The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Scott Ryan) took the chair at 10:00, read prayers and made an acknowledgement of country.
That general business order of the day No. 29, National Integrity Commission Bill 2018 (No. 2), be considered today at the time for private senators' bills.
National Integrity Commission Bill 2018 (No. 2)
Australians don't trust politicians.
Toothless, spineless, and secretive—it would have no power to examine the activities of politicians or those close to them. ... It also—laughably—prevents the investigation of corruption in the past, with the consequence of protecting crooked politicians from any examination of their misdeeds.
The Coalition’s proposal is not a real anti-corruption agency; it is a sham. It would be worse than having no commission at all.
This issue is so hotly contested the Senate inquiry couldn't settle on an agreed position and was forced to leave the matter open.
In evidence to the Senate inquiry, lawyers from Gilbert and Tobin argued both sides, but noted the potential costs associated with holding public hearings, particularly on the "privacy and reputation of individuals involved".
The Law Council of Australia encouraged great caution around the use of public hearings, suggesting private hearings should be the default position and cited the risk of "irreparable damage" upon those unfairly implicated in corruption hearings.
Even the officer which holds the notorious—
NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) to account conceded public hearings left the community "confused" and could lead people to incorrectly conclude that functions of anti-corruption bodies were judicial proceedings.
This is not a trivial matter.
Most Australians would agree that a person should not have to suffer ongoing reputational harm once an anti-corruption commission finds insufficient or no evidence to support a prosecution.
Whatever the shortcomings of Australia's current multi-agency framework, it doesn't run "show trials" and it avoids the risk of prejudicing future criminal proceedings while at the same time upholding longstanding legal principles such as the presumption of innocence.
That the question be put.
The Senate divided. [11:41]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
That this bill be now read a third time.
The Senate divided. [11:50]
(The President—Senator Ryan)
Treasury Laws Amendment (Making Sure Multinationals Pay Their Fair Share of Tax in Australia and Other Measures) Bill 2019
Solving Australia's greatest challenges with the help of science and technology has never been more important—for our quality of life, for the economic health of our nation, and for our contribution and position in a globally competitive world.
One Nation rejects the argument put up by foreign-owned multinationals that it is unfair to change tax policy after they have made their final investment decision and that such action will risk future investment in Australia.
As it stands the only way Australians will benefit from the export of our vast gas reserves in Commonwealth territorial waters is to buy shares in these foreign-owned petroleum companies, because these companies do not pay for our gas, they do not pay tax on the profits made from our gas and they do not reserve any of our gas for domestic use—
We have the weakest fiscal regime for natural gas in the world but it is not only the petroleum industry which is of concern.
We believe foreign-owned multinationals should be progressively removed from paying corporate income tax and transitioned into a tax system based on activity transactions.
By way of example, we would put a royalty of 20% on the value of gas taken at the wellhead using meters.
These transactions are easily enough verified and royalty easily calculated. The companies would then have no further tax obligation in Australia.
It is difficult to estimate the tax that would be collected by putting 700 multinationals in a transaction based tax system. But these companies pay next to nothing now, our view Australia can only benefit.
We estimated the tax collected from these 700 companies could be in the order of 24 billion dollars a year based on a 9% return on their known capital investment in Australia of 1.4 trillion dollars.
We propose that step by step foreign-owned multinationals would be taken out of the current tax system and transitioned to a new transaction based system appropriate to their industry.
In respect of the—
of tax credits accumulated by a clutch of foreign-owned petroleum companies, we would cease the special provisions which apply to them, including uplift factors on expenses of 18 to 30% a year.
That this bill be now read a third time.
Royal Commissions Amendment (Private Sessions) Bill 2019
SECOND MORRISON MINISTRY
29 May 2019
Each box represents a portfolio. Cabinet Ministers are shown in bold type. As a general rule, there is one department in each portfolio. However, there can be two departments in one portfolio. The title of a department does not necessarily reflect the title of a Minister in all cases. Ministers are sworn to administer the portfolio in which they are listed under the 'Minister' column and may also be sworn to administer other portfolios in which they are not listed. Assistant Ministers in italics are designated as Parliamentary Secretaries under the Ministers of State Act 1952 .
Updated 9 September 2019
FEDERAL SHADOW MINISTRY 9 September 2019
Shadow Cabinet Ministers are shown in bold type.
One option is for fiscal support, including through spending on infrastructure.
With EBA's standard practice being three-year agreements, new ones locking in lower outcomes point to slowing wage growth.
That the Senate take note of the answers given by ministers to questions without notice asked today.
Today's young Australians are in danger of being the first generation in memory to have lower living standards than their parents' generation.
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister representing the Minister for Natural Disaster and Emergency Management (Senator McKenzie) to a question without notice asked by Senator Di Natale today relating to climate change.
That the Senate records its deep sorrow at the death, on 22 August 2019, of the Honourable Timothy (Tim) Fischer AC, former Leader of the National Party, Deputy Prime Minister, Minister in the House of Representatives and Ambassador, places on record its gratitude of his long service to the Parliament and the nation, and extends its profound sympathies to his family in their bereavement.
Adopt as your fundamental creed that you will equip yourself for life, not solely for your own benefit but for the benefit of the whole community.
… not only to provide full-time representation for all electors in Farrer but also to seek better the wellbeing of our nation through less government and less taxation and the encouragement of individual enterprise—
The great race of men is that one in which each individual develops his fullest individuality, in which ambition is encouraged, in which there are rewards for the courageous and enterprising …
Tim has found it hard to retreat when there are so many really critical issues, particularly in rural Australia with the drought, climate change and all the things we see every day as farmers.
The United States of America will recover from this human tragedy …
… quietly confident … Australia will play its part and … do so in honour of those who have died, been injured and been so seared in a direct way …
My thanks, my pleasure and my privilege . I move:
That the House do now adjourn.
No-one would believe that somebody could pack so much into one day, do so many things and still come out at the end of the day with some sense of where he'd been, what he'd said and who he'd said it to.
You are one of the very genuinely loved people in this place … You are going to be very much missed by us.
It's the first time I've ever had an interview stop because a truck of cows turned up.
But you chose not that easy road out; you chose to lay your leadership on the line and persist in a course of action which was right for the country.
A lesser person perhaps might have wilted, a lesser person might have said this is a bridge too far, might have objected, and we wouldn't have had the tough gun stance that we took necessarily then.
That leave of absence be granted to Senator Birmingham for today and on 12 September 2019 on account of ministerial business.
(1) That the Senate acknowledges that:
(a) 9 September, is International Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) Awareness Day;
(b) FASD is a life-long but preventable condition caused by in-utero exposure to alcohol;
(c) FASD can cause developmental, physical, mental and behavioural problems, including problems with memory, learning, impulse control, planning ability, understanding consequences, emotional regulation, speech and language; and
(d) people with FASD are likely to have poorer academic and employment outcomes, higher rates of homelessness and incarceration, and increased rates of mental health issues and alcohol and other drug abuse.
(2) That the following matters be referred to the Community Affairs References Committee for inquiry and report by the first sitting day in June 2020:
Effective approaches to prevention and diagnosis of Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD), strategies for optimising life outcomes for people with FASD and supporting carers, and the prevalence and management of FASD, including in vulnerable populations, in the education system, and in the criminal justice system, with particular reference to:
(a) the level of community awareness of risks of alcohol consumption during pregnancy;
(b) the adequacy of the health advice provided to women planning a pregnancy, pregnant women and women who are breastfeeding, about the risks of alcohol consumption;
(c) barriers that may prevent women receiving accurate, timely and culturally/ethnically appropriate information and advice on alcohol and pregnancy;
(d) provision of diagnostic services in Australia including capacity, training, integration and diagnostic models in current use;
(e) the prevalence and nature of co-occurring conditions and of misdiagnosis of FASD;
(f) international best practice in preventing, diagnosing and managing FASD;
(g) awareness of FASD in schools, and the effectiveness of systems to identify and support affected students;
(h) the prevalence of, and approaches to, FASD in vulnerable populations, including children in foster and state care, migrant communities and Indigenous communities;
(i) the recognition of, and approaches to, FASD in the criminal justice system and adequacy of rehabilitation responses;
(j) the social and economic costs of FASD in Australia, including health, education, welfare and criminal justice;
(k) access, availability and adequacy of FASD support available through the National Disability Insurance Scheme, including access to effective and early intervention services for individuals diagnosed with FASD;
(l) support for adults with FASD and for parents and carers of children with FASD;
(m) progress on outstanding recommendations of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Social Policy and Legal Affairs report, FASD: The Hidden Harm, tabled on 29 November 2012;
(n) the effectiveness of the National FASD Action Plan 2018-2028, including gaps in ensuring a nationally co-ordinated response and adequacy of funding;
(o) the need for improved perinatal data collection and statistical reporting on FASD and maternal drinking; and
(p) any other related matters.
(1) That a joint select committee, to be known as the Joint Select Committee on Implementation of the National Redress Scheme, be established to inquire into and report on:
(a) the Australian Government policy, program and legal response to the redress related recommendations of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, including the establishment and operation of the Commonwealth Redress Scheme and ongoing support of survivors; and
(b) any matter in relation to the Royal Commission's redress related recommendations referred to the committee by a resolution of either House of the Parliament.
(2) That the committee present its final report on the last sitting day in May 2022.
(3) That the committee consist of 8 members – 4 senators, and 4 members of the House of Representatives, as follows:
(a) 2 members of the House of Representatives to be nominated by the Government Whip or Whips;
(b) 2 members of the House of Representatives to be nominated by the Opposition Whip or Whips;
(c) 1 senator to be nominated by the Leader of the Government in the Senate;
(d) 1 senator to be nominated by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate;
(e) 1 senator to be nominated by the Leader of the Australian Greens; and
(f) 1 senator to be nominated by any minority party or independent senator.
(4) That:
(a) participating members may be appointed to the committee on the nomination of the Government Whip in the House of Representatives, the Opposition Whip in the House of Representatives, the Leader of the Government in the Senate, the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate or any minority party or independent senator or member of the House of Representatives; and
(b) participating members may participate in hearings of evidence and deliberations of the committee, and have all the rights of members of the committee, but may not vote on any questions before the committee.
(5) That every nomination of a member of the committee be notified in writing to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives.
(6) That the members of the committee hold office as a joint select committee until the House of Representatives is dissolved or expires by effluxion of time.
(7) That the committee may proceed to the dispatch of business notwithstanding that all members have not been duly nominated and appointed and notwithstanding any vacancy.
(8) That the committee elect as chair a member or senator nominated by the Opposition.
(9) That the committee elect as deputy chair a member or senator nominated by the Leader of the Australian Greens.
(10) That, in the event of an equally divided vote, the chair, or the deputy chair when acting as chair, have a casting vote.
(11) That the deputy chair shall act as chair of the committee at any time when the chair is not present at a meeting of the committee, and at any time when the chair and deputy chair are not present at a meeting of the committee the members present shall elect another member to act as chair at that meeting.
(12) That the committee have power to appoint subcommittees consisting of 3 or more of its members, and to refer to any such subcommittee any of the matters which the committee is empowered to examine.
(13) That the committee, and any subcommittee, have power to send for and examine persons and documents, to move from place to place, to sit in public or in private, notwithstanding any prorogation of the Parliament and have leave to report from time to time its proceedings and the evidence taken and such interim recommendations as it may deem fit.
(14) That the committee be provided with all necessary staff, facilities and resources and be empowered to appoint persons with specialist knowledge for the purposes of the committee with the approval of the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives.
(15) That the committee be empowered to print from day to day such papers and evidence as may be ordered by it, and a daily Hansard be published of such proceedings as take place in public.
(16) That the committee have power to adjourn from time to time and to sit during any adjournment of the Senate and the House of Representatives.
(17) That the provisions of this resolution, so far as they are inconsistent with the standing orders, have effect notwithstanding anything contained in the standing orders.
(18) That the committee have access to all evidence and documents of the former Joint Select Committee on oversight of the implementation of redress related recommendations of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Abuse.
(19) That a message be sent to the House of Representatives seeking its concurrence in this resolution.
That the Senate—
(a) notes that, on 31 July 2019, offshore petroleum exploration acreage was released, containing 64 areas available for lease:
(i) this is largest number of areas released since 2000, with more than 120,000 square kilometres available, and
(ii) fossil fuels are the leading cause of climate change; and
(b) calls on the Federal Government to halt the development of any further fossil fuel basins.
The Senate divided. [16:55]
(The Deputy President—Senator Lines)
That the Senate—
(a) notes that:
(i) the Clean Energy Regulator's The Renewable Energy Target 2018 Administrative Report — The acceleration in renewables investment , highlights the record investment in large scale, commercial and industrial and household renewables over the last year,
(ii) the Australian Bureau of Statistics reports that jobs in renewable energy in Queensland grew by 1,550 in 2017-2018, an increase of 44 percent on the previous year,
(iii) the Green Energy Markets 2019 update report, states that 2,012 full time equivalent Queenslanders were employed in the installation and sale of rooftop solar PV in June 2019,
(iv) the recently announced shortlist for the Queensland Government's Renewables 400 tender includes ten renewable energy generation and storage developments projected to collectively deliver 3,000 jobs in central and far north Queensland, including 350 direct jobs created by the Clarke Creek Wind and Solar Farm, west of Rockhampton, and
(v) the Adani Carmichael mine, if it proceeds, is expected to create between 800 and 1,500 jobs in the construction phase, with 100 ongoing jobs; and
(b) calls on the Federal Government to:
(i) deliver real jobs that last, by backing the job-creating, climate-fixing clean energy industry, and
(ii) fund industry development, training and other support to ensure that regional workers and communities, including coal workers, have secure long-term futures.
The Senate divided. [17:07]
(The Deputy President—Senator Lines)
That the Senate—
(a) notes that:
(i) data released by the Minister for Employment, Skills, Small and Family Business shows that nearly four in five jobactive participants have had their payments suspended at least once in the last 12 months,
(ii) jobactive participants often have their payments suspended for reasons out of their control including administrative errors by employment service providers,
(iii) jobactive participants are living on unemployment payments as low as $277 a week and should not be subject to unfair payment suspensions, and
(iv) poverty is a barrier to employment and suspending income support payments does not help people gain employment,
(b) expresses concern that jobactive participants can face payment suspensions due to administrative errors by employment service providers with no recourse to Centrelink; and
(c) calls on the Federal Government to:
(i) implement the recommendations contained in the report of the Education and Employment References Committee into Jobactive: failing those it is intended to serve, tabled on 14 February 2019, and
(ii) abandon the Targeted Compliance Framework.
Paragraph (c)(ii), after "abandon" add "its punitive approach to".
The Senate divided. [17:17]
(The Deputy President—Senator Lines)
The Senate divided. [17:22]
(The Deputy President—Senator Lines)
That the Senate—
(a) notes that recommendations handed down by the South Australian Department for Environment and Water, on 31 July 2019, call for 30 species be added to the threatened species list and a further 15 species be upgraded to a more threatened category; and
(b) calls on the Federal Government to establish and fully fund a plan for each threatened species.
(1) That the Senate notes that:
(a) the report of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade into the management of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) contamination in and around Defence bases (PFAS report), was tabled on 3 December 2018, making nine recommendations; and
(b) the President's report to the Senate on the status of government responses to parliamentary committee reports as at 30 June 2019, indicates that a government response to the PFAS report has not been tabled.
(2) That there be laid on the table by the Minister for Defence, by 12 pm on 10 September 2019, the government's response to the recommendations contained in the PFAS report.
Dear Mr President,
Pursuant to standing order 75, I propose that the following matter of public importance be submitted to the Senate for discussion:
The lack of any plan by the Morrison Government to address slowing economic growth and stagnant wages.
Total real wages being paid to Australians would therefore lift by around 0.2% … Similarly, the stronger economy would boost corporate profits, with that latter boost also running at close to 0.2%.
Finally, the stronger economy (more jobs, higher wages, stronger profits) would mean that the Federal Government would raise about an extra $1.0 billion in taxes, while State and Territory Government revenues would increase by some $0.25 billion.
