Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I move government amendments (1) to (7) on sheet SV119 together:

(1) Schedule 1, page 4 (after line 5), after item 5, insert:

5A After section 6OE(1)

Insert:

(1A) The following are also not admissible in evidence against a natural person in any civil or criminal proceedings in any court of the Commonwealth, of a State or of a Territory:

(a) a statement or disclosure made on behalf of the person at a private session;

(b) the production of a document or other thing on behalf of the person at a private session;

(c) a statement or disclosure made on behalf of the person to a member, or member of the staff, of a Royal Commission for the purposes of a private session (whether or not a private session was, or is to be, held for the Commission).

5B Subsection 6OE(2)

Omit "Subsection (1) does not", substitute "Subsections (1) and (1A) do not".

(2) Schedule 1, item 6, page 4 (lines 14 to 16), omit paragraph 6OP(1)(b), substitute:

(b) the information contains any of the following:

(i) an account of the natural person's, or another person's, experiences of violence, abuse, neglect or exploitation;

(ii) an account of the natural person's, or another person's, experiences of systemic violence, abuse, neglect or exploitation; and

(3) Schedule 1, item 6, page 4 (line 17), after "information", insert "directly or indirectly".

(4) Schedule 1, item 6, page 4 (lines 23 to 25), omit subsection 6OP(2), substitute:

(2) Section 6OE applies:

(a) in all cases—in relation to the natural person who gave the information to the Commission, as if the information were a statement or disclosure made by that person at a private session for the Commission; and

(b) if the information was given to the Commission on behalf of another natural person—in relation to the other natural person as if the information were a statement or disclosure made on behalf of that other person at a private session for the Commission.

(5) Schedule 1, item 6, page 4 (after line 28), after subsection 6OP(3), insert:

(3A) Section 6OJ applies in relation to the information as if it were information obtained at a private session for the Commission.

(6) Schedule 1, item 6, page 4 (after line 31), at the end of section 6OP, add:

(5) A reference in subparagraph (1)(b)(ii) to experiences of systemic violence, abuse, neglect or exploitation is a reference to experiences, or an awareness, of a policy, procedure, practice, act or omission that contributed, or may have contributed, to a natural person experiencing violence, abuse, neglect or exploitation.

(7) Schedule 1, item 8, page 5 (after line 10), after subitem (1), insert:

(1A) Section 6OE of the Royal Commissions Act 1902, as amended by this Schedule, applies in relation to a statement or disclosure made, or a document or other thing produced:

(a) on or after the commencement of this item, at, or for the purposes of, a private session for a Royal Commission that is established on or after that commencement; or

(b) before, on or after the commencement of this item, at, or for the purposes of, a private session for a Royal Commission that:

(i) is established before that commencement; and

(ii) conducts all or part of an inquiry after that commencement.

I will very briefly just talk to the amendments and I know that Senator Steele-John will also briefly speak to them. As I've said, the amendments in detail show that we are committed to ensuring that the disability royal commission instituted by the government is able to thoroughly investigate violence against and abuse, neglect and exploitation of people with disabilities and that there are appropriate protections of confidential and sensitive information. What we are doing with these amendments that the government is introducing is to ensure that they directly respond to feedback received whilst the bill has actually been before the parliament. The amendments to the bill will extend existing protections for the confidentiality of certain information provided to the disability royal commission. The amendments will ensure that all persons wishing to engage with the disability royal commission can be confident that they can tell their stories or provide information in a way that protects the confidentiality of their sensitive information and protects them against potential adverse consequences. Again, I thank the Senate for what I am advised is the support of these amendments.

Jordon Steele-John (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

[by video link] I want to clarify something I said in my concluding remarks in the section before. What I meant to say was that the opportunity to pass these amendments is now before the Senate. If it were before the community, we probably would have done this in 2019. It is now indeed before the Senate.

In relation to these particular amendments, I want to contextualise them briefly and ask the minister a clarifying question. Of course, one of the major thrusts of these amendments is to ensure that information given in relation to systemic violence, abuse, neglect or exploitation is fully and comprehensively covered by the aspects of the broader bill. Ensuring this is of great concern to the disability community because we understand, through lived experience, that it is often systems, institutions and policy processes that either are actively involved in violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation or form the context in which we experience those things.

As to asking people to come forward and giving people the protections required to come forward to disclose these types of abuse and exploitation, if you are an individual within a government department, an institution or a private entity, it is quite an intimidating prospect to do that brave piece and blow the whistle. First of all, I want to ask the minister whether she is able to offer an assurance to the parliament and to the community as to the legal consequences that face anybody who attempts to dissuade or, in any way, cause a negative outcome for somebody who blows the whistle. Secondly, is she able to offer encouragement to people, particularly within a government department—state or federal—that it is the desire of the government to see individuals with information disclose it to the commission so that we can have that information included within recommendations?

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In relation to the second part of your question, Senator Steele-John, absolutely, the government is committed to ensuring that the disability royal commission it has instituted is able to thoroughly investigate violence against and abuse, neglect and exploitation of people with disabilities and that there are appropriate protections of confidential and sensitive information. You are right. I would encourage people—and I hope this bill provides that encouragement—to now come forward and provide their accounts to the royal commission.

As you and I have discussed and as I have already referred to, the amendments the government is introducing directly respond to the feedback received whilst this bill has been before the parliament. As you and I have discussed, the amendments will apply limitations on the use and disclosure of information given by individuals to the royal commission about their experiences of violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation. To go directly to the question that you have posed, the amendments would ensure that systemic accounts are covered by the legislation and—further answering your question, particularly the latter part—that people can engage with the royal commission without fear of further disclosures. I have to say—and you and I have discussed this, Senator Steele-John—it was always intended by the government to protect accounts of a systemic nature. To go to the second part of your question, what we are doing by moving this amendment is making it absolutely clear and explicit, on the face of this legislation, so people understand that it was always intended that accounts of a systemic nature would be protected. So the bill will be passed by the Senate and, yes, I encourage people to come forward, with the assurances that they will now get within this particular piece of legislation.

I will add for thoroughness, though, that the amendments ensure that sensitive information provided to the royal commission outside private sessions will be accorded the same confidentiality as material obtained for the purposes of a private session. The provisions are not confined to an individual account and could be applied more broadly to systemic accounts relating to policies, procedures or practices, or to acts or omissions which have contributed to experiences of violence, abuse, neglect or exploitation. The protections would apply to certain information given to the royal commission when it commenced its operations on 4 April 2019. The amendments will protect individuals in organisations who have observed failures in the implementation of policies that put people with disability at risk. Senator Steele-John, I hope that now does comprehensively put on the record the answers to your question.

Carol Brown (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Labor supports these amendments. The bill extends the confidentiality protections under the Royal Commissions Act to certain information given to the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability—specifically, to the information given by individuals to the commission about their experiences of violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation. As the minister has made clear, those protections apply equally to accounts of a systemic nature. In other words, the confidentiality protections would not only apply to individual accounts but also to accounts of systemic violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation. This is an important clarification and Labor thanks the government for moving these amendments.

Jordon Steele-John (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

[via video link] I have a subsequent question for the Attorney-General. I thank you for those comments; they are clarifying. For the community's confidence, could you briefly outline again what you understand to be the legal penalties that would be faced by anybody who were to attempt to cause anybody some negative consequence for blowing the whistle and for giving information to the commission? You and I both understand that those legal consequences can be quite severe, but I think, for the community following this debate, it would be great if you could just step them out briefly.

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will very quickly table a supplementary explanatory memorandum relating to the government amendments to be moved in relation to this bill. Senator Steele-John, I do now have in front of me a copy of the legislation, the Royal Commissions Act 1902. Part 3 of this act actually deals with what are referred to as the offences. There are a number of offences, commencing with 6H. I will go through them. For example, I will give you 6M, injury to witness, which states:

Any person who uses, causes or inflicts, any violence, punishment, damage, loss, or disadvantage to any person for or on account of:

(a) the person having appeared as a witness before any Royal Commission; or

(b) any evidence given by him or her before any Royal Commission; or

(c) the person having produced a document or thing, or given information or a statement, pursuant to a summons, requirement or notice under section 2;

commits an indictable offence.

The penalty can include imprisonment for one year. It's very serious, as you and I both know. I will give you another example so it's properly articulated on the record. Again, it is in part 3, offences. Clause 6N, dismissal of employers of witness, states:

(1) Any employer who dismisses any employee from his or her employment, or prejudices any employee in his or her employment, for or on account of the employee having:

(a) appeared as a witness before a Royal Commission; or

(b) given evidence before a Royal Commission; or

(c) produced a document or thing, or given information or a statement, pursuant to a summons, requirement or notice under section 2;

commits an indictable offence.

Again, the penalty can include imprisonment for a year. I'm also happy to read out all of the relevant sections under 'PART 3—OFFENCES'. They include: 6H, 'False or misleading evidence'; 6I, 'Bribery of witness'; 6J, 'Fraud on witness'; 6K, 'Destroying documents or other things'; and 6L, 'Preventing witness from attending'. Section 6L(1) states:

Any person who intentionally prevents any person who has been summoned to attend as a witness before any Royal Commission from attending as a witness or from producing anything in evidence pursuant to the summons to attend commits an indictable offence.

Again, the penalty is imprisonment for a year. Senator Steele-John, it should give comfort to people that, within the Royal Commissions Act itself, there is an actual section in relation to offences. They are serious offences, because they are indictable offences, and they can include a penalty of a year's imprisonment.

Jordon Steele-John (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank everybody who has been involved in pulling this piece of legislation together for listening to the community and their concerns and for working with the Greens to make it a reality today. I would like to ask a final question of the minister in relation to the review that the department has committed to undertaking. Minister, could you step out for the record the purview of that review and the time line for its completion?

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do not have available to me the letter that I provided to you. But the review is clearly set out there, and I've signed off that it is a commitment.

Jordon Steele-John (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'll just read it to you for the record and then you can confirm that it meets your recollection. It says: 'The department will immediately commence a review of the act to examine any issues or impediments to people coming forward and sharing information with a royal commission—in particular, to consider the effectiveness of mechanisms in the act, inclusive of the bill's amendments, for safeguarding the identities of people making confidential disclosures to the royal commission and other protections for witnesses giving evidence to royal commissions—and consult with the office of the disability royal commission and have it consider the matters you have raised within the ambit of the royal commission's terms of reference.' Is that your correct recollection of the letter you've sent us?

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If you have correctly read out the letter I sent you, yes it is.

Jordon Steele-John (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Absolutely fantastic. That gives the community additional assurance that, should any further changes be required to the relevant acts to further protect individuals giving evidence, there will be an opportunity for those to be considered in full. With thanks again, and with great excitement and happiness in me, that's it. Thanks, Chair.

Bill, as amended, agreed to.

Bill reported with amendments; report adopted.