WARNING:
This Digest was prepared for debate. It reflects the legislation as
introduced and does not canvass subsequent amendments. This Digest
does not have any official legal status. Other sources should be
consulted to determine the subsequent official status of the
Bill.
CONTENTS
Passage History
Purpose
Background
Financial implications
Main Provisions
Concluding Comments
Endnotes
Contact Officer & Copyright Details
Passage History
Inspector of Transport Security
(Consequential Provisions) Bill 2006
Date introduced: 18 October 2006
House: House of
Representatives
Portfolio: Transport and Regional Services
Commencement: The formal provisions of both the Inspector of
Transport Security Bill 2006 (clauses 1 and 2) and the Inspector of
Transport Security (Consequential Provisions) Bill 2006 (clauses 1
to 3) commence on Royal Assent. The substantive provisions of the
Inspector of Transport Security Bill (clauses 3 to 93) commence
upon Proclamation or, if Proclamation does not occur within 6
months from Royal Assent, on the day after six months from Royal
Assent. The operative schedule of the Inspector of Transport
Security (Consequential Provisions) Bill 2006 will commence at the
same time as the substantive provisions of the other Act.
The proposed legislation for an Inspector of Transport Security
is made up of two Bills: the Inspector of Transport Security Bill
2006 (the Principal Bill ) and the Inspector of Transport Security
(Consequential Provisions) Bill 2006 (the Consequential Bill ).
The purpose of the Principal Bill is to:
provide a framework for independent inquiry and recommendations
in relation to transport security matters and offshore security
matters, to contribute to the improvement of transport security and
the security of offshore facilities.(1)
The purpose of the Consequential Bill is to amend the
Freedom of Information Act 1982 to exempt
information gathered in the course of an inquiry by the Inspector
of Transport Security.
On 4 December 2003 the Government responded to the Secretaries
Committee on National Security(2) review of aviation
security by announcing a number of measures, including that an
independent Inspector of Transport Security would be appointed to
investigate major transport security incidents.(3) It
would appear that the Committee s report and recommendations are
not publicly available, presumably because the Committee advises
the National Security Committee of Cabinet.
On 11 May 2004 the Government announced its intention to
appropriate money for the position of Inspector of Transport
Security.(4) The relevant Budget Paper states:
The Government will provide $1.6 million over four years to
support the establishment within the Department of Transport and
Regional Services of an Inspector of Transport Security. The
Inspector will investigate major incidents and systemic transport
security weaknesses to ensure security vulnerabilities are
identified and addressed.(5)
In a Budget media release the then Minister for Transport and
Regional Services, the Hon. John Anderson, MP, explained:
The [Inspector of Transport Security (ITS)] will investigate
major security incidents in the aviation and maritime sectors, and
will be able to recommend changes to improve Australia s transport
security systems The ITS will also be able to investigate security
incidents involving other modes of transport with the agreement of
the responsible state or territory government.(6)
In November 2004 the Government appointed Mr Mick Palmer as the
Inspector of Transport Security on a part-time basis.(7)
The appointment was not announced at the time.(8) In
early February 2005 Mr Palmer stood aside in order to conduct the
inquiry into the circumstances of the immigration detention of
Cornelia Rau. Mr Palmer s action of temporarily standing down as
Inspector was not publicly announced at the time.(9) Mr
Palmer spent seven months working on the Cornelia Rau
inquiry.(10) Mr Bill Ellis was appointed as Inspector
while Mr Palmer worked on the Rau inquiry.(11)
On 31 October 2005 Mr Palmer told the Senate Rural and Regional
Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee hearing supplementary
Budget Estimates that:
I am paid a retainer per annum plus a daily rate [of $2,000 per
day](12) for the days that I work, at the direction of
the [M]inister. There was a general direction initially from
Minister Anderson with regard to the initial meet and greet and
promotional work. It was obviously important to stakeholders to
gain an understanding of what was intended by the Inspector of
Transport Security arrangements (13)
On 23 May 2005 the Government announced that in light of Mr