At home, we face our own challenges with the impact of flood and drought, as well as a cooling housing market and its impact on household consumption.
That the Senate take note of the document.
That the Senate take note of the document.
… the report said "the current rate of global warming will not allow the maintenance of a healthy reef for future generations […] the window of opportunity to improve the reef's long-term future is now".
A logical national response to the outlook report would be a pledge to curb activity that contributes to global warming and damages the reef. Such action would include a ban on the new extraction of fossil fuels, phasing out coal-fired electricity generation, transitioning to electrified transport, controlling land clearing and reducing local stressors on the reef such as land-based runoff from agriculture.
Particulars of proposed and certain expenditure for the 2019-20 financial year.
That the documents be referred to legislation committees for the consideration of the estimates.
Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment (Sunsetting of Special Powers Relating to Terrorism Offences) Bill 2019
Dear Mr President
I refer to the following question asked by Senator Rex Patrick on 1 August 2019, during the Senate debate on the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment (Sunsetting of Special Powers Relating to Terrorism Offences) Bill 2019:
"Minister—and you may wish to take this on notice—if you can provide the dates on which the department met with the organisations that you suggested, or that you said that they met with, and provide the date upon which the drafting instructions were tendered to the drafters, that would be appreciated."
Pursuant to Senate Standing Order 74, as the Minister representing the Minister for Home Affairs in the Senate, please find enclosed the response provided by the Minister for Home Affairs, the Hon Peter Dutton MP.
Yours sincerely
Senator the Hon Michaelia Cash
Encl. Minister for Home Affairs response to Question on Notice
Department of Home Affairs
Question:
On 1 August 2019, Senator Rex Patrick asked:
Can you can provide the dates on which the Department met with the organisations that you suggested, or that you said that they met with, and provide the date upon which the drafting instructions were tendered to the drafters?
Answer:
Since 1 July 2018, the Department has met with the following organisations on the following dates:
The Department issued drafting instructions on 22 March 2019 and 9 July 2019.
That these bills may proceed without formalities, may be taken together and be now read a first time.
That these bills be now read a second time.
NATIONAL SPORTS TRIBUNAL BILL 2019
Sport plays a significant role in the Australian way of life – each year 14 million Australians participate in some form of sporting activity.
Sport is also an important contributor to the Australian economy. As highlighted by the Boston Consulting Group's 2017 Intergenerational Review of Australian Sport, $35-47 billion of economic activity is generated by sport each year, equating to approximately 2-3 per cent of GDP which is equivalent to the agriculture sector. Recognising the importance of sport to the Australian community, the Australian Government invests more than $300 million to support high performance sport and encourage greater participation.
Australians have no tolerance for the corruption and manipulation of sport. In August 2017, the Government commissioned the Review of Australia's Sports Integrity Arrangements (the Wood Review), chaired by the Hon James Wood AO QC, as part of the work being done to develop the National Sport Plan – Sport 2030.
The Wood Review was published on 1 August 2018. It confirms Australia's position as a leader in addressing sports integrity threats, but cautions that Australia's sports integrity response will require ongoing vigilance to ensure Australian sport can be protected.
Indeed, the Wood Review found that sports are challenged by a range of mounting integrity threats, including the increasing sophistication and incidence of doping, the globalisation of sports wagering particularly through rapidly growing illegal online gambling markets, the infiltration and exploitation of the sports sector by organised crime, corruption in sports administration and growing participant protection issues.
Sports integrity matters are now beyond the control of any single stakeholder.
The nature of sports corruption and manipulation is evolving at the fastest rate ever observed due to the immense commercialisation of sport and sporting organisations and accelerating technological advancement.
These threats are complex, globalised and connected, forming a complicated threat matrix. To respond effectively, Australia must have a robust, comprehensive and nationally‑coordinated response across sports, governments, regulators, the wagering industry, law enforcement and other stakeholders.
A key recommendation of the Wood Review is that a National Sports Tribunal be established to address anti-doping and general sports disputes fairly, quickly and cost-effectively, to ensure accessible natural justice for all parties.
The Wood Review examined similar models overseas, including in the United Kingdom, New Zealand, Canada and Japan, and found that Australia's sports dispute resolution mechanisms lagged behind. The Wood Review underlined the need for such an entity in Australia.
This is why we introduced legislation into the previous Parliament, to fund a two-year pilot of the National Sports Tribunal, which would allow refinement of its jurisdiction and operation according to demand. Although that Bill lapsed due to the recent federal election, we have taken that opportunity to undertake further consultation on, and refinement of, the Bill being introduced today.
By establishing the National Sports Tribunal, we will ensure that the Australian sporting community has access to a dispute resolution mechanism providing:
Currently in Australia, some sports disputes are arbitrated in the first instance by tribunals run internally by individual sports.
However, most sports cannot maintain internal tribunals. Their only available forum for anti-doping rule violation disputes is the Swiss Court of Arbitration for Sport, which can be an expensive and time consuming process.
We have heard from a number of sports about the challenges they face in dealing with disputes. Managing such disputes detracts from the core business of our sports –building a more active Australia and achieving sporting excellence. Integrity compromises detract from these goals and cause major reputational and other damage, especially when they occur during major sporting events.
Establishing the National Sports Tribunal will provide an effective mechanism to manage such issues.
It is proposed the National Sports Tribunal will deal with two types of disputes – anti-doping rule violations and general disputes.
Accordingly, the National Sports Tribunal will be comprised of three Divisions:
The Anti-Doping Division will hear anti-doping rule violation disputes.
The General Division will hear other types of disputes which arise under the rules or policies of a sport, including in relation to code of conduct breaches and disciplinary matters, selection disputes, member protection issues and the like.
The Appeals Division will deal with appeals from the Anti-Doping Division and General Division, and appeals from internal sport-run tribunals in relation to anti-doping rule violation disputes and general disputes.
The National Sports Tribunal will be established by statute, rather than privately, to enable the Tribunal to be given powers to inform itself, including by requiring the attendance of witnesses and the provision of documents.
The National Sports Tribunal will be one of the few, if not the only, sports dispute resolution body worldwide that will have these powers, reaffirming the Government's commitment to, and Australia's position as a leader in, protecting the integrity of sport.
Further, with the agreement of both parties to a dispute, the National Sports Tribunal will be empowered to provide dispute resolution services in addition to arbitration, including conciliation, mediation and case assessment.
This Government is intent on providing participants in sport with a fair, efficient and cost-effective forum of the resolution of sports disputes. We are also focused on relieving the burden of managing complex and serious dispute resolution from sporting organisations, so they can focus their time and resources on doing what they do best - supporting our high performance athletes to excel and providing more opportunities for Australians to get active.
NATIONAL SPORTS TRIBUNAL (CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS AND TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS) BILL 2019
I am pleased to introduce this supporting Bill, the National Sports Tribunal (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2019.
This Bill is a companion Bill to the National Sports Tribunal Bill 2019, and will deal with consequential and transitional matters arising from the enactment of the National Sports Tribunal Act 2019, as well as for related purposes. Both of these Bills were introduced into the previous Parliament, though lapsed due to the recent federal election. This has allowed for the opportunity to undertake further consultation on, and refinement of, the Bill being introduced today.
In addition, this Bill provides for the administrative matters required to transfer the functions and operations of existing sports dispute resolution processes to the National Sports Tribunal.
The scope of this Bill allows a degree of flexibility to make adjustments to the new arrangements or prescribe other matters of a transitional nature in the rules to be made under the Act.
This Bill will make consequential amendments to:
This proposed amendment to the Freedom of Information Act 1982 is necessary to ensure that parties to a dispute before the National Sports Tribunal have the appropriate guarantees around the protection of their private information, including sensitive medical and health information. Without this assurance individuals may be reluctant to utilise the National Sports Tribunal due to concerns about privacy and reputation. Similarly, parties may be reluctant to fully participate in proceedings and/or provide required information. Other information, including information about the administrative workings of the National Sports Tribunal, may still be subject to production under theFreedom of Information Act 1982 .
These amendments will take effect in parallel with the National Sports Tribunal Bill 2019, prior to the intended establishment of the National Sports Tribunal in March 2020.
