Page 379 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 20 February 2018
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Another important feature of the bill is that it excludes reasonable security measures. A court must find that a fortification exceeds what is reasonably necessary for the ordinary lawful use of the premises in granting an order. This means that, for example, reinforced doors or windows on a shopfront that prevent theft would not be captured by the legislation. The bill will not affect businesses with legitimate security needs. Once an anti-fortification order is made, the owner of a place affected will have time granted by the court to comply. Police can enter and remove the fortification if a person fails to comply after that time period.
The process for creating an order provides an opportunity for the matter to be heard independently in court and provides reasonable avenues for people to comply with an order. This process ensures that everyone subject to one of these orders gets a fair hearing and a fair opportunity to comply with the court’s decision.
It is important to consider today’s bill in the context of a broad strategy to keep Canberra safe. As has been mentioned, the Australian Bureau of Statistics earlier this month named Canberra the safest city in Australia, and we will keep working to maintain that position. Law reform is important to combat organised crime, but resourcing for law enforcement and prosecution are also critical to putting those laws into action. That is why this government provided $970,000 in funding for the confiscation of criminal assets program in the budget review.
Depriving offenders of the proceeds of crime serves as a strong disincentive to bring criminal business to Canberra. Additionally, the proceeds that are seized fund anti-crime measures. In 2016 the ACT government used confiscated criminal assets to fund a number of initiatives to address family violence. The funds supported the Canberra Rape Crisis Centre to provide services to people in the ACT affected by sexual violence. The funds were also used to support ACT government membership of Our Watch, an Australian organisation established to drive nationwide change in the culture, behaviours and attitudes that underpin and create violence against women and their children. Today’s bill is another example of the government looking for ways to support police and prosecutors to keep Canberra safe.
In the ongoing debate about legislation that targets criminal gangs I have emphasised and will continue to emphasise two key criteria for developing legislation: firstly, our laws must be compliant with human rights. Laws that are incompatible with human rights have very real consequences for the whole community and degrade our ability to participate in society with dignity and as equals. Secondly, our laws must be effective to achieve their aims, and this is vital when it comes to the criminal law. The statute book is not the appropriate place to make a statement. Police, prosecutors, defence lawyers and judges rely on it for their work. Every piece of legislation we pass needs to be assessed for its practical impact on the prosecution of crimes. Today’s bill measures up to both those criteria. It provides a fair process for courts to review an application by police and it gives police an opportunity to prevent criminal gangs from making their law enforcement activities more difficult.
This government will keep supporting police and prosecutors to target serious and organise crime. The suite of laws developed by the government sends a strong
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video