Page 1702 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 1 April 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The government will also be drafting the balance of the cross-border investigative powers model laws to enhance a nationally coordinated and cooperative approach to cross-border investigations into organised crime. I foreshadowed this last year when I introduced the Crimes (Control Operations) Bill in the Assembly.
These laws were recommended by a joint working group established by the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General and the Australasian Police Ministers Council, as it then was. The foreshadowed laws cover the protection of a witness’s identity, assumed identities and the lawful use of surveillance devices. The ACT government is also involved in the following national forums and organisations, which are instrumental to developing national policies and strategies to fight organised crime:
• Ministerial Council on Police and Emergency Management;
• Australia and New Zealand Police Advisory Authority;
• Intergovernmental Committee of the Australian Crime Commission;
• Australian Crime Commission;
• Standing Committee of Attorneys-General;
• CrimTrac;
• AusTrac;
• Australian Institute of Criminology.
Mr Hanson’s motion mentions the commonwealth national security statement. In his speech of 4 December last year the Prime Minister noted:
The government will develop two initiatives in the related areas of border management and serious organised crime. We will strengthen border management by simplifying arrangements and improving coordination across all agencies.
Second, we will clearly define the role of the Commonwealth in combating serious and organised crime and enhance coordination among Commonwealth agencies.
This is very much the main game in the fight against organised crime, and the ACT welcomes the commonwealth’s efforts.
It is important that we have regard to these actions when we consider what may or may not be required at a territory level. The territory is also actively involved in addressing national security issues through membership of organisations such as the National Counter-Terrorism Committee and the Ministerial Council for Police and Emergency Management—Police.
The fact is that Mr Hanson’s motion presumes that the South Australian law, the New South Wales proposed law and the Queensland proposed law will be the same. It is self-evident from the announcements made by New South Wales and Queensland that the laws will not be consistent between jurisdictions. Mr Hanson also asserts that the police unions are experts in this area. All governments, including this one, respect the work of the police unions, the work of their members and their views. But it is not
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .