Louise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Pursuant to standing orders 38 and 166, I present documents listed on today’s Order of Business at item 12, which have been presented to the President, the Deputy President and the Temporary Chairmen of Committees since the Senate last sat. In accordance with the terms of the standing orders, the publication of the documents was authorised.

The list read as follows—

(a)

Documents certified by the President

1. Department of the Senate—Report for 2009-10 (received 14 October 2010)

2. Department of Parliamentary Services—Report for 2009-10 (received 14 October 2010)

(b)

Committee reports

1. Environment and Communications References Committee—Report—Sustainable management by the Commonwealth of water resources (received 7 October 2010)

2. Economics Legislation Committee—Report: Tax Laws Amendment (Public Benefit Test) Bill 2010—Additional information received by the committee (received 7 October 2010)

(c)

Government responses to parliamentary committee reports

1. Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity—Interim report—Operation of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006 (received 13 October 2010)

2. Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee—Report—Australia’s judicial system and the role of judges (received 19 October 2010)

(d)

Government documents

1. Australian Human Rights Commission—Report—Inquiry of complaint: Mr KL v State of NSW Department of Education (received 1 October 2010)

2. Administrative Review Council—Report for 2009-10 (received 6 October 2010)

3. Classification Board and Classification Review Board—Reports for 2009-10 (received 6 October 2010)

4. Family Law Council—Report for 2009-10 (received 6 October 2010)

5. Office of Parliamentary Counsel—Report 2009-10 (received 12 October 2010)

6. Water Efficiency Labelling and Standards Act 2005—Independent review of the Water Efficiency Labelling and Standards Scheme—Report by Chris Guest (received 13 October 2010)

7. Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security (IGIS)—Report for 2009-10 (received 13 October 2010)

8. Crimes Act 1914—Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity: witness identity protection certificates—Report for 2009-10 (received 13 October 2010)

9. Crimes Act 1914—Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity: assumed identities—Report for 2009-10 (received 13 October 2010)

10. CrimTrac Agency—Report for 2009-10 (received 13 October 2010)

11. Attorney-General’s Department—Report for 2009-10 (received 13 October 2010)

12. Administrative Appeals Tribunal—Report for 2009-10 (received 13 October 2010)

13. National Native Title Tribunal—Report for 2009-10 (received 13 October 2010)

14. Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy—Report for 2009-10 (received 13 October 2010)

15. Australian Communications and Media Authority—Report for 2009-10 (received 13 October 2010)

16. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO)—Report for 2009-10 (received 14 October 2010)

17. Department of Finance and Deregulation—Report for 2009-10 (received 14 October 2010)

18. Australian Law Reform Commission—Report for 2009-10 (received 14 October 2010)

19. Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre (AUSTRAC)—Report for 2009-10 (received 14 October 2010)

20. Family Court of Australia—Report for 2009-10 (received 14 October 2010)

21. Federal Court of Australia—Report for 2009-10 (received 14 October 2010)

22. Federal Magistrates Court of Australia—Report for 2009-10 (received 14 October 2010)

23. High Court of Australia—Report for 2009-10 (received 14 October 2010)

24. Customs Act 1901—Conduct of Customs and Border Protection officers [Managed deliveries]—Report for 2009-10 (received 14 October 2010)

25. Repatriation Medical Authority—Report for 2009-10 (received 14 October 2010)

26. Australian Institute of Family Studies—Report for 2009-10 (received 15 October 2010)

27. Australian Federal Police—Report for 2009-10 (received 15 October 2010)

28. Department of Human Services—Report for 2009-10 (received 15 October 2010)

29. Centrelink—Report for 2009-10 (received 15 October 2010)

30. Medicare Australia—Report for 2009-10 (received 15 October 2010)

31. Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry—Report for 2009-10 (received 15 October 2010)

32. Australia Post—Report for 2009-10 (received 15 October 2010)

33. Australian Government Solicitor—Report for 2009-10 (received 15 October 2010)

34. Inspector-General of Taxation––Report for 2009-10 (received 22 October 2010)

(c)

Report of the Auditor-General

Report no. 12 of 2010-11—Performance audit—Home Insulation Program: Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts; Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency; Medicare Australia (received 15 October 2010)

(f)

Statements of compliance and letters of advice relating to Senate orders1.     Statements of compliance relating to indexed lists of files: Treasury portfolio agencies (received 1 October 2010)Commonwealth Ombudsman (received 14 October 2010)Official Secretary to the Governor-General (received 15 October 2010)Fair Work Ombudsman (received 15 October 2010)Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency (received 18 October 2010)Australian Organ and Tissue Donation and Transplantation Authority (received 20 October 2010)Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government portfolio agencies (received 22 October2.     Letters of advice relating to lists of contracts: Human Services portfolio agencies (received 1 October 2010)Veterans’ Affairs portfolio agencies (received 1 October 2010)Defence Materiel Organisation (received 13 October 2010)Resources, Energy and Tourism portfolio agencies (received 14 October 2010)Education, Employment and Workplace Relations portfolio agencies (received 22 October 2010)3.     Letters of advice relating to lists of departmental and agency appointments and vacancies: Health and Ageing portfolio agencies (received 7 October 2010)Australian Institute of Family Studies (received 7 October 2010)Office for Sport (received 11 October 2010)Department of Immigration and Citizenship (received 11 October 2010)Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (received 11 October 2010)Office of National Assessments (received 11 October 2010)Office of the Official Secretary to the Governor-General (received 11 October 2010)Attorney-General’s portfolio agencies (received 11 October 2010)Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency (received 11 October 2010)Infrastructure and Transport portfolio agencies (received 11 October 2010)Privacy Advisory Committee, Office of the Privacy Commissioner and the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (received 11 October 2010)National Archives of Australia (received 11 October 2010)Department of Veterans’ Affairs (received 11 October 2010)Australian National Audit Office (received 11 October 2010)Australian Public Service Commission (received 11 October 2010)Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (received 11 October 2010)Innovation, Industry, Science and Research portfolio agencies [2] (the latter being a correction) (received 11 and 20 October 2010)Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (received 11 October 2010)Office for the Arts (received 11 October 2010)Old Parliament House (received 11 October 2010)Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman (received 11 October 2010)Office of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security (received 11 October 2010)Human Services portfolio agencies (received 12 October 2010)Finance and Deregulation portfolio agencies (received 12 October 2010)Department of Regional Australia, Regional Development and Local Government (received 14 October 2010)Resources, Energy and Tourism portfolio agencies (received 15 October 2010)Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (received 18 October 2010)Treasury portfolio agencies (received 18 October 2010)Defence portfolio agencies (received 22 October 2010)4.     Letters of advice relating to lists of departmental and agency grants: Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy (received 6 October 2010)Australian Institute of Family Studies (received 7 October 2010)Office for Sport (received 11 October 2010)Department of Immigration and Citizenship (received 11 October 2010)Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (received 11 October 2010)Office of National Assessments (received 11 October 2010)Office of the Official Secretary to the Governor-General (received 11 October 2010)Attorney-General’s portfolio agencies (received 11 October 2010)Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency (received 11 October 2010)Department of Infrastructure and Transport (received 11 October 2010)National Archives of Australia (received 11 October 2010)Privacy Advisory Committee and the Office of the Privacy Commissioner (received 11 October 2010)Department of Veterans’ Affairs (received 11 October 2010)Australian National Audit Office (received 11 October 2010)Australian Public Service Commission (received 11 October 2010)Office of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security (received 11 October 2010)Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman (received 11 October 2010)Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (received 11 October 2010)Innovation, Industry, Science and Research portfolio agencies [2] (received 11 October 2010)Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (received 11 October 2010)Office for the Arts (received 11 October 2010)Old Parliament House (received 11 October 2010)Human Services portfolio agencies (received 12 October 2010)Finance and Deregulation portfolio agencies (received 12 October 2010)Department of Regional Australia, Regional Development and Local Government [2] (received 14 and 19 October 2010)Resources, Energy and Tourism portfolio agencies (received 15 October 2010)Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (received 15 October 2010)Treasury portfolio agencies (received 18 October 2010)

In accordance with the usual practice and with the concurrence of the Senate, the government responses will be incorporated in Hansard.

The documents read as follows—

Government Response to Recommendations Two and Three of the Interim Report from the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity (PJC on ACLEI) inquiry into the Operation of the Law Enforcement integrity Commissioner Act 2006

SEPTEMBER 2010

Recommendation 2

2.51 The committee recommends that, as an immediate measure, the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service be brought under ACLEI’s jurisdiction on a whole-of-agency basis by regulation.

Recommendation 3

2.52 The committee recommends that, in the longer term, the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service be prescribed as a law enforcement agency within the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006 through the amendment of section 5 of the Act.

