Bills unlikely to raise human rights concerns


Bills unlikely to raise human rights concerns

Australian Capital Territory Water Management Legislation Amendment Bill 2013[156]

Portfolio: Environment
Introduced: Senate, 13 November 2013

1.1        This bill proposes amendments to the Australian Capital Territory (Planning and Land Management) Act 1988 to enable the abstraction of water on National Land and by Commonwealth agencies in the ACT to be managed by the ACT Government under the Water Resources Act 2007 (ACT). This bill also seeks to amend the Water Act 2007 to provide that the water resources of the Googong Dam Area are required to be included in a water resource plan area for which the ACT has responsibility.

1.2        The bill is accompanied by a statement of compatibility that states that the bill itself deals with 'minor administrative and machinery matters that support the implementation of the [Murray-Darling] Basin Plan',[157] which overall promotes the right to water.[158]

1.3        The committee considers that the bill does not appear to give rise to human rights concerns.


Australian Civilian Corps Amendment Bill 2013

Portfolio: Foreign Affairs and Trade
Introduced: House of Representatives, 20 November 2013

1.4        This bill seeks to amend the Australian Civilian Corps Act 2011 to take account of the machinery of government change that abolished AusAID and, consequently, the position of the Director-General of AusAID, with effect on and from 1 November 2013. The bill will transfer the powers and functions of the Director-General of AusAID to the Secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and substitute other references to these positions accordingly.

1.5        The bill is accompanied by a statement of compatibility that states that the bill does not engage any human rights.

1.6        The committee considers that the bill does not appear to give rise to human rights concerns.


Australian Research Council Amendment Bill 2013

Portfolio: Education
Introduced: House of Representatives, 14 November 2013

1.7        This bill seeks to update the special appropriation funding cap administered by the Australian Research Council (ARC) to include policy approvals, indexation adjustments and an additional forward estimate for existing schemes within the National Competitive Grants Program. The explanatory memorandum explains that 'indexation adjustments and adding the last year of the forward estimate are part of the standard budget process and are administrative in nature'.[159] 

1.8        The bill is accompanied by a statement of compatibility that states that the bill does not engage any human rights as the amendments are minor and technical and they 'only impact on administered special appropriations; they do not alter the substance of the ARC Act or increase departmental funds'.[160]

1.9        The committee notes that the additional financial support for research under ARC schemes is likely to promote a number of rights, including the right to enjoy the benefit of scientific progress and its applications,[161] and is consistent with the obligation to respect the freedom indispensable for scientific research and creative activity.[162]

1.10      The committee considers that the bill does not appear to give rise to human rights concerns.


Commonwealth Electoral Amendment (Above the Line Voting) Bill 2013

Sponsor: Senator Xenophon
Introduced: Senate, 13 November 2013

1.11      This bill proposes to amend the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 to implement an optional preferential voting system above and below the line for Senate elections.

1.12      The bill is accompanied by a statement of compatibility that states that the bill promotes the right to take part in public affairs,[163] as it gives 'voters greater control over their vote'.[164]

1.13      The committee considers that the bill does not appear to give rise to human rights concerns.


Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Amendment Bill 2013

Portfolio: Treasury
Introduced: House of Representatives, 13 November 2013

1.14      This bill seeks to increase the Treasurer’s standing borrowing authority from $300 billion to $500 billion.

1.15      The bill is accompanied by a statement of compatibility that states that it does not engage any human rights.

1.16      The committee considers that the bill does not appear to give rise to human rights concerns.


       

Education Services for Overseas Students Amendment Bill 2013

Portfolio: Education
Introduced: House of Representatives, 4 December 2013

1.18      This bill seeks to amend the Education Services for Overseas Students Act 2000 (the ESOS Act) to clarify refund provisions for overseas students studying in Australia, as well as overseas students yet to arrive in Australia.  The bill seeks to:

  • ensure refunds required to be made by registered providers to overseas students can encompass tuition fees paid by students both before and after the commencement of a study period;
  • clarify existing arrangements relating to refunds where an overseas student is refused a student visa, to ensure providers must refund both unspent tuition fees and unspent non-tuition fees where the student is yet to commence their course; and
  • make a minor amendment to ensure the title of the National Code of Practice for Registration Authorities and Providers of Education and Training to Overseas Students properly reflects its content  and that its scope is appropriate to its function and consistency with the ESOS Act.

1.19      The bill is accompanied by a statement of compatibility that states that to the extent that the bill engages the right to education, the bill promotes this right, in that the purpose of the bill is to clarify refund provisions to ensure that refunds to overseas students can encompass tuition fees paid by students both before and after the commencement of a study period.