Palmer s initial consultations it would put in place legislation to
support the role, particularly in the protection of information for
no blame inquiries. (14)
For the financial year 2005/06 to the end of April 2006 Mr
Palmer worked in the role of Inspector of Transport Security for 52
days.(15) Mr Palmer s current appointment as the
Inspector of Transport Security is until 31 December
2006.(16)
On 31 October 2005 Mr Palmer told
the Senate Committee that in November 2004 and January 2005 he met
with key stakeholders in Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne and
Hobart.(17) He stated:
They were stakeholders from aviation and maritime security, both
private industry and government. As a result of their concerns,
there was strong support for the role of ITS in principle and the
functionality of ITS but concern over the lack of guaranteed
protection. There was also concern, including from some of the
private industry stakeholders, that I may not have the wherewithal
to demand entry and demand access to documentation, for example, in
situations where it might be necessary. That led me to go back to
the government and to the department to suggest that there was a
need for legislation to enable the function to roll
properly.(18)
In introducing the Bill, the Transport Minister, the Hon. Mark
Vaile, MP, stated:
In preparing this [B]ill extensive consultation has been
undertaken with industry stakeholders and state and territory
governments. Issues that have arisen during the consultation
process have been, wherever possible, taken into account. The
government has worked hard to address concerns
raised.(19)
However, the Explanatory Memorandum contains no details of the
consultations.
The ALP is in favour of an independent Inspector of Transport
Security. When the Government first announced its policy commitment
in early December 2003, the ALP responded that it is a policy that
should have been put in place immediately after 11 September 2001
rather than leaving the investigation of aviation security breaches
to the Department of Transport and Regional
Services.(20) Since that time the ALP has been critical
of the delay in introducing legislation to give the Inspector
statutory powers and the fact that Mr Palmer has been appointed on
a part time basis.(21)
The Australian Democrats also expressed concern that the
position of Inspector of Transport Security was vacant
(22) while Mr Palmer inquired into immigration
detention.(23)
The Greens and Family First do not appear to have articulated
their policy positions on this issue.(24)
A consequence of a failure to pass the Principal Bill will be
that the Inspector will continue to have no statutory power to
investigate a major transport security incident. A year ago Mr
Palmer told the Senate Committee that such an investigation:
would and could only proceed on the basis of cooperation and
goodwill from each of the stakeholders. So I would have common-law
powers of entry in the absence of specific legislation. [Which
means, b]y invitation.(25)
Probably the major feature of the
Bill compared to the current situation is the various protections
attaching to information given to, or otherwise collected by, the
Inspector pursuant to inquiries into transport security incidents.
Without such protection, persons may be more reluctant to provide
information and thus hamper the effectiveness of the Inspector s
operations. Certainly the Bill contains little, if anything, in the
way of coercive powers.
Neither the Principal Bill nor the Consequential Bill will have
a financial impact.(26)
The main provisions of each Bill are explained thematically
rather than in numerical order.
The Minister may appoint a person as the Inspector (proposed
new subclause 25(1)) for periods of up to five
years at a time (proposed new subclause
25(2)). The Inspector may be appointed on a part-time
basis (proposed new subclause 25(3)).
Proposed new clause 26 outlines the conduct
expected of the Inspector. At least some of them respect and
courtesy , upholds the good reputation of Australia appear to be
drawn from the Public Service Act 1999 and presumably
reflect the sensitivity of the position. Failure to comply with
new clause 26 is a ground upon
which the Minister may terminate the appointment (proposed
new paragraph 31(2)(c)).
The role of the Inspector is to inquire into transport security
matters(27) and offshore security matters(28)
in accordance with directions given by the Minister and to prepare
reports in relation to those inquiries (proposed new clause
32). Proposed new subclause
10(2) stipulates that the Inspector may only
inquire into such matters that is, the Inspector cannot initiate
his or her own inquiries.
