Act 2000; the Fisheries Management Act 1991, which you've heard the two previous speakers refer to particularly; the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011; the Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Act 1992; and the Tobacco Plain Packaging Act 2011. Some of these acts contain existing regulatory regimes which the bill replaces with the standard provisions to align the acts' regulatory regimes with the standard provisions. The bill provides additional powers for current regulatory regimes in some acts to ensure they are robust and align with best practice. The bill also provides some regulatory powers for acts which do not currently contain regulatory regimes but require regulatory powers to ensure a robust compliance and enforcement scheme. Modifications to the standard powers are included where necessary for effective regulation in the context of each act. The bill also makes minor amendments to the regulatory powers act to ensure that the regulatory requirements and the underlying penalty and offence provisions of acts that trigger the regulatory powers act can be effectively enforced.

As a general overview of this bill, the measure represents a second coordinated tranche of amendments to Commonwealth acts that trigger the operation of the regulatory powers act. The regulatory powers act provides for a standard suite of provisions in relation to monitoring and investigation powers, as well as provisions regulating the use of civil penalties, infringement notices, enforceable undertakings and injunctions. By standardising the regulatory powers across the Commonwealth, the act intends to: (1) significantly reduce the length of legislation governing each regulatory regime; (2) provide greater clarity and consistency for agencies that need to exercise powers with respect to multiple regulatory regimes; (3) make it easier for businesses that are subject to multiple regimes to understand and comply with the law; and (4) facilitate the development of a common body of law. If we can, we should make it easier and less complicated for businesses to do business and they can understand the development of a common body of law, where everybody can get on board.

The standard provisions of the regulatory powers act represent best practice in relation to regulatory powers of general application. Implementing the regulatory powers act supports the government's regulatory reform agenda, as that act intends to simplify and streamline Commonwealth regulatory powers across the statute book that currently vary in breadth and detail, resulting in inconsistency or unnecessary duplication across regimes.

Standardisation provides the regulatory agencies with the opportunity to use more-uniform powers and increase legal certainty for businesses and individuals who are subject to those powers. The use of standard provisions ensures that the government exercises regulatory powers responsibly and with accountability so that the rights of individuals and businesses remain protected. I'll just repeat that: the use of the standard provisions ensures that the government exercises regulatory powers responsibly and with accountability so that the rights of individuals and businesses remain protected.

The Regulatory Powers (Standard Provisions) Act will make minor amendments to the regulatory powers act to ensure that the regulatory requirements and underlying penalty and offence provisions of the acts that trigger the regulatory powers act can be effectively enforced. Those amendments would (1) enable the use of monitoring powers in relation to matters rather than only in relation to a provision or information given in compliance with a provision and (2) update the prescription of offence provisions and the description of a provision relating to infringement notices which might apply to the contravention of both a civil penalty and criminal offence provision to ensure consistency throughout the regulatory powers act and respond to recent drafting practices.

As part of addressing this issue, I'd like to turn my attention to the Defence Force Discipline Act. The Defence Force Discipline Act 1982 is to be amended. The measure amends the Defence Force Discipline Act to trigger the investigations provisions in part 3 of the regulatory powers act to enable investigation of alleged service offences on civilian premises and public places. Existing investigation powers under the Defence Force Discipline Act enable investigation of alleged service offences on service land, not on public or civilian premises. This measure provides a supplementary suite of investigative powers to those currently available in the Defence Force Discipline Act that are more appropriate to application on non-service land. The powers contained in this measure are necessary because evidence required in order to investigate service offences may not be located on service land. Because of the use of new technologies or innovations, they're not necessarily held on service land that needs to be investigated.

The amendments will ensure that the investigation of alleged service offences can be undertaken effectively and appropriately when they occur off Defence Force facilities, off Defence Force land and out in the community. This act amends the Defence Force Discipline Act to include the following modifications to the standard investigation provisions: (1) the power to use force against things that is necessary and reasonable in the circumstances by authorised persons and persons assisting authorised persons and (2) the ability of an authorised person to be accompanied by and make use of an animal in the course of that investigation.

So it obviously increases the opportunity and powers for those persons who are responsible for investigating such malfeasance to be able to do that off Defence Force land, which they are unable to do at the moment. So this actually gives them the opportunity and creates a system for the enforcement and maintenance of good order and discipline in the Australian Defence Force. It also serves to ensure the effectiveness, efficiency and morale of the ADF and consequently the defence of the nation as well as public confidence in the ADF. This bill does this through creating a disciplined system which includes a disciplinary offence code for service offences.

All ADF members are subject to the Defence Force Discipline Act in certain situations. A specified category of civilian persons—defence civilians—and prisoners of war are also subject to this act. This act currently establishes a framework that allows for investigation of service offences under the Defence Force Discipline Act. The framework includes extensive investigative powers that are appropriate and necessary within a military context. However, the exercise of many of these powers are confined to service land, as I said before. This application limits the practical scope of the existing investigation powers and therefore many of the investigation powers themselves have not changed to take into account the evolving nature of military life and offending. Schedule 2 of the act amends the Defence Force Discipline Act to trigger the investigation provisions in part 3 of the Regulatory Powers Act to enable investigation of alleged service offences on premises which are not service land—that is, civilian premises and public places.

Triggering part 3 of the Regulatory Powers Act provides a supplementary suite of investigation powers to those currently available under part 6 of the Defence Force Discipline Act that are more appropriate for application on non-service land. The availability of investigation powers that can be used on civilian premises and in public places is necessary as a service offence and the evidence required to investigate those offences, such as bank statements, real estate records, CCTV footage and other things that may not be located on service land. The amendments in schedule 2 are necessary in order to ensure that evidential material can be obtained wherever it is located, either with the consent of the occupier of the premises or the owner of the said thing, or by executing a warrant. This just brings the Defence Force Discipline Act, created in 1982, into today's real world of what needs to be addressed by the Defence Force along with all of these other regulatory issues that are bound up in this quite extensive legislation.

Of course, like for myself, in this parliament anything that streamlines government regulatory operations and which gives a greater understanding to all of us of what we need to do under the law is good. The law is in this place; the laws are made here, but it is right that we review every piece of legislation and see if we can streamline that legislation so it is easier to understand and so it is acknowledged by the people who are affected by that legislation—that doesn't matter if they're in the Defence Force, education services or fisheries management or if it's about the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency, the tobacco advertising prohibition or the Tobacco Plain Packaging Act. All of these things should be addressed by this parliament. We should review legislation that is put in place when, in a latter time such as this, it has become out of date and needs updating.

This legislation will make Australia, doing business in Australia and the regulatory powers that cover all these issues, streamlined. I commend this act to the House for immediate delivery and passage.

Jason Wood (La Trobe, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Customs, Community Safety and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I firstly thank all honourable members for their contribution to the debate on this bill. The Regulatory Powers (Standardisation Reform) Bill 2020 represents the second coordinated tranche of amendments to Commonwealth acts to trigger the operation of the Regulatory Powers (Standard Provisions) Act 2014. Implementing the regulatory powers act supports the government's regulatory reform agenda as that act intends to simplify and streamline Commonwealth regulatory powers across the statute book which currently vary in breadth and detail, resulting in inconsistency or unnecessary duplication across regimes. Standardisation provisions provide regulatory agencies with the opportunity to use more uniform powers and increase legal certainty for businesses and individuals who are subject to those powers. The use of the standard provisions ensures that the government exercises regulatory powers responsibly and with accountability so that the rights of individuals and businesses remain protected. I commend the bill to the House.

Lucy Wicks (Robertson, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this the honourable member for Isaacs has moved as an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted, with a view to substituting other words. The immediate question is that the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the question.

Question agreed to.

Original question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.