1.20      The committee considers that the bill does not appear to give rise to human rights concerns.


Grape and Wine Legislation Amendment (Australian Grape And Wine Authority) Bill 2013
Primary Industries (Customs) Charges Amendment (Australian Grape and Wine Authority) Bill 2013
Primary Industries (Excise) Levies Amendment (Australian Grape and Wine Authority) Bill 2013

Portfolio: Agriculture
Introduced: House of Representatives, 14 November 2013

1.21      This package of three bills seeks to implement the merger of the Grape and Wine Research and Development Corporation (GWRDC) and the Wine Australia Corporation to create a new wine statutory authority – the Australian Grape and Wine Authority. The explanatory memorandum explains that the new Authority is intended to commence on 1 July 2014, and will undertake the functions of the GWRDC and Wine Australia without a change in the structure or amounts of the levies that currently fund both authorities.[165] The assets, staff and functions of GWRDC and Wine Australia will transfer to the new Authority.[166]

1.22      The bills are accompanied by statements of compatibility, each of which states that the respective bill does not engage any human rights.

1.23      The committee considers that these bills do not appear to give rise to human rights concerns.


Import Processing Charges Amendment Bill 2013

Portfolio: Immigration and Border Protection
Introduced: House of Representatives, 21 November 2013

1.24      This bill seeks to amend the Import Processing Charges Act 2001 to increase the import processing charges levied on air, sea and post consignments with a value of $10,000 or more. The explanatory memorandum states that the 'Import Processing Charges have not increased since 2005-06'.[167]

1.25      The bill is accompanied by a statement of compatibility that states that the bill does not engage any human rights.

1.26      The committee considers that the bill does not appear to give rise to human rights concerns.


Indigenous Education (Targeted Assistance) Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2013

Portfolio: Indigenous Affairs
Introduced: Senate, 13 November 2013

1.27      This bill proposes amendments to the Indigenous Education (Targeted Assistance) Act 2000 (IETA) to enable the Minister to enter into contracts with education providers in respect of 2014 and beyond. Currently, the IETA only refers to funding under the special appropriation non-ABSTUDY payments up until June 2014.

1.28      The bill is accompanied by a statement of compatibility that states that the bill does not engage any human rights as it only makes technical amendments.

1.29      The statement of compatibility also states that the principal Act, the IETA, promotes a number of rights, including the right to an adequate standard of living,[168] the right to education,[169] and the right to non-discrimination on the ground of race under the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD). The statement of compatibility claims that the provision can be viewed as a special measure of advancement, within the meaning of article 1(4) of the ICERD.

1.30      The committee considers that the bill does not appear to give rise to human rights concerns.


National Health Amendment (Simplified Price Disclosure) Bill 2013

Portfolio: Health
Introduced: House of Representatives, 21 November 2013

1.31      This bill seeks to amend the National Health Act 1953 with the objective of improving the operation of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) by streamlining the price disclosure arrangements. According to the explanatory memorandum, '[p]rice disclosure arrangements seek to ensure that the price at which the government subsidises multiple-brand medicines more closely reflects the sale prices in the market'.[170] The changes proposed by the bill will 'allow price reductions to occur sooner, and more frequently, after medicines become subject to market competition'.[171]

1.32      The bill is accompanied by a statement of compatibility which states that the bill promotes the right to health 'because consumers will pay less for some PBS medicines as a result of these changes'.[172]

1.33      The committee considers that the bill does not appear to give rise to human rights concerns.


Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Cash Bidding) Bill 2013
Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage (Regulatory Levies) Amendment Bill 2013

Portfolio: Industry
Introduced: House of Representatives, 20 November 2013

1.34      The Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Cash Bidding) Bill 2013 proposes to amend the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act 2006 to provide an optimised ‘auction style’ model for allocating cash bid exploration permits in the offshore petroleum regulatory regime.

1.35      The Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage (Regulatory Levies) Amendment Bill 2013 proposes to amend the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage (Regulatory Levies) Act 2003 to provide for the annual titles administration levy to be collected by the National Offshore Petroleum Titles Administrator in relation to cash bid petroleum exploration permits in the offshore regulatory regime.

1.36      Each bill is accompanied by a statement of compatibility that states that each respective bill does not engage any human rights.

1.37      The committee considers that these bills do not appear to give rise to human rights concerns.


Parliamentary Proceedings Broadcasting Amendment Bill 2013

Sponsor: Senator Xenophon
Introduced: Senate, 13 November 2013

1.38      This bill proposes amendments to the Parliamentary Proceedings Broadcasting Act 1946 to prevent the Joint Committee on the Broadcasting of Parliamentary Proceedings from making a condition prohibiting the use of Parliamentary footage for the purposes of satire or ridicule. According to the explanatory memorandum, 'the new requirement [will] not prevent the Joint Committee from determining conditions that apply to all re-broadcasting of Parliamentary procedures and which cover requirements such as context, fairness and accuracy'.[173]

1.39      The bill is accompanied by a statement of compatibility that states that the bill promotes the right to freedom of expression 'as it allows Parliamentary proceedings to be re-broadcast in a wider range of circumstances'.

1.40      The committee considers that the bill does not appear to give rise to human rights concerns. 


Rural Research and Development Legislation Amendment Bill 2013[174]
Primary Industries (Excise) Levies Amendment Bill 2013[175]
Primary Industries (Customs) Charges Amendment Bill 2013[176]

Portfolio: Agriculture
Introduced: House of Representatives, 20 November 2013

1.41      This package of three bills proposes to make amendments to rural research and development legislation with the objective of improving the accountability, effectiveness and efficiency of rural research and development corporations.

1.42      The Rural Research And Development Legislation Amendment Bill 2013 is accompanied by a statement of compatibility which states that it promotes the right to equality and non-discrimination because it requires diversity, including diversity of experience, expertise and gender, to be taken into account when nominating members to relevant Selection Committees or when nominating candidates to the board of directors of statutory research and development corporations.

1.43      The other two bills are accompanied by statements of compatibility that state that the respective bill does not engage any human rights.

1.44      The committee considers that these bills do not appear to give rise to human rights concerns.


Tax Laws Amendment (Research and Development) Bill 2013

Portfolio: Treasury
Introduced: House of Representatives, 14 November 2013

1.45      This bill proposes to amend the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 to exclude access to the research and development (R&D) tax incentive for companies with aggregated assessable income of $20 billion or more for an income year. The explanatory memorandum states that the amendments are intended to ‘better [target] the R&D tax incentive to businesses that are more likely to increase their R&D spending in response to government incentives, delivering a greater return for taxpayers’.[177]

1.46      The bill is accompanied by a statement of compatibility that states that the bill does not engage any human rights.

1.47      The committee considers that the bill does not appear to give rise to human rights concerns.


Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Consumer Protection) Bill 2013[178]

Portfolio: Communications
Introduced: House of Representatives, 14 November 2013

1.48      This bill proposes to make amendments to telecommunications legislation; in particular, the bill:

  • makes amendments to the Do Not Call Register Act 2006 to tighten laws around the making of telemarketing calls and sending marketing faxes;
  • streamlines the process for amending registered industry codes under the Telecommunications Act 1997; and
  • clarifies the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman's (TIO) role and expected standards of operation, and requires periodic review of the TIO scheme.

1.49       The bill is accompanied by a statement of compatibility which states that the bill is compatible with human rights as it does not engage any rights. The statement notes that, in coming to this conclusion, consideration was given to any impact the bill may have on the right to privacy and the right to freedom of expression.

1.50      In light of the explanations provided in the statement of compatibility, the committee considers that these provisions do not appear to give rise to concerns with regard to the right to privacy or the right to freedom of expression.


Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Submarine Cable Protection) Bill 2013

Portfolio: Communications


Introduced: House of Representatives, 14 November 2013

1.51      The Telecommunications Act 1997 sets out a regulatory regime for the protection of telecommunications submarine cables that connect Australia to places outside Australia. The aim of the regime is to minimise the risk to submarine cables from human activity, particularly some kinds of fishing, anchoring and dredging. The regime gives the industry regulator, the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), the power to declare protection zones around existing or planned submarine cables of national significance, regulate activities of ships and persons within protection zones, and establishes an installation permit system for international submarine cables that connect to Australia.

1.52      The bill proposes amendments to that regime to:

  • modify how the regime applies to foreign nationals and foreign ships to ensure consistency with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS);[179]
  • include domestic submarine cables within the scope of the regime;
  • provide a process for consideration of the Attorney-General’s Department’s portfolio matters such as international law, native title or security matters in relation to proposed submarine cable installations;
  • streamline the installation permit regime; and
  • make several administrative and technical changes to improve the overall operation of the regime.

1.53      The bill is accompanied by a detailed statement of compatibility that identifies a number of rights engaged by the bill. The rights identified include the right to a fair hearing;[180] the presumption of innocence;[181] the right to privacy;[182] and the right to non-discrimination[183].

1.54      The committee considers that the statement of compatibility adequately addresses the issues it raises and provides sufficient justifications for any proposed limitations. The committee accepts that ensuring the protection of submarine cable infrastructure is a legitimate objective and considers that, in general, the bill appropriately confines the powers that ACMA and the Minister may exercise.

1.55      The committee notes that the changes proposed by the bill would expand the application of existing civil penalty provisions in the Telecommunications Act. As our predecessor committee has noted, a penalty which is described as 'civil' under domestic law may nonetheless be classified as ‘criminal’ for the purposes of human rights law because of its purpose, character or severity. Given that these civil penalty provisions appear in a regulatory context, it is arguable that the penalties are not 'criminal' in nature. Although the penalties are substantial, it may be considered that they are not excessive in terms of a business and in view of the national interests that are being protected.


Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment Bill 2013

Portfolio: Prime Minister
Introduced: House of Representatives, 12 November 2013

1.56      This bill proposes to change the title of the War Precautions Act Repeal Act 1920 to the ‘Protection of Word ‘Anzac’ Act 1920’.

1.57      The bill is accompanied by a statement of compatibility that states that it does not engage any human rights.

1.58      The committee considers that the bill does not appear to give rise to human rights concerns.

Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page