Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I just indicate that the Australian Greens will be supporting that amendment. Indeed, Greens amendment (5) was an amendment with a similar effect. As I indicated in my speech in the second reading debate, we do have concerns around lowering the threshold. We think that where the standard sits at the moment is appropriate. In light of the Labor Party moving their amendment, we'll be withdrawing our amendment (5).

Question negatived.

by leave—I move Greens amendments (1), (3) (4) and (8) on sheet 8966 together:

(1) Clause 2, page 2 (table item 2, column 1), omit "4", substitute "4A".

(3) Schedule 1, item 16, page 5 (lines 17 and 18), omit the item, substitute:

16 Subsection 14(4)

Omit "ADRVP", substitute "CEO".

(4) Schedule 1, item 40, page 9 (lines 5 to 9), omit subsection 78(5), substitute:

(5) A national sporting organisation of Australia, or a person performing work or services for the organisation, is not liable to an action or other proceeding for damages for or in relation to an act done or omitted to be done in good faith:

  (a) in the performance or purported performance of any function given to the national sporting organisation under the NAD scheme; or

  (b) in the exercise or purported exercise of any power given to the national sporting organisation under the NAD scheme.

(8) Schedule 1, page 12 (after line 6), after Part 4, insert:

Part 4A—Athlete ombudsman

48A At the end of section 14

Add:

  Athlete Ombudsman

(6) The NAD scheme must establish an Athlete Ombudsman.

(7) The functions of the Athlete Ombudsman must include:

  (a) providing independent advice to athletes and support persons, at no cost, in relation to the operation of the NAD scheme and this Act; and

  (b) investigating complaints made in relation to matters arising under the NAD scheme; and

  (c) providing assistance in disputes arising in relation to matters under the NAD scheme; and

  (d) establishing and maintaining a list of legal practitioners who are able to provide pro bono assistance to athletes and support persons in relation to matters arising under the NAD scheme.

(8) All money required to give effect to the Athlete Ombudsman is to be funded out of money appropriated by the Parliament for the purposes of this section.

We also oppose schedule 1 in the following terms:

(2) Schedule 1, item 14, page 5 (lines 13 and 14), to be opposed.

(6) Schedule 1, item 45, page 11 (lines 7 to 9), to be opposed.

(7) Schedule 1, item 47, page 11 (line 12) to page 12 (line 3), to be opposed.

As I indicated in my speech in the second reading debate, we have a number of concerns about other elements of this bill. I won't repeat those concerns. Suffice it to say that we believe that these amendments improve this legislation. We're supportive of the broad thrust of the bill. We're pleased that the disclosure threshold hasn't been lowered, and we believe these other amendments would improve the bill significantly. They, I think, would allow a strengthening of the anti-doping framework without compromising the fundamental rights of athletes, including the right not to self-incriminate.