Proposed new clause 33 provides that the
Inspector may only use his or her powers for the purpose of
carrying out the Inspector s functions (detailed above in proposed
new clause 32) or for other
purposes permitted by the Act.
The Bill is based on a no-blame principle.(29)
Accordingly, it is not an object of the Bill nor by extension an
inquiry to apportion blame in relation to a matter or to provide
the means to determine the liability of a person in relation to a
matter (proposed new subclauses 9(3)(a) and
(b)).
To understand the types of inquiry envisaged by the Principal
Bill it is helpful to set out in full the meaning of transport
security matter .
Proposed new clause 12 provides:
A transport security
matter is:
(a) an incident occurring in the course of
transport, or involving a transport vehicle, that:
(i) the Minister believes on reasonable grounds to
be a major incident; and
(ii) demonstrates, or may demonstrate, a problem
with the security of transport; or
(b) a state of affairs that suggests, or may
suggest, a systemic failure or weakness in the way in which the
security of transport is regulated; or
(c) any other occurrence, circumstance, state of
affairs or matter that:
(i) the Minister believes on reasonable grounds to
be significant; and
(ii) has, or may have, implications for the
security of transport.
A transport vehicle means an aircraft, ship, rail vehicle or
road vehicle (proposed new clause
3).
An offshore security matter is defined in similar terms to a
transport security matter except that it is an incident occurring
on, around or in relation to a security regulated offshore facility
and so on (proposed new clause 13). A security
regulated offshore facility has the same meaning as in the
Maritime Transport and Offshore Facilities Security Act
2003 (proposed new clause 3). In effect this
means offshore oil and gas production rigs and associated
infrastructure that have been designated in the
Gazette.(30)
Proposed new clause 23 outlines the
geographical reach of inquiry, namely the necessary links that the
transport security matter or the offshore security matter must have
with Australia.
Proposed new clause 7 outlines the Bill s
relationship with other laws. The Explanatory Memorandum
states:
This clause makes it clear that the Bill is not
intended to cover the field in relation to inquiries into transport
security.
The Bill does not prevent a State or Territory
from conducting its own inquiries into transport security matters
under the laws of that jurisdiction so long as the law of the State
or Territory is not directly inconsistent with this
Bill.(31)
The Minister will be empowered to direct the Inspector to
inquire into a transport security matter or an offshore security
matter (proposed new subclause 11(1)). This type
of direction from the Minister is not a legislative instrument
(proposed new subclause 11(4)). This means that it
is exempt from the provisions of the Legislative Instruments
Act 2003 and essentially is not subject to Parliamentary
oversight.
Proposed new clauses 14 18 set out the
circumstances in which the Minister may direct the Inspector to
inquire into transport security matters that involve air transport,
maritime transport, rail transport, road transport and security
regulated offshore facilities. These circumstances reflect the
Commonwealth s constitutional limitations in regulating transport
as such regulation has traditionally been the domain of the States.
However, it is probable that the combination of the various
constitutional powers (notably those regarding interstate or
overseas trade or commerce, corporations, and external affairs) are
likely to provide sufficient scope to allow the Minister to direct
an inquiry be undertaken.
However, if a prospective inquiry involves surface transport
aspects,(32) the Minister cannot direct an inquiry into
such aspects unless the Minister of the State or Territory in which
the transport security aspect arose consents to the scope of the
inquiry (proposed new subclause 22(1)).
Further, before giving an inquiry direction to the Inspector,
the Minister must consult with all other Commonwealth Ministers
whose areas of responsibility might be affected by the inquiry
(proposed new subclause 20(1)). An objection from
the Defence Minister about the proposed inquiry into a defence
aspect(33) of a transport security matter or an offshore
security matter will prevent the Minister from directing the
Inspector to inquire into that defence aspect (proposed new
subclause 21(1)).