Agree

Subject to finalisation of consultations relating to resources required by the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity (ACLEI), the Government will extend the jurisdiction of ACLE1 to include the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service (ACBPS) in recognition of ACBPS’s critical law enforcement and related functions. It is expected this jurisdiction will commence in 2011.

The Australian Government will respond to the Committee’s other recommendations when the Final Report is tabled.

The Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee Report on Australia’s Judicial System and the Role of Judges (December 2009)

Government Response

The Government welcomes the report of the Committee on Australia’s Judicial System and the Role of Judges.  It is a significant contribution to the body of work in this area and will assist in the ongoing debate and growing impetus for a more effective complaints handling system.

The Government welcomes the Committee’s endorsement of its judicial appointments processes.  The Government has improved processes for appointing judicial officers to the federal courts by implementing more transparent processes.  While recognising the quality of the Australian judiciary, transparency and merit based appointments have strengthened the quality of appointments and ensured that the process is fair and effective.  The Attorney-General has received significant support and positive feedback regarding the implementation of the new processes.

The Government also welcomes the Committee’s support of the work currently underway in relation to judicial complaints handling.  A transparent, impartial and accountable system of judicial complaints handling has the potential to enhance public confidence in the administration of justice, and ultimately, to strengthen the judiciary itself.  At the request of the Attorney-General, the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General (SCAG) has established a working group to examine the feasibility of a national judicial complaints handling mechanism.

Recommendation 1

2.9 The committee recommends that the High Court of Australia adopt a written complaint handling policy and makes it publicly available, including on its website, within 1 month of the tabling of this report.

The Government notes this recommendation.

The implementation of this recommendation is a matter for the High Court of Australia.

The Attorney-General received a letter from the Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia dated 17 December 2009 in which his Honour stated:

Section 72 of the Constitution provides that the Justices of the High Court shall not be removed from office ‘except by the Governor-General in Council, on an address from both Houses of the Parliament in the same session, ... on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity’.

There is no statutory or other basis for establishing any procedure for ‘handling complaints’ against Justices of the High Court.  Because it seems inevitable that any question as to the constitutional validity of procedures of that kind would come to this Court for decision, the Court will make no further comment on the issue.

Recommendation 2

2.19 The committee recommends that, following consultation about the best way to achieve this, all federal courts publish quarterly complaint handling summary status reports on their websites recording the number of complaints received and, in relation to each complaint, the date it was received, the nature of the complaint, the date on which it was resolved and a summary of any action taken in response to the complaint.

2.20 The committee recommends that no personal details of either the complainant or judicial officer be identifiable from these reports.

The Government notes this recommendation.

The implementation of this recommendation is a matter for each of the federal courts.

Recommendation 3

3.23 The committee recommends that when the appointment of a federal judicial officer is announced the Attorney-General should make public the number of nominations and applications received for each vacancy.

3.24 If the government or department prepared a short-list of candidates for any appointment, the number of people on the list should also be made public.

The Government accepts this recommendation in part.

The Government proposes that on the announcement of the appointment of federal judicial officers, the number of nominations and applications received (if sought) would be included in the announcement.

Recommendation 4

3.72 The committee recommends that the process for appointments to the High Court should be principled and transparent. The committee recommends that the Attorney-General should adopt a process that includes advertising vacancies widely and should confirm that selection is based on merit and should detail the selection criteria that constitute merit for appointment to the High Court.

The Government accepts this recommendation in part.

Appointments to the High Court are made on merit having regard to the qualifications for appointment in section 7 of the High Court of Australia Act 1979.

The Government agrees with the Committee’s observation that the special position of the High Court means that an identical judicial appointments process to that used in other courts is not appropriate. 

The Government will continue to consult widely on all appointments.  With respect to appointments to the High Court, the Attorney-General will continue to invite nominations for appointment from a broad range of individuals and organisations and from State Attorneys-General (as required under section 6 of the High Court of Australia Act 1979).

In light of the high profile nature of appointments to the High Court, and that most of the candidates will themselves be known to Government, advertising vacancies will achieve little in addition to the broad consultation detailed above. 

Recommendation 5

4.27 The committee recommends that all jurisdictions set a nationally consistent compulsory retirement age for judicial officers and encourages each jurisdiction to implement it within the next 4 years.

The Government does not accept this recommendation.

The retirement age for all federal courts is the maximum permitted by the Constitution.  There is no proposal to amend section 72 of the Federal Constitution. 

The compulsory retirement age for State and Territory judicial officers is a matter for each State and Territory.

Recommendation 6

4.28 The committee recommends that at the next Commonwealth referendum section 72 of the Constitution should be amended in relation to the compulsory retirement age for judges to provide that federal judicial officers are appointed until an age fixed by Parliament.

The Government does not accept this recommendation.

As noted in relation to Recommendation 5, there is no proposal to amend section 72 of the Constitution.

Recommendation 7

4.64 The committee recommends that the High Court of Australia Act 1969 (Cth) prohibition on federal judges holding another office of profit be retained.

The Government accepts this recommendation.

Recommendation 8

4.70 The committee recommends that by 30 June 2010 the Attorney-General develop and implement a protocol that provides guidelines to federal courts for the appropriate use of short and long term part-time working arrangements for judicial officers.

Recommendation 9

4.71 The committee recommends that the Attorney-General present the protocol to the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General for consideration at the first meeting after 30 June 2010.

The Government notes recommendations 8 and 9.

The Federal Magistrates Act 1999 provides that a Federal Magistrate (other than the Chief Federal Magistrate) may hold office on a part-time basis if their commission of appointment so specifies, although no Federal Magistrate has been appointed on a part-time basis to date.

The High Court of Australia Act 1979, the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 and the Family Law Act 1975 do not provide for the appointment of judges on a part-time basis. There is no proposal to amend these Acts to provide for part-time appointments at this stage.

Recommendation 10

7.82 The committee recommends that the Commonwealth government establish a federal judicial commission modelled on the Judicial Commission of New South Wales.

The Government notes this recommendation. 

The Government is currently working within SCAG to consider possible models for a national mechanism for judicial complaints handling.  A range of options are being considered including adopting a consistent set of rules, procedures and standards and the establishment of an appropriate complaints handling body. 

A federal mechanism could be either an interim step or complement a national mechanism. The SCAG working group’s recommendations will assist the Commonwealth Government’s consideration of an appropriate federal mechanism. 

Recommendation 11

7.83 The committee recommends that this new judicial commission include the three functions of complaints handling, assisting courts to achieve consistency in sentencing and judicial education.

The Government notes this recommendation.  As outlined in relation to recommendation 10, the Government is working within SCAG on a range of options. 

Recommendation 12

7.84 The committee recommends that the functions currently fulfilled by the National Judicial College of Australia be incorporated into the new judicial commission.

The Government notes this recommendation.  As outlined in relation to recommendation 10, the Government is working within SCAG on a range of options. 

Recommendation 13

7.85 The committee recommends that within 12 months the government undertake planning and budgetary processes necessary for the establishment of this commission.

The Government notes this recommendation.  As outlined in relation to recommendation 10, the Government is working within SCAG on a range of options.

Recommendation 14

7.86 The committee recommends that within 18 months the government introduce a bill to establish the new judicial commission.

The Government notes this recommendation.  As outlined in relation to recommendation 10, the Government is working within SCAG on a range of options.

Recommendation 15

7.87 The committee recommends that recommendations 10 to 14 above are implemented subject to any constitutional limits and in consultation with the federal courts.

The Government notes this recommendation. 

In the consideration of judicial complaints handling mechanisms at both the SCAG and federal levels, the Government has been mindful of the Constitutional protections on judicial independence.  This has included drawing on assistance from the Special Committee of Solicitors-General and the Commonwealth Solicitor-General. 

The Attorney-General, in a speech to the Annual Conference of Supreme and Federal Court Judges on 25 January 2010, invited all judicial officers to engage positively with the issue and to have input into proposals as they are developed.

Recommendation 16

7.96 The committee recommends that as soon as possible, and no later than, 30 June 2010 the government:

• implement a federal process enabling it to establish an ad hoc tribunal when one is needed to investigate complaints of judicial misconduct or incapacity;
• establish guidelines for the investigation of less serious misconduct or incapacity issues; and
• implement the Family Court and Federal Magistrates Court proposal for an oversight committee.

The Government notes this recommendation.

As outlined in relation to recommendation 10, the Government is working within SCAG on a range of options for handling complaints against judicial officers.

The proposal raised by Chief Justice Bryant and Chief Federal Magistrate Pascoe for an oversight committee, to assist heads of jurisdictions in the investigation of complaints, is currently being considered by the Government.