Steve Hutchins (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I present the report of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Australian Crime Commission on the examination of the annual report of 2007-08 of the Australian Crime Commission, together with the Hansard record of proceedings.

Ordered that the report be printed.

by leave—I move:

That the Senate take note of the report.

Before I report on the committee’s findings, I want to thank my colleagues on the committee for their contributions to this examination, in particular senators Boyce, Parry, Polley and Fielding, along with our colleagues in the other place. I would also like to thank the witnesses who appeared on behalf of the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity and the Australian Crime Commission board, particularly the Australian Crime Commission Chief Executive Officer, John Lawler; the former Chief Executive Officer, Alistair Milroy; and the chair of the ACC board, Mick Keelty. Finally, a special thank you needs to go to the committee secretariat, headed by the dedicated and indefatigable Dr Jacqueline Dewar, supported by Nina Boughey and Danielle Oldfield, for all the assistance they have provided.

Since our last report, we have lost our minister, our chief executive officer and we are about to lose our chairman—that is, Bob Debus, Alistair Milroy and Mick Keelty. I would like to thank them on behalf of the committee for their exceptional contribution to public life and their efforts in law enforcement. This report has been undertaken as part of the committee’s statutory duty under the Australian Crime Commission Act to examine each annual report of the Australian Crime Commission and report to parliament on any matter appearing in or arising out of any such report. As a result of the examination of the report and the evidence received at the public hearing in Canberra in March, the committee has made four recommendations for the government and the ACC to consider.

The first recommendation relates to the need to expedite the judicial process for contempt proceedings relating to ACC contempt matters. This matter was first brought to the attention of the government and the parliament in the Trowell report. During the public hearing the ACC reiterated its concern that the commission does not have mechanisms that are broad, strong or fast enough to deal with contempt arising out of the exercise of the ACC’s coercive powers. The difficulties posed by contempt proceedings were highlighted by Mr Lawler, who indicated that the ACC has intelligence suggesting that certain high-risk crime groups have directed their members to frustrate ACC examinations by refusing to comply with and to provide evidence to the commission. It is an intolerable situation where organised crime groups are able to disrespect the legal powers granted to the commission by relying on the delay that arises when contempt proceedings are pursued. This is not the first time the committee has made this recommendation, but I would hope that it will be the last. It is imperative for the efficacy of ACC investigations that the government issues a response to the Trowell report recommendations and considers how it will enhance definitions of contempt and extradite contempt proceedings.

The second recommendation relates to the shifting focus of the ACC towards financial crime under Wickenby and Midas determinations and the need to address this shifting focus in the ACC’s structure. To address this the committee is suggesting that the Commissioner of Taxation be included as a member of the ACC board, a view supported by the board, according to its chairman. Again this recommendation goes back as far as 2005, when the committee made the same recommendation in its report on the review of the Australian Crime Commission Act 2002. I am aware that this recommendation has featured in at least two subsequent reports as well. We have been advised that the board has taken some action in the interim by inviting the Commissioner of Taxation to attend meetings as an observer; but in the long-term it is the view of the committee and the ACC board that the increased focus on the financing and assets of serious and organised crime will be best served by having the commissioner as a permanent voting member.

The third recommendation deals with establishing a practice of reporting and publicising a list of corruption complaints received and investigated by the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity in an appendix to the ACC annual reports. We recognise the concerns of ACLEI that reporting these process cases in an inappropriate manner could jeopardise ongoing investigations or unduly tarnish the reputation of individuals whose guilt has not yet been established. Nevertheless, ensuring the accountability and transparency of ACC reporting processes is a key responsibility of the parliamentary joint committee and as such we firmly believe that this process is necessary. At the same time, we are fully supportive of ACLEI and ACC collaborating on a reporting mechanism that does not compromise or cast aspersions on any case or individual so long as it continues to provide the information in an open and accountable way.

Finally, the ACC is a unique organisation in that, unlike every other law enforcement organisation, the ACC’s CEO has no ability to remove staff members based on loss of confidence in that staff member’s integrity. I am sure I do not need to tell senators just how critical it is that our law enforcement agencies have the ability to monitor their officers’ integrity and act to deal with potential or prospective breaches. Every state police force has this ability, as does the Australian Federal Police. The CEO of the ACC does not even have the power to suspend employees under investigation.

This is an untenable situation for an organisation that is taking the fight to organised crime in Australia, where the potential for security breaches is enormous and the stakes are high. As such, the committee recommends that the Australian government review existing arrangements for the suspension and dismissal of Commonwealth law enforcement agency employees believed on reasonable grounds to have engaged in serious misconduct or corruption and that the government take action as appropriate, bearing in mind the need to respect the rights of employees.

In conclusion, I would like to commend the ongoing work of the Australian Crime Commission in their fight against serious and organised crime. The agency is performing exceptionally well and continues to meet its key performance indicators. The recommendations arising from this report will assist the commission by removing some serious impediments to its effective operation. I table this report. I encourage senators to give it due consideration, to read it and to assist us in prosecuting the recommendations that we have made to this parliament and to this government.