Finally, in terms of conducting the inquiry, one of the objects
of the Act states the Inspector is not to interfere with the
investigations of another government agency, or a coronial inquiry
into a matter (proposed new subclause 9(2)).
The Inspector is empowered to:
- request information (proposed new Part 5, Division
1), and
- enter and search premises and board and search transport
vehicles (proposed new Part 5, Division
2).
These powers are dealt with in turn.
Generally
Where the inspector believes information or documents (but not
OBR information(34) or restricted
information(35) under section 62 of the Transport
Safety Investigation Act 2003) to be relevant to the inquiry
the Inspector is empowered to request the information or documents
from:
- persons generally (proposed new clause 35),
and
- government agencies (proposed new clause
36).
The person or government agency may comply with the request
despite any other law (proposed new subclauses 35(4) and
36(3)). There is no explicit obligation to tell persons
that they may refuse the request, though presumably this would
occur in the normal course of work.
Protection of on board recordings and
restricted information
Sections 48-63 of the Transport Safety Investigation Act
2003 contain complex provisions setting out limited
circumstances in which on-board recording (OBR) information and
restricted information can be disclosed or otherwise made available
to various parties. (36) The Bills Digest to that Act
noted that:
According to the explanatory memorandum, it is
arguable that the release of CVR [(cockpit voice recording)]
information on occasion into the courts and the public domain has
in fact had a prejudicial effect on transport safety
(37)
Proposed new subclause 37(1) provides that the
Inspector may request the Executive Director of the Transport
Safety Investigation ( the Executive Director ) to disclose OBR
information or restricted information to him or her where the
Inspector believes that information to be relevant to the Inspector
s inquiry. The Executive Director may comply with the request if he
or she considers that the public interest in disclosing the
information to the Inspector outweighs any adverse effect that the
disclosure may have on current or future investigations under the
Transport Safety Information Act 2003 (proposed
new subclause 37(2)).
The Inspector s powers in relation to entering and searching
premises are detailed in proposed new
clause 45. Premises is defined to include a
security regulated offshore facility.(38) Proposed
new clause 46 details the Inspector s powers in
relation to boarding and searching a transport
vehicle.
In both cases the Inspector or other person authorised to
enter/board and search pursuant to the proposed Act must identify
himself or herself to the controller of the premises or vehicle
(proposed new subclause 41(1)) and the controller
must consent to the access (proposed new clauses 43 and
44). In requesting consent, the Inspector must tell the
controller that they can refuse it, or withdraw it at any time.
Where, during the course of a search, electronic equipment is
operated in order to access documents/records and the equipment is
damaged then the Commonwealth may have to pay compensation
(proposed new clause 47).
Proposed new subclause 83(1) provides that the
States and Territories may confer powers and functions on the
Inspector.
Proposed new clause 50
outlines the provisions concerning reports (interim, draft and
final).
Upon completion of an inquiry the Inspector must give a final
written report to the Minister setting out the Inspector s
conclusions and recommendations (proposed new subclauses
59(1) and (3)). As the Explanatory Memorandum for the
Principal Bill notes The Inspector will generally not have the
capacity or requirement to publish or otherwise distribute the
outcomes of inquiries. (39)
The Minister may table the final report (or a part of it) in
Parliament if the Minister considers that it is, on balance, in the
public interest to do so (proposed new subclause
64(1)). The Explanatory Memorandum for the Principal Bill
notes that this is due to the no blame nature of the
scheme.(40)
Proposed new subclauses 64(2) (5) prevent the
Minister from tabling certain information in the final report
unless the requirements in those subclauses have been satisfied (eg
the OBR or CVR information(41) is already publicly
available, the Transport Minister or the State or Territory in
which a surface transport aspect of a transport security matter
occurred consents to the tabling of that information and so
on).
The only proceedings in which a final report will be admissible
are coronial inquiries (proposed new clause
65).
The Second Reading Speech for the Principal Bill notes:
This Bill balances two competing policy interests.
One is to establish a no-blame legislative framework to encourage
the provision of information to the Inspector that will contribute
to improving transport security. The second is to ensure that,
where information acquired by the Inspector in the conduct of an
inquiry indicates that a serious offence is imminent, the
legislation provides that the Inspector may disclose this
information to the appropriate law enforcement
bodies.(42)
These two policy interests are reflected in the confidentiality
regime and some exceptions to it.
Protected information is defined in proposed new clause
66. The Explanatory Memorandum to the Principal Bill
explains:
In general terms, information generated or
obtained in the course of an inquiry is considered protected
information unless it is publicly available or in the open access
period prescribed in the Archives Act 1983
Protected information also excludes OBR
information and CVR information, which are protected under the
Transport Safety Investigation Act 2003 and the Civil
Aviation Act 1988 respectively. The exclusion of such
information from the definition of protected information is
intended to remove the overlap between the confidentiality regimes
under the aforementioned legislation and the new regime created by
Part 7 of this Bill.
Restricted information given to the Inspector by
the Executive Director of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau is
also excluded from the definition of protected information . Such
information is subject to separate (but substantially similar)
protections under clause 73.(43)
[Emphasis added]
Proposed new subclause 67(1) makes it a
criminal offence for a person who has obtained or generated
protected information in the course of an inquiry from copying,
recording, using or disclosing it. The maximum penalty is
imprisonment for 2 years. Proposed new subclause
67(2) outlines the circumstances in which new
subclause 67(1) will not apply, including where the
information is permitted to be copied, recorded, used or disclosed
by the proposed Act.
The Explanatory Memorandum explains that:
Restrictions on the use and disclosure of
protected information reinforce the notion that information
gathered or generated in the course of an inquiry under this Bill
should not be used for other purposes such as judicial proceedings
(particularly criminal proceedings).(44)
There are some situations in which the Inspector may disclose
protected information (see proposed new clauses 68, 69 and
70).
Proposed new subclause 68(1) provides that the
Inspector may disclose protected information to a government agency
where the Inspector has reasonable grounds that a serious offence
is imminent and the information may be relevant to the prevention
of the offence. The receiving government agency may only deal with
the protected information for the purpose of preventing the
imminent serious offence (proposed new subclause
68(2)). Contravention of subclause
68(2) is a criminal offence punishable by a maximum
penalty of imprisonment of not more than 2 years.
Proposed new Part 8 provides that the Inspector
can, for the purposes of this proposed Act, copy, make a record of,
use and disclose OBR information, CVR information and restricted
information given to the Inspector by the Executive Director of the
Transport Safety Investigation despite the provisions of the
Transport Safety Investigation Act, the Civil Aviation Act and any
other law (propose new clause 72).
Proposed new subclause 77(1) empowers the
Inspector to apply to an eligible Judge(45) or nominated
AAT member(46) for an order allowing the Inspector to
disclose OBR information, CVR information, or restricted
information to another government agency if the Inspector suspects
on reasonable grounds that a serious offence is imminent and the
information may be relevant to the prevention of the offence.
Proposed new clause 38 provides protection from
liability (including civil liability and disciplinary action) for a
person who is requested to provide information under
proposed new Part 5, Division 1 (the Inspector s
powers relating to information and documents) and who does so in
the honest and reasonable belief that the request is permitted
under the Division.
There is a similar provision in relation to a person who
volunteers information or documents that they consider to
be relevant so long as in doing so the person does not commit an
offence under the Transport Safety Investigation Act or
the Civil Aviation Act (proposed new clause
48).
Proposed new clause 85:
protects the Minister, the Inspector (or
delegates) and other persons from legal (but not disciplinary)
proceedings in the event of failure to take specific actions in
exercising powers or performing functions contained in the Bill or
in the course of doing anything permitted by this
Bill.(47)
Under proposed new clause
82, the Inspector can delegate, in writing, any of his or
her powers to quite junior Australian Public Service staff - to
Executive Level 1 (often known as an Assistant Director), as well
as private sector contractors. In the latter case, these
contractors must satisfy specific criteria set out in regulations.
Proposed new clause 82 also allows the Executive
Director of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau to delegate
their powers under the Bill down to a APS Executive Level 1
officer. There is no explicit provision that persons exercising
delegated powers are subject to the direction of the Inspector or
the Executive Director.
The Explanatory Memorandum for this Bill states that:
the Bill protects the information generated or
gathered in the course of inquiries from being released under an
FOI claim and supports the other confidentiality provisions in the
Inspector of Transport Security Bill 2006.(48)
The Bill does this by amending Schedule 3 of the Freedom of
Information Act 1982 (the FOI Act), which concerns secrecy
provisions. The Bill inserts the following references to the
proposed Inspector of Transport Security Act 2006 into
Schedule 3:
- Subsection 35(7) the criminal offence provision for
unauthorised dealing with information requested from persons
generally
- Subsection 36(7) the criminal offence provision for
unauthorised dealing with information requested from government
agencies
- Subsection 37(8) the criminal offence provision for
unauthorised dealing with restricted information given to the
Inspector by the Executive Director of Transport Safety
Investigation
- Subsection 49(2) the criminal offence provision for
unauthorised dealing with information generated in the course of an
inquiry
- Subsection 56(1) the criminal offence provision for
unauthorised dealing with a draft report of the Inspector
- Subsection 60(5) the criminal offence provision for
unauthorised dealing with a final report of the Inspector
- Subsection 63(3)
- disclosure by the Minister of a final report containing OBR
information or CVR information which is not publicly available or
in circumstances where it need not have been given to a
Commonwealth Minister or a Minister of a State or Territory or
- disclosure by the Minister of a part of a final report that
contains restricted information given by the Executive Director of
Transport Safety Investigation which is not publicly available or
in circumstances where it need not have been given to a
Commonwealth Minister or a Minister of a State or Territory
- Subsection 63(4) the criminal offence provision for
unauthorised dealing with a final report that contains OBR
information or CVR information
- Subsection 63(5) the criminal offence provision for
unauthorised dealing with a final report that contains restricted
information given by the Executive Director of Transport Safety
Investigation
- Subsection 67(1) the criminal offence provision for
unauthorised dealing with protected information
- Paragraph 67(7)(a) a court or a coroner cannot require a person
to disclose protected information that the person is prohibited
from disclosing
- Subsection 68(2) the criminal offence provision for
unauthorised dealing by a government agency of protected
information obtained from the Inspector in relation to an imminent
serious offence
- Subsection 69(2) unauthorised dealing by a government agency of
protected information obtained from the Inspector where the
Inspector does not consider it to be directly relevant to an
inquiry but it may be relevant to the prevention or prosecution of
an offence
- Subsection 75(2) the criminal offence provision for
unauthorised dealing of restricted information given to the
Inspector by the Executive Director under subsection 37(2)
- Paragraph 75(8)(a) a court or a coroner cannot require a person
to disclose restricted information that the person is prohibited
from disclosing, and
- Subsection 77(9) unauthorised dealing by a government agency of
information disclosed on the order of an eligible Judge or AAT
member.
Accordingly, documents that have been disclosed in breach of
these provisions will be exempt documents (subsection 38(1) of the
FOI Act) and people will not have a legally enforceable right to
obtain access to these documents under the FOI Act (subsection
11(1) of the FOI Act).
Concluding
comments
The provisions of both the Principal Bill and the Consequential
Bill do not appear to be particularly controversial. Rather, there
has been controversy about the fact that the Inspector was
appointed almost two years ago yet the legislation that would
empower the Inspector to undertake investigations has only recently
been introduced in the Parliament. In late November 2005 Senator
Kerry O Brien, the Shadow Minister for Transport, concluded that
information provided to a Senate Committee, of which he had been a
member, suggested that to date [the position of Inspector of
Transport Security] has been simply an expensive meet and greet
exercise. (49)
As a final comment, it is worth noting that
proposed new clause 83 of the Bill enables States
and Territories to confer powers and functions on the Inspector.
The drafting of that clause appears to be designed to avoid the
constitutional problems in such schemes arising from the decision
of the High Court in R v Hughes
(2000).(50) The constitutional issues involved in such
schemes are discussed in the Bills Digest for the Trade Practices
Amendment (Australian Energy Market) Bill 2004.(51)
- Explanatory Memorandum, Inspector of Transport Security Bill
2006, p. 2.
- This Committee is chaired by the Secretary of the Department of
the Prime Minister and Cabinet and consists of Secretaries of other
relevant Commonwealth Departments. The Committee advises the
National Security Committee of Cabinet. National Counter-Terrorism
Committee, National Counter-Terrorism Plan, June 2003, p.
3.
- J. Anderson (Deputy Prime Minister; Minister for Transport and
Regional Services), Enhanced Aviation Security Package
Announced, media release, Parliament House, Canberra, 4
December 2003.
- Budget Measures 2004-05, 2004-05 Budget Paper No. 2,
2004, p. 98; J. Anderson (Deputy Prime Minister; Leader of the
Nationals; Minister for Transport and Regional Services),
Strengthening Australia s Transport Security, Budget media
release, Parliament House, Canberra, 11 May 2004.
- ibid. (Budget Measures).
- J. Anderson, Strengthening Australia s Transport
Security, op. cit.
- J. Anderson (Deputy Prime Minister; Leader of the Nationals;
Minister for Transport and Regional Services), Inspector of
Transport Security, media release, Parliament House, Canberra,
23 May 2005.
- K. Beazley, Grievance Debate: National Security , House of
Representatives, Debates, 23 May 2005, p. 64. A search of
the Parliamentary Library s databases on ParlInfo did not reveal
any Government announcement.
- ibid.
- K. Beazley (Leader of the Opposition), A Full-Time
Inspector of Transport Security, media release, Sydney, 12
August 2006.
- S. Rochfort, Questions over flurry of airport security reviews:
Concerns raised as fifth inquiry imminent , The Sydney Morning
Herald, 29 July 2005, p. 6.
- M. Palmer, Evidence to Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and
Transport Legislation Committee, Parliament of Australia, Canberra,
31 October 2005, p. 88.
- ibid., p. 87.
- J. Anderson, Inspector of Transport Security, op.
cit.
- K. Beazley, A Full-Time Inspector of Transport
Security, op. cit.
- ibid.
- M. Palmer, Evidence to Senate, op. cit., p. 87.
- ibid., p. 92.
- House of Representatives, Debates, 18 October 2006, p.
6.
- M. Ferguson (Shadow Minister for Urban and Regional
Development; Shadow Minister for Transport and Infrastructure),
Aviation Security Package Too Little Too Late, media
release, Parliament House, Canberra, 4 December 2003.
- K. Beazley, A Full-Time Inspector of Transport
Security, op. cit.; A. Bevis (Shadow Minister for Homeland
Security, Aviation and Transport Security), Transport Security
Like a Snail on Sleeping Pills, media release, Parliament
House, Canberra, 18 October 2006.
- It would appear that Mr Ellis appointment as Inspector was not
publicly announced at the time.
- L. Allison (Leader of the Australian Democrats), Democrats
Call for Govt to Fix Baggage Handling & Release Report,
media release, Parliament House, Canberra, 31 May 2005.
- A search of the Parliamentary Library s databases on ParlInfo
did not reveal any press releases by these parties.
- M. Palmer, Evidence to Senate, op. cit., p. 94.
- Explanatory Memorandum, Inspector of Transport Security op.
cit., p. 4.
- Defined in proposed new clause 12 of the
Principal Bill.
- Defined in proposed new clause 13 of the
Principal Bill.
- Explanatory Memorandum, Inspector of Transport Security op.
cit., p. 7.
- Subsection 17B(1) of the Maritime Transport and Offshore
Facilities Security Act 2003.
- Explanatory Memorandum, Inspector of Transport Security op.
cit., p. 6.
- Defined in proposed new subclause 22(2) of the
Principal Bill.
- Defined in proposed new subclause 21(2) of the
Principal Bill.
- OBR is short for on-board recording. The term OBR information
is defined in proposed new clause 3 of the
Principal Bill as having the same meaning as in the Transport
Safety Investigation Act 2003. That is, OBR information is an
OBR, part of an OBR, a copy or transcript of any OBR or information
obtained from any OBR (section 3 of the Transport Safety
Investigation Act).
- Defined in section 3 of the Transport Safety Investigation
Act 2003. In sum, it is statements, medical or private
information and other communications such as records of analysis of
information obtained in investigations but not OBR
information.
- Matthew L. James and Angus Martyn, Transport Safety
Investigation Bill 2002 , Bills Digest, no. 27,
Parliamentary Library, Canberra, 2002 03.
- ibid.
- Proposed new clause 3 of the Principal
Bill.
- Explanatory Memorandum, Inspector of Transport Security op.
cit., p. 3.
- ibid., p. 27.
- CVR is short for cockpit voice recording. The term CVR
information is defined in proposed new clause 3 of
the Principal Bill as having the same meaning as in Part IIIB of
the Civil Aviation Act 1988. That is, CVR information is a
CVR, part of a CVR, a copy or transcript of any CVR or any
information obtained from any CVR (section 32AN of the Civil
Aviation Act).
- Second Reading Speech, Inspector of Transport Security Bill
2006.
- Explanatory Memorandum, Inspector of Transport Security op.
cit., p. 27 28.
- ibid., p. 28.
- Proposed new clause 78 of the Principal Bill
provides that an eligible Judge is a person who is a Judge of a
Federal court who has given written consent to be nominated by the
Attorney-General as an eligible Judge for the purpose of this
proposed Act and whom the Attorney-General has declared in writing
to be an eligible Judge.
- Proposed new clause 79 of the Principal Bill
provides that a nominated AAT member is a person who is the
President, a Deputy President or senior member (currently enrolled
as a legal practitioner in Australia and who has been so enrolled
for 5 or more years) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal who the
Attorney-General has nominated by writing to make orders under
proposed new subclause
77(7).
- Explanatory Memorandum, Inspector of Transport Security op.
cit., p. 36.
- Explanatory Memorandum, Inspector of Transport Security
(Consequential Provisions) Bill 2006, p. 2.
- K. O Brien (Shadow Minister for Transport), Aviation Security
and its impact on the aviation industry , paper presented to the
Asia Pacific Airport and Aviation Security Summit, 28 November
2005, p. 5.
- (2000) 202 CLR 535.
- Peter Prince, Trade Practices Amendment (Australian Energy
Market) Bill 2004, Bills Digest, no. 172, Parliamentary
Library, Canberra, 2003 04.
Justine Clarke
1 November 2006
Bills Digest Service
Parliamentary Library
This paper has been prepared to support the work of the
Australian Parliament using information available at the time of
production. The views expressed do not reflect an official position
of the Parliamentary Library, nor do they constitute professional
legal opinion.
Staff are available to discuss the paper's
contents with Senators and Members and their staff but not with
members of the public.
ISSN 1328-8091
© Commonwealth of Australia 2006
Except to the extent of the uses permitted under the
Copyright Act 1968, no part of this publication may be
reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, including
information storage and retrieval systems, without the prior
written consent of the Parliamentary Library, other than by members
of the Australian Parliament in the course of their official
duties.
Published by the Parliamentary Library, 2006.
Back to top