Jacqui Lambie (Tasmania, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

First of all, I want to go straight to the Parliamentary Library research and reports on this bill, the Transport Security Amendment (Serious or Organised Crime) Bill 2016, which make some concerning comments about organised crime in Australia, and I quote:

Criminal intelligence and law enforcement agencies have also identified risks presented by ‘trusted insiders’ within the civil aviation sector in relation to organised crime, including the importation or exportation of illicit drugs, domestic drug trafficking, money laundering, and smuggling activities.

This bill, by its very existence in this parliament, says to the people of Australia, 'We have one hell of a big problem with organised crime.' The big problem I have with the approach this government has to organised crime is this: are we doing enough? This bill, which I will support, while its purpose and effects will help in the fight against the threat of serious and organised crime, may be seen as just tinkering at the edges of the organised crime problem in Australia when compared with legislation which could be presented to this parliament.

This leads me to some very serious and important questions. Why won't the Liberal, Labor and National parties support national legislation which makes it illegal to be a member of an organised crime organisation? And why is it being left up to the states to approach this very real problem of organised crime in an ad hoc, very unorganised, fashion? If this government can bring to the federal parliament this and other similar legislation, which a federal parliamentary committee says 'addresses a threat which serious and organised crime poses to Australian transport infrastructure,' why can't the same government bring forward legislation which does a proper job on organised crime? Once again, this is half-hearted.

While this chamber ponders that question, I will briefly turn to the independent Library report, which indicates that:

In a submission to the Senate Standing Committee on Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport inquiry into airport and aviation security in January 2015, ASIO stated, 'We expect civilian aviation will remain a high-value terrorist target for the foreseeable future'. It identified several factors that make airports susceptible to terrorist attack, including that 'terrorists have exploited the trusted access of individuals within the aviation sector in order to overcome security measures'. Criminal intelligence and law enforcement agencies have also identified risks presented by 'trusted insiders' within the civil aviation sector in relation to organised crime, including the importation or exportation of illicit drugs, domestic drug trafficking, money laundering, and smuggling activities.

While I accept that the legislation will help in the fight against organised crime and attacks by terrorists, what about the police and public servants who are at the pointy end of the terrorism and organised crime threat? I would like senators to spend a little time today reflecting on the plight of the men and women who willingly put their lives on the line while they attempt to enforce this Liberal-National party government legislation? Is this coalition government properly supporting those brave men and women of the Australian Federal Police and other Australian security agencies, who kiss goodbye to their families, not knowing if they will return back home to their family in one piece?

In light of recent media stories, it is clear not only that the coalition has failed to practically support members of our federal law enforcement but also that there is a strong case to show that Liberal and National members of this parliament have sneakily betrayed officers of the Australian Federal Police and their families. In fact, while the conservative politicians make grand speeches in this place about this and other legislation which strengthens our terrorism and organised crime laws, they have been caught out weakening the resourcing and staffing levels of the public servants who are tasked with enforcing these laws. Shame on them! It is well known that this government has deliberately set out to cut the budgets, resources and wages of our very own Australian Federal Police officers. This well-documented attempt at betrayal comes at a time when it is not a matter of if a terrorist attack happens but when it happens. You would think that at some point common sense or a love for Australia would kick in for those in executive government who think that it is okay to take resources away from the Australian Federal Police and other government agencies.

I was approached by members of the Australian Federal Police and also family members of Australian Federal Police officers. The information I was given by the Australian Federal Police Association allowed me to table and have the Senate pass last year the following notice of motion, in which I moved:

That the Senate—

(a) notes that the Australian Federal Police Association warns that:

  (i) the 2015-16 Budget Papers indicate the Australian Federal Police's (AFP) fiscal position through the forward estimates will deteriorate to the tune of $112 million,

  (ii) as an operational agency, the brunt of this deterioration will be borne within employee ranks, with funds available for employee benefits reducing by $61 million,

  (iii) by straight division, this represents a reduction of 450 staff, though the actual number will be higher,

  (iv) enterprise bargaining is currently underway in the AFP, with employees being unable to sacrifice sufficient terms and conditions to fully offset the $94 million cost of delivering a two per cent per annum salary increase over a three-year agreement,

  (v) the consequence of this will be a further reduction in staffing numbers, by perhaps as many as an additional 400 to offset the cost, and

  (vi) in total, the AFP is confronting a situation where up to 1,000 employees could be lost through budgetary deterioration and enterprise bargaining; and

(b) calls on the Government to identify which operational outcomes will no longer be required as the AFP cannot deliver business as usual into the future in this environment.

According to reliable sources, when this notice of motion passed the Senate last year, the justice minister became very, very angry. He and his conservative colleague's betrayal of Australian Federal Police officers was exposed and made public.

Just before Xmas last year I was contacted by a very distressed person associated with an Australian Federal Police officer and I wrote the following to the Prime Minister on this person's behalf:

Dear Prime Minister

RE: Government Budget Cuts to AFP—High Volume Composite Removal from 2017-20 EA

I would like to bring to your attention the attached disturbing letter I received from a spouse of an AFP officer.

