PREFACE
Background to the reference
On 4 December 1996, the Productivity Commission Bill 1996 was introduced
in the House of Representatives. [1] In general terms, the Bill proposed to establish
the Productivity Commission by merging the functions of the Industry Commission,
the Economic Planning Advisory Commission and the Bureau of Industry Economics.
On 13 February 1997, the Bill was introduced into the Senate. On 3 September
1997, the Bill was negatived in the Senate at the third reading stage.
However, before this occurred, a number of amendments were proposed to
the penalty provisions included in the Bill. In general terms, these amendments
proposed to replace the penalty of imprisonment with a fine. [2]
After debate, the Senate agreed to refer the penalty provisions in the
Bill to the Senate Scrutiny of Bills Committee for inquiry and report
by 29 October 1997. [3]
Conduct of the inquiry
On 30 September 1997, the Committee held a public hearing on the reference
at which it took evidence from representatives of the Australian Institute
of Criminology and the Commonwealth Attorney-General's Department. Officers
of both organisations undertook jointly to prepare a paper to address
concerns expressed by the Committee, and provide some general background
on the philosophy of judicial punishment. To enable the preparation of
this paper, the Committee sought and was granted an extension of time
until 20 November 1997 to report. [4]
On 30 October 1997, the Bill was restored to the Notice Paper, and listed
for debate on 10 November 1997. Given the likelihood of debate taking
place on the Bill before the Committee had had time to prepare its report,
on 17 November 1997 the Committee tabled an interim report and appended
to it the joint Briefing Paper referred to above. [5]
Interim report
The Committee concluded its Interim Report by noting that:
In the light of the issues raised by the paper, the committee finds that
determining the appropriate penalties for these kinds of offences requires
a longer and more thorough inquiry and will be seeking the approval of
the Senate to do so. [6]
On 19 November 1997, the Committee sought, and was granted, a further
extension of time until the last Tuesday of the winter sittings in 1998
to conduct its inquiry. In addition, the inquiry's terms of reference
were amended to require the Committee to inquire into and report on “the
appropriate basis for penalty provisions in legislation comparable to
the Productivity Commission Bill 1996”. [7]
On 30 March 1998, the Senate resumed debate on the Bill and amended a
number of its provisions. The penalty provisions were passed unamended.
The Bill was then read a third time and, on 1 April 1998, the House of
Representatives agreed to the Bill as amended by the Senate. [8]
Structure of this report
The Committee's report is set out in the following way: Chapter 1 deals
with the offence and penalty provisions in the Productivity Commission
Bill. Chapter 2 examines the penalty provisions for similar offences in
other Commonwealth legislation. Chapter 3 discusses the sentencing principles
which govern the imposition of penalties. Chapter 4 expresses the Committee's
conclusions and recommendations.
Acknowledgment
The Committee would like to acknowledge the assistance provided by the
Attorney-General's Department and the Australian Institute of Criminology,
and record its appreciation for that assistance.
Senator Barney Cooney
Chairman
Footnotes
[1] House of Representatives, Votes and Proceedings,
No 56, 4 December 1996, p 974.
[2] See, for example, Senate, Hansard,
3 September 1997, pp 6271-2 (Senator the Hon N Sherry).
[3] Journals of the Senate, No 122, 3
September 1997, p 2419.
[4] Journals of the Senate, No 137, 28
October 1997, p 2737.
[5] Journals of the Senate, No 142, 17
November 1997, p 2851.
[6] Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny
of Bills, Sixteenth Report of 1997, Interim Report on the Penalty Provisions
of the Productivity Commission Bill 1996, (13 November 1997), p 333.
[7] Journals of the Senate, No 144, 19
November 1997, p 2923.
[8] House of Representatives, Votes and Proceedings,
No 152, 1 April 1998, p 2900.