Criminal Code Amendment (Agricultural Protection) Bill 2019
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
The Criminal Code Amendment (Agricultural Protection) Bill 2019 will amend the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Criminal Code) to safeguard Australian farmers and primary production businesses from those who incite trespass or other property offences on agricultural land.
Recently, we have seen a number of incidents of trespass on agricultural properties and businesses.
Farmers are a vital part of the Australian community. They deserve to go about their business free from harassment and threats of harm.
This reprehensible conduct was enabled and encouraged by the sharing of information online, including personal details of farmers' names, addresses and workplaces.
The Government is committed to protecting farmers from the actions of those who disseminate such information with the intention to encourage others to unlawfully trespass, or unlawfully damage property, on agricultural land.
This Bill builds on action that Government has already taken to protect farmers. Earlier this year, the Government prescribed the 'Aussie Farms' website as an organisation under the Privacy Act 1988 (Privacy Act), after it published information about Australian farmers including their names and addresses. This decisive action will expose Aussie Farms to potential penalties of up to $2.1 million if it is found to breach the Privacy Act.
The Bill introduces new offences for individuals who use a carriage service, such as the internet, to incite another person to trespass, damage, destroy or steal property on agricultural land.
Incitement of trespass on agricultural land
Trespass onto private property is already criminalised by state and territory legislation, but new laws are needed to strengthen protections for farmers.
Trespass onto agricultural land has the potential to cause food contamination and breach biosecurity protocols. It can also lead to farmers and their families feeling unsafe on their own land.
The Bill will address this by creating a new offence for using a carriage service to transmit, make available, publish or otherwise distribute material with the intention to incite another person to trespass on agricultural land.
This offence would require that a person is reckless as to whether the other persons' trespass or related conduct could cause detriment to a primary production business being carried out on the land.
For the purposes of the new offences, 'agricultural land' means land in Australia that is used for a primary production business. For the purposes of this definition, it is immaterial whether the land is also used for residential purposes or for a business that is not a primary production business.
The law would cover dairy and meat farmers, but also other agricultural premises such as abattoirs, meat exporters, fish farms, livestock sale yards, and tree, fruit, vegetable and crop growers.
This offence would apply whether or not actual trespass or detriment results from the incitement. The intention of a person to incite trespass will be based on all the circumstances of a case. For instance, the inclusion of a disclaimer on a website would not, of itself, be conclusive.
A person who is found guilty of this offence could face up to 12 months imprisonment.
This will send a strong message that actions that threaten the safety of our farmers and food system are not acceptable.
Incitement of damage, destruction or theft of property on agricultural land
The Bill will also create an aggravated offence for those who use a carriage service to incite more serious forms of harm – property damage and destruction, or theft from agricultural land.
This offence, and the substantial penalty proposed, reflects the gravity of these more serious forms of conduct and the substantial loss of income that could follow.
This offence will carry a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment.
For example, if a person posts on social media intending that other people pull down fences on a farm, or steal livestock from a farm, that person would be subject to the aggravated offence and its higher penalty.
Protections for whistleblowers and journalists
It is critical that journalists and those who lawfully disclose animal cruelty, or other criminal activity where it exists in the agricultural industry, are protected under the Bill.
For this reason, the Bill contains appropriate exemptions for journalists and whistleblowers.
For journalists, the offences would not apply to material relating to a news or current affairs report, where made by a journalist in the public interest and in their professional capacity. For example, the Bill would provide an exemption for a journalist acting in their professional capacity who publishes a story that listed the locations of farms with 'questionable' farming practices, simply because activists use that information for future trespasses.
The exemption would not protect a journalist suggesting that activists should use the information to facilitate farm trespass.
For whistleblowers, the exemption would apply in any circumstance where a law of the Commonwealth, or of a State or Territory provides that they would not be subject to any civil or criminal liability for the conduct.
Conclusion
The events of recent months demonstrate the need for greater deterrence for those from the existing legislative framework is not adequately able to deter people from entering agricultural land illegally. Australian farmers have experienced criminal trespass, intimidation and disruption to their businesses and livelihoods.