You will note in the letter that the above-mentioned removal of the High Volume Composite and accompanying reduction in wages and conditions is reported to affect around 280 members within the AFP and could result in a cut of up to 35% and $40K p/a for certain AFP members.

At a time when our National Security alert is at high, I am very disappointed that your Government through the enterprise bargaining process, seems to have placed this sort of extreme financial pressure on AFP officers, who are tasked with protecting our borders and the lives of all Australians.

I also note your public comments following yesterday's horrific terrorist attack in Germany.

'Australia's police and security forces were the finest in the world and keenly focused on keeping Australians safe.' (source Sky News)

If you truly believe those words, then I would expect you to do everything in your power to protect Australia's finest police officers and security forces from unfair and dangerous cuts to their pay and conditions.

Unfortunately, this is not the first time that I have been asked by AFP officers and/or their families to raise their concerns in the Senate. Should this report be accurate—and a significant reduction in AFP wages is being proposed just before Christmas, it will mean that your Government is behaving in a shifty and heartless manner.

I know that you personally are the opposite of shifty and heartless. So I ask that you please ensure that these matters raised by the family of an AFP officer are properly investigated and remedied as soon as possible.

I look forward to your favourable response by return.

Yours Faithfully and Merry Christmas

Senator Jacqui Lambie

I call on the minister and the PM to give an ironclad guarantee that the cuts in the Australia Federal Police budget, wages and staffing, and capacity to combat terrorists and organised crime, will stop now.

The reduction in Australian Federal Police resources has already been felt in Tasmania. In a local media article published 21 October 2014 and headlined 'Australian Federal Police officers withdraw from Hobart Airport' read:

Australian Federal Police officers have officially withdrawn from Hobart Airport.

The decision to remove 27 federal police officers from the airport came after a $22 million budget cut was announced in the May federal budget.

…      …   …

Hobart is now the only capital city airport in Australia without a permanent AFP presence.

Following that article, the media revealed last year on 5 July:

The Hobart International Airport is "almost open slather" for drug smugglers, because of the lack of an Australian Federal Police (AFP) presence, a police union spokeswoman says.

The article goes on to reveal:

On Friday a random search by local police with a drug detection dog found $250,000 worth of the drug "ice" on a passenger.

Joseph Roy Wallner, 21, allegedly had 280 grams of ice hidden in his underwear.

Federal police were removed from the Hobart Airport in October 2014, after a $22 million Commonwealth budget cut.

The State Government, Tasmania Police, ASIO and police unions all opposed the withdrawal.

The head of the Australian Federal Police Association (AFPA), Angela Smith, said Tasmania had become a soft target for drug smugglers and she called for the federal officers to be reinstated.

"It is the only airport that doesn't have AFP full-time protection presence there, I guess it's almost open slather for these things to occur and its creating problems for the Tasmanian community," she said.

And my goodness, is it causing issues!

Pat Allen from the Police Association of Tasmania, who previously worked as part of the Australian Federal Police contingent at the airport, is quoted as saying:

They say that the AFP is concentrating on terrorism, well that's great and so they should, but we'd be fools to believe there haven't been people on the terrorism watch-list traced in and out of Tasmania.

The article also said:

Mr Allen said the state did not have the resources to properly police the airport.

"You rely on calls from the airport or the odd operation or two but you know, I fly in and out of the airport all the time and I've hardly ever seen a Tasmania Police officer actually down there," he said.

"Our members do a great job trying to stem the flow of ice into the state."

This bill and other similar bills are designed to strengthen our security at our airports and seaports. A simple step that this government could have taken to achieve the same aim is to tighten up on the issuing of the 457 foreign work visas. From my conversations with Australian port workers, it is clear that radicalised foreign workers in our seaports and airports are a grave security risk. Sacked Australian maritime engineers Stephen Dalton and Adrian Morris have explained to me how overseas maritime workers, because of a complete lack of security checks, pose a significant security threat to cruise liners refuelling in Sydney Harbour. Sacked Australian maritime engineer Adrian Morris said to me:

Foreign worker comes in from overseas … we don't know where he came from. We don't know what his credentials are or who he associates with. You bring in a foreign worker who becomes radicalised … and you've got a fuel barge on Sydney Harbour tied up next to a cruise ship … there's a significant risk factor.

We know that the government, for political reasons, wants to attack the union movement and undermine wages and conditions by letting in as many foreign workers on 457 and other work visas, who do not have to submit to the same level of security checks as Australians. It is a ridiculous situation. National security has been placed at risk because the government allows foreign workers access to our vital trade infrastructure, all because they do not like unions and want to lessen wages and working conditions of Australian unions.

I hope that this legislation helps correct this situation. I also hope that all sides of this parliament seriously consider supporting legislation which attacks organised crime from a national perspective and makes it illegal in Australia to belong to an organised criminal group. And let's not make the same mistake that Campbell Newman made and allow politicians and public servants to draw up a list of groups that they said were organised criminals. That is not a decision for politicians and public servants; that is a decision for the courts after the police produce evidence which proves certain organisations are organised criminals. It is as simple as that. That way the separation of powers is always protected, and basic democratic freedoms and rights are also protected. I support this legislation.