This Bill sends a strong message to anyone who intends to incite trespass on agricultural land or cause damage to property.
The Morrison Government is committed to keep Australian farmers and their families safe.
And this Bill will introduce serious criminal penalties to ensure that is the case for our farmers and their families are protected.
Customs Amendment (Immediate Destruction of Illicit Tobacco) Bill 2019
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
The Government is committed to combating the illicit tobacco black market. In particular, a range of complementary measures were introduced in the Black Economy Package— combatting illicit tobacco as part of the 2018-19 Budget.
The Black Economy Package seeks to disrupt illicit tobacco supply chains and deny criminal groups access to illicit profits that fund their other criminal and black economy activities. As part of this package, it is proposed that from 1 July 2019 tobacco products will be a prohibited import and will only be allowed to enter Australia with a valid import permit, with limited exceptions. Any tobacco that is detected at the border without a valid permit will be seized.
The Customs Act 1901 currently requires seized prohibited imports to be stored for a minimum of 30 days before destruction. This storage requirement, together with legislative and administrative requirements for prohibited imports, will impact upon border operations and limit the ability of the Government to regulate and manage illicit tobacco effectively.
This Bill will amend the Customs Act to empower the Comptroller-General of Customs to deal with seized tobacco products in a manner he or she considers appropriate, including immediate destruction of the goods. Similar controls already exist for other prohibited imports, including seized psychoactive substances and prohibited serious drug alternatives.
These amendments will improve the handling of seized illicit tobacco, resulting in effective regulation of tobacco permit conditions and enabling greater focus on targeting of illicit tobacco. This Bill will improve financial outcomes for the Government and enhance implementation of the new tobacco measures.
Road Vehicle Standards Legislation Amendment Bill 2019
Timor Sea Maritime Boundaries Treaty Consequential Amendments Bill 2019
Passenger Movement Charge Amendment (Timor Sea Maritime Boundaries Treaty) Bill 2019
Treasury Laws Amendment (Timor Sea Maritime Boundaries Treaty) Bill 2019
Farm Household Support Amendment Bill 2019
Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment (Sunsetting of Special Powers Relating to Terrorism Offences) Bill 2019
Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Cashless Welfare) Bill 2019
Treasury Laws Amendment (Consumer Data Right) Bill 2019
That the following matter be referred to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee for inquiry and report by the final sitting day of June 2020:
Australia's relations with the People's Republic of China, with particular reference to:
(a) the management of a mutually respectful and beneficial bilateral relationship between Australia and China;
(b) Australian and Chinese perspectives on, and interests in, regional and global security issues;
(c) trade, investment and infrastructure issues, including Australia's engagement with China's Belt and Road Initiative;
(d) educational and research cooperation;
(e) tourism, cultural exchanges and people-to-people ties;
(f) management of diplomatic and consular arrangements;
(g) dialogue on human rights issues;
(h) the roles of Australian institutions in Australia's relations with China, including: state and local governments, universities and other academic bodies, business, and non-government organisations; and
(i) any related matters.
After travelling to China with his family, the democracy advocate and academic was detained in January on the allegation of being suspected of "endangering national security".
Since then he has been held in harsh conditions without charge, with limited access to consular assistance. He has not been permitted to talk to his lawyers or see his family.
Being a true friend and ally of any nation means when issues arise in a foreign justice system affecting Australian citizens, we are obliged to speak up .
As a blogger, he has written thousands of articles promoting the rule of law, democracy and human rights, and built up a large following in China.
Yang and detainees like him must be treated humanely in a fair, transparent manner …
But it is the rule of law that most strongly drives economic performance.
The detentions have destroyed my family … We can say it [has also] destroyed Uighur society … I cannot bear keeping silent [any more] because I think there's a genocide taking place in East Turkestan.
They want to erase, erase, erase your identity and our culture and to melt them into Han Chinese.
The Senate divided. [21:13]
(The Acting Deputy President—Senator Fawcett)
Royal Commissions Amendment (Private Sessions) Bill 2019
After 50 years I finally feel I've been heard. People have listened to me before, but no one has really heard me.
Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice.