• Home
• Skip to content

You are here:

• Home »
• Publications »
  • Annual Reports »
    • Annual Report 2006-07 »
      • Annual Report 2006-07 Part 2 - Performance Outcomes 2

Publications

• Publications by Date
• Publications by Topic
• Publications by Team
• Publications by A to Z
• Annual Reports
• Annual Report 2007-08
• Annual Report 2006-07
• Annual Report 2005-06
• Annual Report 2004-05
• Annual Report 2003-04
• Annual Report 2002-03
• Annual Report 2001-02
• Annual Report 2000-01
• Annual Report 1999-00
• Annual Report 1998-99
• Annual Report 1997-98
• Annual Report 1996-97
• Annual Report 1995-96
• Budgets
• Regulatory Plans
• Australian Government responses to the Clarke Inquiry and other counter-terrorism reviews - December 2008

Annual Report 2006-07 Part 2 - Performance Outcomes 2

6. Outcome 2: Coordinated federal criminal justice, security and emergency management activity, for a safer Australia
   • Output 2.1—Policy advice on, and program administration and regulatory activities associated with, the Commonwealth’s domestic and international responsibilities for criminal justice and crime prevention; and meeting Australia’s obligations for extradition and mutual assistance
   • Output 2.2—National leadership and coordination of legal and policy advice on national security and counter-terrorism laws and critical infrastructure protection
   • Output 2.3—Provide national leadership in the development of emergency management measures to reduce risk to communities and manage the consequences of disasters
   • Output 2.4—Development and promotion of protective security policy advice and common standards and practices; the coordination of protective security services, including counter-terrorism and dignitary protection; the provision of security for special events; the development of counter-terrorism capabilities; and the coordination of national security crises and information through the Watch Office and National Security Hotline

Outcome 2

Coordinated federal criminal justice, security and emergency management activity, for a safer Australia

Overview

The Attorney-General’s Department contributes to the achievement of Outcome 2 by providing policy advice and operational coordination and services—in the areas of national security (including counter-terrorism and security law), telecommunications interception, emergency management, criminal justice, crime prevention, critical infrastructure protection and protective security—and by undertaking a range of activities to meet obligations and responsibilities in international and domestic circumstances.

The Department administers payments under the National Community Crime Prevention Programme, the National Counter-Terrorism Committee and the National Emergency Volunteers Support Fund as well as payments for Asia–Pacific Economic Cooperation security arrangements. These and other administered items are presented later in this section.

The Department works in consultation and cooperation with many other organisations to achieve Outcome 2. These include government agencies (Australian, State and Territory) as well as non-government and foreign institutions, and include advisory bodies, law enforcement agencies, emergency services and commercial businesses, and local government and community sector bodies. In addition to maintaining these interrelationships with other organisations, the Department operates in a complex environment where international as well as domestic events or trends can play a significant role.

During 2006–07, we made significant and substantial progress towards achieving Outcome 2, with many of our contributions receiving positive comments from the Attorney-General, the Minister for Justice and Customs and a variety of stakeholders.

Performance reports for each output contributing to Outcome 2 are presented later in this section.

Resource summary

* Full-year budget, including additional estimates.

* Full-year budget, including additional estimates.

Our People

Achieving a just and secure society

Wayne Colless, Identity Security Branch.

When the Council of Australian Governments signed up to the National Identity Security Strategy (NISS) Intergovernmental Agreement in April 2007, members of the Identity Security Branch celebrated the achievement.

The Branch had been working on the NISS since 2005, when the Australian Government announced the development and implementation of an identity security strategy to combat the misuse of stolen or assumed identities in the provision of government services.

Under the NISS framework, a range of operational and targeted initiatives are being undertaken by federal, State and Territory agencies to strengthen identity security, including at the Australian border, in commerce and banking, and online.

The importance of combating identity theft and fraud was highlighted after the September 11 terrorist attacks. After the attacks, investigators discovered that the 19 terrorists had used over 350 false names to plan and execute the attacks. Closer to home, the Bali bombers used false identification documents to operate bank accounts, transport bomb-making materials and avoid detection.

Wayne Colless, an advisor in the Identity Security Branch, has seen every identity fraud trick in the book. Before joining the Attorney-General’s Department, Wayne had spent 19 years as a technical fraud analyst at Centrelink. He exposed customers who had manufactured identities or stolen the identities of real people, and even fellow employees who had created fake identities to obtain fraudulent welfare payments.

‘During the time I worked in identity fraud detection, I came to appreciate that the problem was growing and the financial costs were enormous,’ Wayne said. ‘But I also saw the human cost of identity fraud.’

‘For many victims whose identities are stolen, the emotional stress often takes a heavier toll than the financial cost. And although we all recognise the great costs imposed upon the victims, many people forget that the families of the perpetrators also suffer after these cases are detected.’

A key component of the Strategy is the development of a national Document Verification Service. A prototype service operated between February and June 2006, and a full national system will be rolled out from late 2007. This will be a high priority for the project team into the future.

‘I really wanted to be part of this project because I realised that it would make a real difference. I thought I had something to offer,’ Wayne explained. ‘In my last job I could see that more could be done to improve government efficiency and reduce the costs—financial and emotional—that are products of identity misuse.’

‘Identity fraud is a human story with a human toll,’ Wayne said. ‘I’ve seen that toll first hand, so I’m thrilled to be part of a project that will reduce the opportunities for identity theft and protect Australians.’

Output 2.1

Policy advice on, and program administration and regulatory activities associated with, the Commonwealth’s domestic and international responsibilities for criminal justice and crime prevention; and meeting Australia’s obligations for extradition and mutual assistance

Summary

The Criminal Justice Division and the International Crime Cooperation Division, created on 1 January 2007, shared responsibility for Output 2.1. In 2006–07, there was a major breakthrough under this output on interjurisdictional DNA matching through the National Criminal Investigation DNA Database, culminating in the signing of a Ministerial Arrangement on 28 June 2007. The Council of Australian Governments (COAG) endorsed an Intergovernmental Agreement on the further development of the National Identity Security Strategy and Document Verification Service, and agreed to changes to double jeopardy law. The Division again supported the Government on legislation related to bail and sentencing criteria, investigating terrorism and serious crime, and combating drug trafficking, corruption, child sex offences and many other serious offences. Offender management and international transfer of prisoners continued to be high priorities. Australia’s work to foster regional collaboration in the control of illicit drug precursors was recognised as best practice by the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs. Support was again provided to government departments, and relationships were strengthened with the States and Territories to ensure coordinated contribution to whole-of-government outcomes on many matters. These included work on a national firearms management system, people trafficking and anti-corruption strategies. There was extensive consultation with the private sector on anti-money laundering policy and legislation, and systems to combat it were provided to countries in the region.

Major achievements

DNA matching

After seven years’ delay, a major breakthrough was achieved during the year in interjurisdictional DNA matching and the effective use of the National Criminal Investigation DNA Database. Between November 2006 and March 2007, the Commonwealth commenced DNA matching with New South Wales, Queensland, Western Australia and the Northern Territory. This means a DNA sample taken from a suspect or convicted offender under the laws of one jurisdiction can now be matched against a crime scene sample obtained by the police of another jurisdiction. DNA matching also has a vital role to play in the identification of disaster victims and missing persons. An even more significant breakthrough occurred on 28 June 2007 when, following extensive lead up work by the Division, all Australian jurisdictions other than Victoria and New South Wales signed a Ministerial Arrangement that will allow for DNA matching between all Australian jurisdictions. Victoria and New South Wales gave a commitment to sign on to the Arrangement as soon as they have passed the necessary legislation (Victoria signed in August 2007). Those jurisdictions that had already begun matching report that this will lead to the successful investigation and prosecution of offences that would otherwise have gone unsolved. The signing of the Ministerial Arrangement was the result of intensive work during May and June involving the Department, CrimTrac, and State and Territory justice departments and police services.

COAG agreements

In April 2007, the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) endorsed an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) to underpin the further development of a National Identity Security Strategy. The IGA sets out the elements of the Strategy, provides a framework for intergovernmental cooperation and commits jurisdictions to collaborate in its development and implementation. COAG noted the progress already made towards standard enrolment processes for the issue of key identification documents; best practice security standards for such documents; improvements to data integrity processes; enhanced authentication processes for dealings with government online; and options for improved interoperability of biometric security measures.

COAG also endorsed the further development and implementation of a Document Verification Service (DVS) to assist federal, State and Territory agencies to enhance their existing proof-of-identity processes and systems to support the delivery of high value benefits or services. An evaluation of the operation of the prototype DVS was completed in November 2006. Other key achievements in 2006–07 have included the appointment of a DVS Hub Manager, the strengthening and ‘hardening’ of the DVS Hub, improvements in the electronic data holdings of Commonwealth document issuing agencies to enable their full participation in the DVS, and the completion of a privacy impact assessment to guide further consideration of privacy issues.

We also worked closely with the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (CDPP) and State and Territory officers in contributing to a report to COAG on reforms to the law governing double jeopardy. COAG (excluding Victoria and the Australian Capital Territory) endorsed the report and committed to those reforms at its meeting in April 2007.The Department provided expert input on the existing law and policy options. The result of COAG’s decision is that serious offences will be able to be re-prosecuted in relevant circumstances. These include, for example, circumstances where there was fresh and compelling evidence from such things as DNA evidence, the prior acquittal was tainted, or evidence was tampered with.

Legislation

During the year, we provided advice on and assisted in the framing of criminal offences, civil penalties and enforcement powers in a large number of significant pieces of legislation developed by the Government. A notable example was our work in close collaboration with the Department of Human Services (DHS) and the Australian Federal Police (AFP) in the framing of the Human Services (Enhanced Service Delivery Bill) to ensure that offences and enforcement provisions relating to the misuse of the access card and information associated with the card were appropriately framed. Our involvement helped ensure that relevant misconduct could be investigated and prosecuted. We also appeared before the Senate Standing Committee on Finance and Public Administration to brief it on the offence and enforcement aspects of the original version of the Bill.

We supported the Government in the passage of the Crimes Amendment (Bail and Sentencing) Act 2006. The Act amended Commonwealth bail and sentencing legislation to implement the 14 July 2006 decision of COAG and addressed the outcomes of the Intergovernmental Summit on Violence and Child Abuse in Indigenous Communities. Commonwealth legislation, as amended by the Act, ensures that in bail and sentencing decisions no customary law or cultural practice can be considered to excuse, justify, authorise, require or lessen the seriousness of criminal behaviour and that the impact on granting bail on victims and witnesses, particularly those in remote communities, is taken into account in bail decisions.

Support was provided for the introduction of the Crimes Legislation Amendment (National Investigative Powers and Witness Protection) Bill 2006. The Bill gives effect to the Government’s commitment to implement model laws on controlled operations, assumed identities and witness protection of identity developed by the Joint Working Group of the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General (SCAG) and the Ministerial Council for Police and Emergency Management—Police, formerly known as the Australasian Police Ministers’ Council. The Bill also introduces a new delayed notification search warrant scheme for the investigation of terrorism and other serious crime and makes important changes to current witness protection arrangements.

We also supported the Government in crafting the Crimes Amendment (Forensic Procedures) Act (No 1) 2006, which was a major development in assuaging a number of the concerns of States and Territories in establishing a national system of interjurisdictional DNA matching. One of the principal changes was to clarify that a national database of DNA information would not allow for information kept on any State or Territory database to form a part of the Commonwealth database, and nor would information kept on the Commonwealth DNA database form part of any State or Territory database. The amendment effectively allowed for the Commonwealth to receive DNA profiles from States and Territories, and to disclose profiles on the Commonwealth database to States and Territories, allowing the National Criminal Investigation DNA Database to function as it was originally intended. This vital step helped to remove a number of specific impediments that had previously prevented national interjurisdictional DNA profile matching from going ahead.

The Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 (AML/CTF Act) received Royal Assent on 12 December 2006. The reforms seek to implement Australia’s international obligations including a commitment to bring our AML/CTF regime in line with the international standards as set out by the Financial Action Task force on Money Laundering. Obligations under the AML/CTF Act will be phased in over 24 months after Royal Assent to allow industry to develop necessary systems needed for compliance in the most cost efficient way. This first tranche of reforms covers the financial sector, including banks, credit unions, building societies and trustees, and extends to casinos, TABs wagering service providers and bullion dealers. The second tranche of reforms will cover real estate agents, dealers in precious metals and dealers in precious stones and a range of non-financial transaction provided by accountants, lawyers and trust and company service providers.

A range of consequential amendments and some minor corrections of earlier amendments were made by the AML/CTF (Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act 2006 and AML/CTF Amendment Act 2007.

We worked closely with the Australian Customs Service (ACS), the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) and the Treasury on the International Trade Integrity Bill 2007 in response to recommendations contained in the Report of the Inquiry into Certain Australian Companies in relation to the UN Oil-for-Food Programme. The Bill contains a number of important measures to strengthen Australia’s domestic enforcement of UN sanctions.

A discussion paper, A better mutual assistance system: a review of Australia’s mutual assistance law and practice, was released on 18 September 2006. The paper canvassed reforms to the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act 1987 (the Mutual Assistance Act). Proposed amendments to both this Act and the Extradition Act 1988 (the Extradition Act) were developed. These reforms will help Australia work with other countries to fight terrorism, drug trafficking, corruption, child sex offences and many other serious offences. The reforms are aimed at reducing delays in the current extradition and mutual assistance processes and will ensure that Australia does not become a safe haven for fugitives or their proceeds of crime.

Connected government

We continued to provide expert policy advice to other departments on Commonwealth criminal law policy. This has assisted the Minister for Justice and Customs to carry out his role as minister responsible for approving criminal law aspects of all federal legislation.

We continued to have strong relationships with key stakeholders. These include the AFP, the Australian Crime Commission, the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity, the Australian Transactions Reports and Analysis Centre, the ACS, the CDPP and the Australian Institute of Criminology. We chaired meetings of a Commonwealth law enforcement agencies criminal law working group, in December 2006 and May 2007, to coordinate law enforcement input to reform projects. We have also maintained our links with other agencies, including AusAID, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Department of Human Services, and the Department of Immigration and Citizenship. We have built on these relationships to ensure regular liaison and communication and coordinated contribution to whole-of-government outcomes in identity security, people trafficking and anti-corruption strategies. Anti-money laundering policy and legislation also require extensive consultation with the private sector.

Strong relationships with State and Territory agencies are a key part of the ongoing development of the identity security strategy, management of international transfer of prisoners casework and implementation of cross-jurisdictional, DNA matching arrangements.

Identity crime

We provide the secretariat for the Model Criminal Law Officers Committee, a committee of Commonwealth, State and Territory criminal law experts that develops discussion papers and reports on reform of areas of criminal law at the request of SCAG. In April 2007, the Committee released a discussion paper on identity crime, containing a proposal for the enactment by all jurisdictions of a specific identity crime offence and a proposal for courts to be able to issue a certificate to a victim of identity crime to assist them in re-establishing their credit history. Work on a final report had commenced by 30 June 2007, taking account of the 19 submissions received, from within the Australian Government, from State and Territory agencies and from the private sector. The Committee was also finalising a report on drink and food spiking for SCAG consideration and was tasked to prepare a discussion paper on unlawful DNA testing.

People trafficking

In the 2007–08 Budget, the Government committed a further $38.3 million to continue and enhance the whole-of-government strategy to combat people trafficking. The Department was the lead agency for the strategy to create awareness of trafficking related issues among those in the community who come into contact with trafficked victims. The awareness campaign aimed to inform and educate target audiences about the nature of people trafficking and provide information on how they can report it, or seek assistance if they have been trafficked. Information is available in English, Thai, Chinese, Korean, Vietnamese and Tagalog. The strategy, including the selection of languages, was based on extensive consultation with non-government stakeholders, including the sex industry sector and health and social welfare organisations.

Illicit drugs

The Department pursued a significant new agenda to establish an effective international response to the diversion of precursor chemicals into illicit drug manufacture by establishing two key forums in the region: the Asian Collaborative Group on Local Precursor Control and the South Pacific Precursor Control Forum. In March 2007, the model developed by Australia was recognised as best practice by the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs.

Following agreement between all federal, State and Territory police ministers, work began on the National Clandestine Laboratory Database. The database is designed to collect and store uniform data on clandestine laboratory investigations and precursor chemicals used in the manufacture of illicit drugs.

Significant progress was made under the National Strategy to Prevent the Diversion of Precursor Chemicals into Illicit Drug Manufacture, including: agreement to the national roll-out of Project STOP, and implementation of training and awareness-raising initiatives for people in key sectors including pharmacists, Customs officers and forensic chemists.

Firearms

We provided secretariat support and policy input for the Minister for Justice and Customs’ Sporting Shooters and Firearms Advisory Council and for the Australasian Police Ministers’ Council Firearms Policy Working Group. These were the main forums for consultation between the Australian Government, State and Territory governments and stakeholders on firearms issues. We oversaw the initiation of a project for the establishment of a business case for a possible National Firearms Management System. The development of a national system will enable State and Territory firearms registries to communicate more effectively.

Proceeds of crime grants

A successful grants round was held for non-government funding under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 targeting illicit drug use. Eleven successful proceeds of crime grants to non-government organisations were announced in the year, totalling $5.5 million. There were more than 130 expressions of interest for funding proceeds in the non-government grants round. Twenty-eight government and non-government proceeds of crime projects were under way at 30 June 2007. Full details of all projects funded from the Confiscated Assets Account are published at <www.crimeprevention.gov.au>.

Casework

International Transfer of Prisoners

The National Law Enforcement Policy Branch managed the international transfer of prisoners in 2006–07. These included several high profile cases requiring significant resource diversion to manage the cases and provide ministerial and media briefings.

The following transfers took place:

• one transfer to Australia from the United Kingdom
• one transfer to Australia from Spain
• one transfer to Australia from Guantánamo Bay
• one transfer to Australia from the United States
• three transfers from Australia to Germany
• one transfer from Australia to Canada
• one transfer from Australia to Italy
• three transfers from Australia to the Netherlands
• three transfers from Australia to Spain.

There has been a focus on improving case management systems for international prisoner transfers, including process mapping and database refinements.

Federal offenders

The National Law Enforcement Policy Branch administers the sentences of federal offenders, including parole, early release on licence (section 19AP, Crimes Act 1914), interstate transfer of federal prisoners (Transfer of Prisoners Act 1983), forensic mental health cases and applications by parolees to travel overseas. The Department also advises the Minister for Justice and Customs about petitions for the Royal Prerogative of Mercy from federal offenders, including pardons, remission fines and referral back to the Local Court or Court of Appeal.

Decisions about the following matters were made in 2006–07:

• parole (95)
• early release on licence (9)
• interstate transfer of federal prisoners (8)
• forensic mental health care (2)
• overseas travel for parolees (26), and
• the Royal Prerogative of Mercy (7).

Embryo exports

In 2006–07, the Minister granted 12 export approvals for human embryos. All were in respect of embryos that were being exported for the applicant’s own use. The Customs (Prohibited Exports) Regulations 1958 prohibit the exportation of embryos unless the Minister for Justice and Customs provides written permission.

The Prohibition of Human Cloning for Reproduction and the Regulation of Human Embryo Research Amendment Act 2006 effectively repealed the Attorney-General’s Department embryo export permit scheme. From 12 June 2007, the scheme was replaced by controls administered by the Therapeutic Goods Administration.

Firearms imports

The Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956 restrict the importation of certain categories of firearms, their parts and accessories. Importation must comply with one of the tests specified in the Schedule of the Regulations. The Minister for Justice and Customs may provide permission for importation for all tests, except firearms that fall within the police authorisation test.

In 2006–07, the Minister granted 125 import approvals for firearms, ammunition and related parts and accessories. Of these approvals, 83 were granted under the official purposes test, 16 under the dealer test and 26 under the specified purposes test. The Minister also granted eight domestic sports shooters certificates and seven international sports shooters certificates.

Mutual assistance and extradition

The Mutual Assistance and Extradition Branch is Australia’s Central Authority for mutual assistance and extradition. The Branch is responsible for meeting Australia’s international obligations under mutual assistance treaties and multilateral arrangements and undertaking mutual assistance and extradition casework.

During the year, we continued to work closely with the AFP and other Australian law enforcement agencies, the CDPP and DFAT meeting these obligations. Stakeholder liaison meetings were held with these departments and agencies, the Minister’s Office and the NSW Police service. The Branch also upgraded its database and conducted training programs on extradition and mutual assistance for these stakeholders. It continued to work closely with the team conducting reviews of the Mutual Assistance and Extradition Acts. With the International Assistance and Treaties Branch, the Mutual Assistance and Extradition Branch contributed to the development and implementation of regional capacity building programs and treaties on mutual assistance and extradition.

International assistance and treaties

The Anti-Money Laundering Assistance Team (AMLAT) is located in the International Assistance and Treaties Branch. AMLAT assisted the Solomon Islands to set up its anti-money laundering (AML) system. Similar systems are being established with AMLAT assistance in Papua New Guinea, Nauru and Kiribati. Other countries that have received technical assistance from AMLAT include the Cook Islands, Fiji, the Marshall Islands, Niue and Palau.

The Team worked in partnership with the AFP to host a workshop in June 2007 for all Pacific financial intelligence units and representatives of transnational crime units and other police agencies. The workshop promoted cooperation between police and financial intelligence units to tackle local and transnational financial crime,including a simulated multi-jurisdiction exercise on tax fraud and associated money laundering.

The AMLAT and Pacific Section hosted a regional workshop in Samoa on international crime cooperation, focusing on proceeds of crime. Fourteen Pacific island countries participated, with representatives including prosecutors, law enforcement officers, and justice agencies. The workshop used practical exercises to develop skills in preparing mutual assistance and extradition requests, while fostering relationships between key officials in the Pacific.

The Branch managed Australia’s chairing of the APEC Anti-Corruption and Transparency Experts Task Force and led delivery of its key objectives. Outcomes in the year were the creation of the APEC Code of Conduct for Business and Conduct Principles for Public Officials, and high level acknowledgment of the importance of fighting corruption in APEC economies. Australia’s effective leadership of the Task Force contributed to this outcome by strengthening commitment to, and implementation of, anti-corruption initiatives among Australia’s APEC partners in the Asia–Pacific region.

A number of treaties negotiated by the Department came into force during the year. These included a mutual legal assistance treaty with China and extradition and mutual legal assistance treaties with Malaysia. Signed treaties negotiated by the Department were those between Australia and the Kingdom of Thailand on mutual legal assistance and with the Kingdom of Cambodia on the transfer of sentenced persons. The pursuit of a treaty with Indonesia for the transfer of sentenced persons was a high priority.

Colloquium of the International Centre for the Prevention of Crime

In September 2006, Australia hosted the Sixth Annual Colloquium of the International Centre for the Prevention of Crime at the National Museum of Australia in Canberra. The 2006 colloquium was the first to be held outside Europe and the Americas and had a theme of ‘Communities in action for crime prevention’. The successful event provided for exchange of ideas and experiences between crime prevention practitioners, 170 of whom attended from 18 countries. The Centre is an international UN-affiliated, non-government organisation that helps countries and cities enhance safety and reduce delinquency, violent crime and fear of crime.

International participation

On the international front, we provided leadership of the Asian Collaborative Group on Local Precursor Control and the South Pacific Precursor Control Forum. We participated in the proceedings of a large number of international organisations, including the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs, UN Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice, Financial Action Task Force Asia–Pacific Group on Money Laundering, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the Commonwealth Secretariat.

The Department also chaired the APEC Anti-Corruption and Transparency Experts Taskforce, including hosting two workshops, and led delivery of key APEC anti-corruption outcomes by consensus with APEC members. Finally, we participated in the Conference of the Parties to the UN Convention on Transnational Organised Crime and to the UN Convention against Corruption.

Evaluations/reviews

Review of the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act 1987

The purpose of this review and the review of the Extradition Act 1988 was to evaluate the current extradition and mutual assistance procedures and develop proposals to improve current arrangements while still keeping appropriate safeguards. The reform proposals were designed to minimise delays in current processes, enable Australia to cooperate with a greater number of countries, and ensure that Australia can continue to provide the widest form of cooperation that is appropriate by expanding the range of law enforcement tools available to assist foreign countries.

The discussion paper A better mutual assistance system: a review of Australia’s mutual assistance law and practice was widely circulated and face-to-face consultations on it were conducted with a number of key stakeholders including non-government organisations. Nineteen submissions were received in response to the discussion paper. The review of both Acts will continue in 2007–08 with the development of an exposure draft Bill. The exposure draft bill is expected to be released for further consultation in 2007–08. Comments received on the exposure draft bill will be considered before the amended legislation is introduced into Parliament.

Review of Part 1D of the Crimes Act 1914

Under section 23YV of the Crimes Act, there is a requirement to follow up an initial (2003) review of Part 1D with a second review in 2005. However, as identified in the first review, the principal function of the second review is to examine the effective working of the National Criminal Investigation DNA Database (NCIDD), which had only just begun operating in any significant way in early 2007. The Government decided to propose to Parliament an amendment to defer this review to 2009, when it will be possible to meaningfully assess the effective workings of NCIDD.

Review of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002

An independent review under section 237 of the Proceeds of Crime Act was completed within the statutory timeframes. The Report was tabled in Parliament in October 2006. The Report is generally very supportive of the Act but identifies some areas where it can be improved. The Government is considering the Report’s recommendations.

Review of Commonwealth criminal penalties

Work on the review of Commonwealth criminal penalties, announced by the Government in 2006, was delayed by other priorities. It will be a high priority for the coming year.

Review of the National Community Crime Prevention Programme

A review of the National Community Crime Prevention Programme is being conducted by the Australian Institute of Criminology. The project commenced in February 2007 and a final report is expected by October 2007.

Reviews of the Australian Institute of Criminology and the Criminology Research Council

As an outcome of the Uhrig Review into the corporate governance of statutory authorities and office holders, the governance and accountability arrangements of the Australian Institute of Criminology and the Criminology Research Council have been reviewed. The review was undertaken in consultation with State and Territory governments. At the end of this reporting period, the report was with State and Territory governments for comment.

Challenges

As in 2005–06, recruitment of sufficiently experienced staff remained an ongoing challenge, as did the need to develop new areas of expertise to respond pro-actively to emerging criminal justice issues, including those on the international agenda.

A challenge for the successful development and implementation of the Document Verification Service will be achieving full participation from potential stakeholders in the development of the service. Stakeholder consultation and negotiation will continue.

The law reform related work was more and more closely tied to advancing uniformity and cooperative legislative scheme projects with the States and Territories. This made it increasingly important to develop effective working relationships with State and Territory officers, and to have pre-existing networks for collaboration that could be employed to advance particular projects. The Model Criminal Law Officers Committee, which at the end of the financial year was more active than it had been for a number of years, played a central role to that end. On an ad hoc basis, we have also formed other groupings to advance the DNA Matching Ministerial Arrangement. There is likely to be increasing emphasis on effective collaboration between the Australian Government and States and Territories in relation to criminal justice reform in the years ahead.

Mutual assistance and extradition casework remains demanding and complex, and the number of mutual assistance requests made to and received by Australia continues to grow significantly. The Mutual Assistance and Extradition Branch has sought to address this by increasing the number of staff available to deal with casework, but the volume of such work will present a continuing challenge in the foreseeable future.

The work of the Anti-Money Laundering Assistance Team (AMLAT) remains subject to developments affecting stability in the Pacific. As a result of the coup in Fiji in December 2006, AMLAT has not provided bilateral technical assistance to the Fiji police, and some projects have been delayed due to political tensions in other Pacific countries.

Outlook

We will continue to develop the national capacity of the Document Verification Service to support and enhance identity security to help accomplish the Government’s desire to preserve and protect the identity of Australian citizens.

A key priority for the coming year is to complete the review of Commonwealth penalties, which has been delayed by other priorities. This will be an important benchmark setting exercise to assess not only the appropriateness of particular existing penalties but also the broader framework for setting Commonwealth criminal penalties.

An immediate priority early in the year is to deliver on the commitment reflected in the Ministerial Arrangement on DNA Matching by getting DNA matching between all jurisdictions under way quickly.

A range of significant policy issues in relation to Commonwealth criminal justice legislation were under close consideration at the end of the financial year and are likely to be central to our work program in the coming year. These include new initiatives to combat organised crime (including outlaw motorcycle gangs), and the examination of whether there is a gap in the ability to secure ‘take down’ of a web site containing unlawful content in relation to which a person has been criminally convicted.

Several important projects will be completed in the next year, including the national roll-out of Project STOP and the implementation of the National Clandestine Laboratory Database.

The Department will continue to engage internationally to prevent the manufacture of illicit drugs. A particular focus will be on the South Pacific Precursor Control Forum and the Asian Collaborative Group on Local Precursor Control to progress their work programs and improve precursor controls within the Asia–Pacific region.

The draft government response to Australian Law Reform Commission report no 103 on federal sentencing is expected to be completed for the Government’s consideration in late 2007.

The development of a business case for a possible National Firearms Management System will continue. The system will enable State and Territory firearms registries to communicate more effectively, diminishing the risk of firearms diversion posed by interstate movement of firearms.

We aim to progress implementation of the second tranche of legislation on money laundering and counter-terrorist financing, which will cover real estate agents, dealers in precious metals and stones, and the legal and accounting professions. We will also implement the whole-of-government strategy to combat people trafficking, and promote awareness of the offence of foreign bribery.

At a June 2007 conference hosted by the Anti-Money Laundering Assistance Team and the AFP, Pacific Island officials identified priorities to improve their anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing systems. High priorities include assistance with supervising financial institutions, analysis of suspicious transaction reports, provision of analytical software, and establishing closer links between financial intelligence units and law enforcement agencies. Such priorities for technical assistance and mentoring provide an excellent basis for AMLAT strategic and operational planning in 2007–08.

In 2007–08, an exposure draft bill on reforms to Australia’s extradition and mutual assistance arrangements will be developed and released for further consultation. Once comments received on the exposure draft bill have been considered, it is expected the legislation will be introduced into Parliament.

Australia will continue to support the work of the APEC Anti-Corruption and Transparency Experts Task Force under Peru’s leadership as 2008 APEC host.

Our People

Achieving a just and secure society

Maggie Jackson and Sam Wade, International Crime Cooperation Division.

In early 2007, the Attorney-General’s Department’s Regional Legal Assistance Unit (RLAU) became a ground-breaker in international cooperation when two of its staff, Maggie Jackson and Sam Wade, travelled to Phnom Penh to participate in a hearing of the Cambodian Parliament.

The joint hearing was before members of the Cambodian National Assembly and the Senate and was convened to discuss Cambodia’s draft law on counter-terrorism. This was a new approach for the Cambodian parliament which had not previously formed a commission of this type to consider technical legislation.

‘Working with Cambodian officials was extremely rewarding,’ explained Maggie Jackson, First Assistant Secretary, International Crime Cooperation Division. ‘They are very dedicated and keen to enhance the legal infrastructure of their country. The task of developing modern legislation in all areas is huge.’

RLAU has been working with the Cambodian Ministry of Justice to develop the law on counter-terrorism and facilitate its passage through the Cambodian Parliament since 2005. Following RLAU’s appearance at the hearing, the law passed smoothly through the National Assembly and Senate and commenced operation on 21 July 2007.

RLAU also has a strong relationship with its counterparts in the Ministry of Justice in Vietnam. In 2007, RLAU hosted a study tour in Canberra which focused on developing and encouraging international legal cooperation.

Looking ahead, in 2007–08 RLAU will work with the Australian Federal Police, the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and foreign government agencies to assist regional countries to implement the more recent United Nations counter-terrorism instruments and to develop a model code on international crime cooperation measures to facilitate cooperation among countries in combating terrorism and transnational crime in the South-East Asian region.

Performance indicators

(Quantitative and qualitative)

Output 2.1

Policy advice on, and program administration and regulatory activities associated with, the Commonwealth’s domestic and international responsibilities for criminal justice and crime prevention; and meeting Australia’s obligations for extradition and mutual assistance

* The number of ministerials relates to the number of actions in relation to ministerial correspondence.

** The numbers of advice provided by output have been derived from the Department’s annual workload survey and are an aggregated figure over four separate one-week periods—two from a parliamentary sitting week and two from non-sitting periods.

*** Refer to Appendix 11 for extradition, mutual assistance, international war crimes and criminal justice certificates figures.

Our People

Achieving a just and secure society

Michael Jerks, Major Projects, Critical Infrastructure Protection Branch.

The Critical Infrastructure Protection Modelling and Analysis (CIPMA) program shows how natural disasters such as earthquakes and cyclones, or bomb blasts caused by a terrorist attack, can impact on our economy, our people, and our society.

CIPMA is a computer-based capability that simulates the relationships and dependencies of critical infrastructure. It can show how natural disasters, accidents and terrorist incidents impact on critical infrastructure, places of mass gathering, and key business centres. CIPMA also estimates how long the disruption is likely to last, the area affected and how various infrastructure systems will behave.

As the only program of its kind in the world operating at both a detailed local and national level, CIPMA is generating considerable domestic and international interest.

As the CIPMA Program Manager, Michael Jerks has met with experts from around the world to model the impact of critical infrastructure failure.

‘The program’s accuracy relies on infrastructure owners and operators providing confidential or sensitive information to the program, which CIPMA is fully committed to protecting,’ Michael said.

CIPMA is a key component of the Australian Government’s commitment to enhance protection of our critical infrastructure. The program has been developed in conjunction with Geoscience Australia as technical lead agency and the CSIRO. The owners and operators of critical infrastructure are central to the success of CIPMA.

‘We’ve worked hard to build trust and we can now say that the CIPMA program is a true business-government partnership involving Australian Government agencies, the states and territories and the current priority sectors of banking, communications, energy and water.’

Output 2.2

National leadership and coordination of legal and policy advice on national security and counter-terrorism laws and critical infrastructure protection

Summary

The challenge again faced by the Security and Critical Infrastructure Division in 2006–07 was whether Australia, as it reacts to international developments, has the laws to deal with possible terrorist activity and its consequences. In the course of the year, legislation to implement the Marplex Convention on plastic explosives passed through Parliament. The Division’s provision of numerous briefings and advisings included a heavy workload on the David Hicks case. Considerable effort also went into collaborative projects with business and industry to protect Australia’s critical infrastructure—in particular, telecommunications, information technology networks, and water. Assistance was provided to countries in Australia’s region on the development of counter-terrorism and international legal cooperation frameworks, and advances made towards further collaboration. All activities anticipated in 2005–06 and planned for in 2006–07 were achieved, excluding—due to competing priorities—implementation of protocols on unlawful acts against the safety of maritime navigation and fixed platforms on the continental shelf.

Major achievements

Telecommunications and Surveillance Law

Connecting with stakeholders

A major innovation in 2006–07 was the establishment of the Telecommunications Surveillance Law Branch (TSLB) as a separate entity from the Security Law Branch (SLB). The former is responsible for the administration of the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979 and the Surveillance Devices Act 2004. Its formation came from the recommendations of the Review of the Regulation of Access to Communications (the Blunn Review) in August 2005. The Branch commenced work on 1 July 2007 and began implementing the second tranche of the Blunn Review’s recommendations, including the introduction into Parliament of the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment Bill 2007. The Branch has expanded the Department’s outreach and interaction with industry. It prepared for a major telecommunications conference in September 2007 aimed at further reaching stakeholders in the public sector and the business community.

Critical Infrastructure Protection

Modelling and analysis

The Critical Infrastructure Protection Branch (CIP) has responsibility for the Critical Infrastructure Modelling and Analysis program, which was reviewed and rescoped in the year to expand its functions and provide for broader engagement with business. Following wide stakeholder consultation, the Attorney-General announced the water services sector as the next critical infrastructure sector to be covered by the program, and work commenced to scope the data collection tasks for this sector. The program also achieved good progress on coverage of the other three priority sectors of energy, banking and finance, and communications. It provided stakeholders with important information on vulnerabilities and dependencies in these sectors to better understand and manage their risks.

Cyber security

As a result of the review of the E-Security National Agenda conducted in 2006, the Department has become the lead agency for e-security policy. In addition, CIP Branch is responsible for the protection of the electronic systems that underpin Australia’s critical infrastructure. The Computer Network Vulnerability Assessment program continued to co-fund critical infrastructure owners and operators to identify weaknesses in computer systems and to test the resilience of their systems. Two funding rounds were conducted during the reporting period. Projects were initiated in the energy, transport and defence sectors. The lessons learnt from completed projects were shared with other critical infrastructure owners and operators through the Trusted Information Sharing Network for Critical Infrastructure Protection.

The Branch also manages GovCERT.au, the Australian Government Computer Emergency Readiness Team. GovCERT.au acts as a point of contact within the Australian Government for foreign governments on Computer Emergency Response Team issues and coordinates any related requests. Following on from the E-Security National Agenda review, the Government has funded the expansion of GovCERT.au to provide information about sophisticated electronic threats to critical infrastructure owners and operators and key businesses, and to work with them to develop an understanding of critical systems.

Security assessments, standards and information

Work completed in 2006–07 included handling of sectoral threat assessments, the development of sector risk context statements, and briefing of industry sectors. We assisted Standards Australia to implement recommendations of the Security Standards and Support Systems Report designed to develop an integrated security framework to better protect critical infrastructure.

We completed an analysis of the availability, quality and requirement for training in security risk management, business continuity management, protective security and emergency planning, and operations management for the critical infrastructure protection community. We implemented recommendations to improve the type and level of security training, and identify training opportunities to better prepare critical infrastructure owners and operators to manage their risks.

We also produced and distributed the business information kit Good security—good business to assist small and medium sized enterprises in their management of security risks.

Security law

The Security Law Branch supported the preparation of legislation that was enacted to implement the UN Convention on the Marking of Plastic Explosives for the Purpose of Detection. The Law and Justice Legislation Amendment (Marking of Plastic Explosives) Act 2007 (the Marplex Act), which implements the obligations under the Convention, received Royal Assent on 19 February 2007. The Branch progressed the development of the administrative scheme to implement the legislation and consulted with stakeholders in both the private and public sectors about the Convention and the impact of its implementation.

We worked with the States and Territories to implement preventative detention legislation and ensured that issuing authorities were appointed in each State and Territory. Only an ‘issuing authority’ can extend a preventative detention order beyond an initial 24-hour period. Eighty-four issuing authorities have been appointed, with appointments in all States and Territories. Those appointed include federal magistrates, Supreme Court judges and members of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

We assisted the Government in responding to the report of the Security Legislation Review Committee (see Evaluations/reviews below).

We also assisted the Government in the development of national security and counter-terrorism policy by continuing to support the Attorney-General in his role as a member of the National Security Committee of Cabinet.

We continued to work closely with the Protective Security Coordination Centre and other Australian Government agencies to effectively implement the National Security Information (Criminal and Civil Proceedings) Act 2004 and ensure its consistent application in individual court proceedings. We prepared a practitioners’ guide to enhance understanding of the provisions of the Act among courts and legal practitioners, to be published soon.

We ensured the Attorney-General was informed of developments in counter-terrorism legal cases, including the criminal prosecutions of over 25 defendants, through the provision of timely briefing on the status of, and significant issues in, those cases. We also facilitated the effective conduct of the Government’s defence in a number of security-related civil litigation matters, including Mr Thomas’ constitutional challenge to control orders, Mr Habib’s civil suit and Mr Hicks’ civil suit and repatriation from the United States after conviction by a US military commission.

Counter-terriorism policy

The Counter-Terrorism Strategic Policy Unit (CTSP) continued to play a key role in ensuring the effective development and implementation of counter-terrorism and national security policy. In an increasingly complex and rapidly changing security environment, the Unit engaged with agencies in the Attorney-General’s portfolio and with other departments to achieve consistent and coordinated policy outcomes across a range of national security initiatives. In particular, we provided leadership and policy coordination within the Attorney-General’s portfolio on transport security issues to ensure an effective and consistent approach to aviation, maritime and surface transport security. We also facilitated the National Counter-Terrorism Committee’s consideration of the Review of Information and Intelligence Sharing in the Aviation Sector, by working with Australian Government, State and Territory agencies to oversee implementation of the 37 recommendations of the review.

Regional assistance

Through the Regional Legal Assistance Unit (RLAU), the Department assists countries in Australia’s region to implement UN conventions and protocols on countering terrorism. It does this by providing support in developing legislation that criminalises the offences set out in the conventions and protocols and facilitates mutual assistance and extradition. It also provides training and practical advice on the operation of legislation, once passed. These activities contribute to achieving a safer Australia through increased security and legal counter-terrorism capabilities across our region. In particular, effective counter-terrorism and international legal cooperation legislation provides regional countries with an essential platform to prosecute or deny safe haven to terrorism offenders.

Cambodia legislation

A major achievement in the year was the progress made in developing counter-terrorism frameworks in Cambodia. During 2006–07, we provided support to our counterparts in Cambodia to progress a comprehensive counter-terrorism law that implements the international conventions and protocols relating to counter-terrorism. Unit officers attended meetings and public forums to promote successful passage of the law. The draft law was approved by the Cambodian National Assembly on 26 June 2007 and is expected to be passed by the Cambodian Senate and promulgated by the King before the end of July 2007. We also helped Cambodia develop legislation criminalising people smuggling. This included conducting a workshop for Cambodian officials in December 2006.

Vietnam project

We assisted Vietnam in 2006–07 to develop international legal cooperation legislation covering extradition, mutual assistance in criminal matters, judicial assistance in civil matters and international transfer of sentenced persons. As part of this assistance project, RLAU conducted two workshops in Vietnam to discuss issues surrounding the draft law, and organised a five-day study tour to Australia for a small group of senior Vietnamese officials.

Visits, dialogues and workshops

The Unit’s officers delivered presentations on counter-terrorism, international legal cooperation and border security issues at workshops in Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, the Philippines, Laos, Vietnam, Japan, Cambodia and India. These included workshops organised by RLAU and by other governments or organisations, such as the UN’s Office on Drugs and Crime. Unit officers conducted scoping visits to three countries to explore options for further capacity-building assistance projects.

With DFAT and other Australian Government agencies, we participated in counter-terrorism dialogues with the United States and Japan in October 2006 and June 2007. The dialogues aim to improve coordination of counter-terrorism donor activities in South-East Asia.

A senior official from the Unit accompanied the Attorney-General at the Sub-Regional Ministerial Meeting on Counter-Terrorism held in Indonesia in March 2007. Australia, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand were represented. At this meeting, the Attorney-General announced that Australia will convene a major workshop for sub-regional countries in November 2007 on implementation of the most recently adopted international counter-terrorism instruments

Purchaser/provider arrangements

In September 2006, we entered into a whole-of-government subscription to the AusCERT alert service, which is being distributed to Australian Government agencies via the OnSecure web site of the Defence Signals Directorate (DSD).

Evaluations/reviews

Review of E-Security National Agenda

The purpose of this review, involving a number of agencies, was to ensure Australia’s policy objective of creating a secure and trusted online environment is still valid. The review commenced in March 2006 and ended in October 2006. The review found:

• While the policy objective of the Agenda to create a secure and trusted online environment is still valid, Australia’s economy is at increasing risk from sophisticated threats against its information and communications technologies (ICT).
• The electronic environment has become increasingly hostile, with sophisticated attacks coming from criminals, politically motivated groups and, quite possibly, foreign governments.
• The complex and interconnected nature of the electronic environment means sophisticated online attacks can be launched directly at governments or Australia’s critical infrastructure via home users and SMEs, and e-security issues cannot therefore be addressed in isolation.

The review concluded that Australia required an integrated approach to e-security with three main components: securing the Australian Government’s ICT; enhancing the protection of Australia’s critical infrastructure from e-security risks; and enhancing the protection of home users and small and medium sized enterprises from online attacks and fraud.

The Department led the following agencies in conducting the review: Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts; the Department of Defence’s Defence Signals Directorate; and the Department of Finance and Administration’s Australian Government Information Management Office. Written submissions were provided to the review committee. These submissions were used as the basis for extensive stakeholder consultations.

The report was provided to government and used to inform the 2007–08 financial year budget process.

Regulation impact statement—Harmonisation of private security industry regulation

The Critical Infrastructure Protection Branch commissioned and produced a regulation impact statement to support the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) deliberations on adopting a nationally consistent approach to the regulation of the private security industry. The statement was produced by the Centre for International Economics using standard Office of Best Practice Regulation methodology. The results, supporting proposals and indicating a net benefit, were approved by the Office and presented to COAG on 13 April 2007.

Review of counter-terrorism legislation—Security Legislation Review Committee

The report by the Security Legislation Review Committee into the operation, effectiveness and implications of amendments made by 2002 terrorism legislation was tabled in Parliament on 15 June 2006. The Division provided advice to the Government on responses to the recommendations of the SLRC report. The Government’s response was provided as a submission to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security Review of Security and Counter-Terrorism Legislation (the PJCIS Review).

Review of security and counter-terrorism legislation—Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security

Under paragraph 29(1)(ba) of the Intelligence Services Act 2001, the Committee is required to review the operation, effectiveness and implications of the:

• Security Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Act 2002
• Border Security Legislation Amendment Act 2002
• Criminal Code Amendment (Suppression of Terrorist Bombings) Act 2002, and
• Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism Act 2002.

Sub-section 4(9) of the Security Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Act required the Committee to take into account the recommendations of the SLRC report. The Committee’s report was tabled on 4 December 2006.

We provided a submission to the PJCIS Review and appeared before the Committee during its public hearings on 1 August 2006. The Government is considering the recommendations of the PJCIS report.

Inquiry into the terrorist organisation listing provisions of the Criminal Code Act 1995—Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security

Section 102.1A(2) of the Criminal Code Act 1995 requires the Committee to review, as soon as possible after the third anniversary of the commencement of that section, the operation, effectiveness and implications of sections 102.1(2), (2A), (4), (5), (6), (17) and (18) of the Criminal Code. The Department provided a submission to the PJCIS Review and appeared before the Committee during its public hearings on 4 April 2007. The Committee has not yet reported.

Challenges

Keeping pace with technology change in the area of lawful access to telecommunications information for law enforcement and national security again proved to be a major challenge during the year. In response, the Department introduced the second stage of recommendations from the Blunn Review, with the Attorney-General presenting supporting legislation to Parliament. All of the measures in this second tranche were completed on time and within budget. Among the results were the formation of the TSLB and broader engagement with the telecommunications industry.

The Division’s resources were challenged in ensuring the Attorney-General was informed of developments in counter-terrorism legal cases, including the criminal prosecutions of more than 25 defendants. We facilitated the effective conduct of the Government’s defence in a number of security-related civil litigation matters, including Mr Hicks’ civil suit and repatriation from the United States after conviction by a US military commission.

Preparing for responses to terrorist attacks and plots with appropriate legal strategies was, and is, an ongoing challenge. Appropriate modification of the legislative framework in cooperation with the States and Territories—and, in some cases, foreign governments—is required. Court decisions that do not produce the intended policy outcomes sometimes require modification of laws and practices.

The level of assistance some regional countries require is more extensive than initially contemplated, the RLAU found. They also require differing kinds of technical legal assistance. To address this, the Unit commenced development of comprehensive bilateral work programs with these countries. This extends to assistance with development of legal frameworks necessary to support counter-terrorism legislation and assistance with implementation. The Unit began allocating resources and prioritising work in accordance with these programs. While working bilaterally with countries, the Unit maintained its broader engagement with the region by participating in multilateral regional forums and capacity building workshops.

Outlook

The Division expects the demands of keeping pace with advances in technology, engaging with business and the community, and developing its legal responses to real and threatened terrorist activity to continue to dominate its work over coming years.

Looking ahead, we have identified the need for more effective communication of the objectives and implications of national security and counter-terrorism laws to the community. The Critical Infrastructure Protection Modelling and Analysis program will also progress presentations to major government and business stakeholders and deliver these in the first half of 2007–08. Good coverage of key aspects of the three initial sectors is to be achieved by March 2008.

The CIP Branch received funding in the 2007–08 Budget to implement recommendations from the E-Security National Agenda review. Under this, the Department will lead a multi-agency program to enhance Australia’s e-security environment. GovCERT.au will expand its operations to brief industry on sophisticated threats to their electronic systems and continue to develop the Government’s understanding of e-security risk to critical infrastructure. Cyber Storm II, a major international cyber exercise involving business and government organisations, will be conducted to identify a range of vulnerabilities that affect the national information infrastructure. The Department will also initiate a feasibility study into the development of a business centre that allows security information to be shared quickly between Government and critical infrastructure organisations, minimising the impact of electronic attacks.

There will be an evaluation and review of the CIP program to consider future resource requirements, future evaluation strategies, and possible new initiatives. The threat assessments for vital critical infrastructure assets and critical infrastructure sectors will continue to be reassessed and updated. Owners and operators and industry sectors will be briefed as required.

Lawful access to telecommunications information for law enforcement and national security purposes will continue to face a number of challenges. These include the diversification within the telecommunications industry sector and ongoing rapid developments in telecommunications technologies—in particular, the convergence of information and communications technologies into a single data stream, and the emergence of numerous new products and services.

Meeting these challenges will require a regulatory regime that is able to adapt quickly and imaginatively to keep pace with these changes. Achieving this will require active engagement with all stakeholders to develop a shared understanding of the technological and operational issues, and to ensure that emerging issues are quickly fed back into the policy development cycle. With its responsibility for administering the relevant legislation and providing policy advice, the Division will play a key role in fostering these relationships among agencies and industry stakeholders, which must be based on a culture of cooperation, innovation and flexibility.

The new TSLB will host the first national telecommunications conference in September 2007. The conference will provide a forum for the entire stakeholder community of agencies and carriers to meet to discuss developments and issues, as well as the opportunity to hear from international speakers on developments overseas.

We will increase the level of activity in the industry outreach program, with a schedule of visits to carriers and carriage service providers to discuss compliance and capability issues. We will provide support to the Attorney-General during the parliamentary debate of the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment Bill 2007, and proceed with the examination of a number of policy issues that may form the basis of new legislative amendments to the Acts administered by the Branch. These will ensure the continued relevance and effectiveness of the regulatory regime.

We will continue our lead role in working with international partners on issues of lawful interception and harmonisation of approaches to global telecommunications providers. This will assist us in the work we undertake to ensure ongoing lawful access by agencies to telecommunications interception.

The Security Law Branch will continue to monitor and review existing national security and counter-terrorism legislation to ensure the legislative framework meets demands. The Branch will also continue to monitor and provide advice, where required, on terrorism cases before the courts.

We will implement international obligations relevant to national security and counter-terrorism, including efficient administration of the Marplex Act in its first year and the enactment of legislation necessary to implement new international initiatives with respect to nuclear terrorism and maritime counter-terrorism obligations.

The CTSP Unit will continue to provide strategic policy advice to government departments on counter-terrorism and national security issues, to identify avenues for strengthening national security policy and to ensure effective coordination.

Having established itself as an effective resource in our region, RLAU’s greatest challenge for 2007–08 will be in allocating resources to cover a growing number of requests for assistance. To address this challenge, the Unit will continue to engage actively with regional governments and international organisations to prioritise value adding opportunities and avoid duplication of work.

The adoption of new international counter-terrorism instruments in 2005 following RLAU’s development of model counter-terrorism legislation means the Unit must develop new legislative models. The Unit will achieve this in the year ahead, while continuing its work with countries to strengthen laws relating to counter-terrorism, international legal cooperation and other related issues. Specific priorities for the Unit include conducting two major workshops at the Jakarta Centre for Law Enforcement Cooperation in November 2007 on implementation of the most recently adopted international counter-terrorism instruments and on international crime cooperation.

The Unit will continue to provide assistance to Cambodia to update its counter-terrorism law to include obligations under the more recently adopted international counter-terrorism instruments and provide training on the law’s operation. It will also finalise the law to criminalise people smuggling, and further develop Cambodia’s international legal cooperation framework.

Other regional initiatives in the year ahead will be to continue to help Vietnam with its international legal cooperation legislation and develop procedural guidelines to assist with its implementation and, in Laos, to conduct a workshop introducing key concepts in drafting similar legislation. These activities, and other work by the Unit in the region, will be progressed in accordance with the legislative timetables and priorities of these countries.

Our People

Achieving a just and secure society

Chris Perry, Information Coordination Branch, Protective Security Coordination Centre.

For Christopher Perry, Assistant Manager Special Projects in the Protective Security Coordination Centre, a picture really is worth a thousand words. More than that, he believes that pictures are the next major tool in the decision-makers’ kit.

‘When you look at an image, you use a different part of your brain than when you read a brief,’ Christopher said. ‘Most people can deal with the information in an image more intuitively because they can see the relationships between different objects. That is the power of geospatial information.’

Having worked as a geospatial information specialist for nine years, Christopher is keen to unlock the power of imagery as a decision-making tool. Emergency workers and the military have a long history of using maps and diagrams to aid decision-making and enhance situational awareness.

Now, with advanced computer-based imagery techniques, a wide range of data about a particular location can be brought together. This might include information about traffic control systems, underground utilities, the location of schools and hospitals, topographical and weather information, and site or floor plans of major buildings.

The visual information can then be manipulated and used to help decision-makers, particularly in support of emergency management, critical infrastructure protection and counter-terrorism.

‘Geospatial information can be used to model the impact of cyclones, explosions, or chemical spills,’ Christopher explained. For example, in the case of an earthquake, imagery could be pulled together to represent how damage to a power sub-station might affect nearby homes, hospitals and businesses. This facilitates faster decisions, more effective deployment of resources and enhanced community safety.

‘By incorporating geospatial capabilities into routine operational procedures, the PSCC can greatly assist timely decisions.’

Performance indicators

(Quantitative and qualitative)

Output 2.2

National leadership and coordination of legal and policy advice on national security and counter-terrorism laws and critical infrastructure protection

* The number of ministerials relates to the number of actions in relation to ministerial correspondence.

** The numbers of advice provided by output have been derived from the Department’s annual workload survey and are an aggregated figure over four separate one-week periods—two from a parliamentary sitting week and two from non-sitting periods.

Our People

Achieving a just and secure society

Back row, from left: Mark Sullivan, Peter Willett; front: Shannon McNamara, Janet Zanetti and Prue Harley, Emergency Management Australia.

The images of the devastation caused by the December 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami shocked Australia and the world. With more than 230,000 people in 13 countries killed by the deadly wave, Australia recognised that a more sophisticated and reliable tsunami warning system was needed.

The Australian Government has invested nearly $70 million to upgrade existing arrangements and establish an Australian Tsunami Warning System. This will help warn Australians about an impending tsunami, as well as facilitate the provision of tsunami warnings in the southwest Pacific. The new system will also contribute to the establishment of an Indian Ocean tsunami warning system.

Since 2005, a small implementation team at Emergency Management Australia (EMA) has been working with Geoscience Australia, the Bureau of Meteorology, and State and Territory Governments to implement the new warning system.

Peter Willett, a member of the implementation team, was part of the relief operation following the 2004 tsunami. Peter briefed the Australian medical assistance teams that were deployed from across Australia to help the communities affected by the disaster.

‘It was very humbling to work on such a massive operation,’ Peter said. ‘It gave me an insight into the devastation that a huge tsunami can cause and how important it is to have an effective warning system for Australia.’

The risk of a tsunami in Australia is very real. We are surrounded by 8,000 kilometres of active tectonic plate boundary capable of generating tsunamis which could reach our coastline within two to four hours. One-third of all earthquakes worldwide occur along these boundaries.

EMA’s role is to enhance community awareness and State, Territory and local government agencies’ capacity to effectively plan and prepare for a tsunami. More than 1,000 emergency management personnel have attended presentations and training sessions focused on the best ways to prepare and respond.

As part of the community awareness program, Shannon McNamara is overseeing a project to help build resilience within remote Indigenous coastal communities to deal with the threat of a tsunami. The project will profile over 200 Aboriginal communities along the Western Australian coastline to identify communities and groups most at risk from tsunamis. The research will also establish if any pre-existing local knowledge or coping strategies relating to tsunamis are in place. An awareness program will be designed and delivered nationally to educate and enhance existing traditional knowledge.

EMA’s efforts are not confined to Australia. The team is working with the Bureau of Meteorology on a project to assist 14 Pacific Island countries to assess their ability to receive, communicate and respond to tsunami warnings.

The EMA team is confident that it can help raise the level of tsunami awareness, both in Australia and, where possible, internationally.

‘Tsunamis are a powerful phenomenon. Early warning, improved awareness, and effective planning are the best ways to mitigate their impact,’ Peter said.

‘Fortunately, the level of cooperation between our State and Territory colleagues, the Bureau of Meteorology, Geoscience Australia and EMA has been remarkable and is greatly assisting us to achieve our goals.’

Output 2.3

Provide national leadership in the development of emergency management measures to reduce risk to communities and manage the consequences of disasters

Summary

The Australian Government is committed to providing a safe and secure Australia and through the Department encourages an ‘all agencies’, ‘all hazards’ approach to the prevention or mitigation of disasters, preparedness for their impact, response to that impact, and recovery from the consequences. In 2006–07, Emergency Management Australia again performed this role in achieving Outcome 2: coordinated federal criminal justice, security and emergency management activity, for a safer Australia. Highlights were the further development of the Australian Emergency Plan, building capacity and capability, and raising community awareness on preparing for the worst and knowing what to do when it happens. The Government is also committed to supporting States and Territories, through the Department, in developing their capacity for dealing with emergencies and disasters, and providing physical assistance to them when they cannot cope in a disaster. EMA has responsibility for providing a comprehensive, national approach to emergency management and works closely with other government agencies such as the Department of Finance and Administration, Geoscience Australia and the Bureau of Meteorology. EMA achieved all of its plans for the year as listed in the 2005–06 report. Responsibility for the procurement of new urban search and rescue equipment was transferred to the States and Territories.

Major achievements

Emergency management leadership and collaboration

Our planning for 2006–07 gave high priority to ensuring that plans and arrangements for managing disasters are robust, flexible and sufficient to meet Australia’s needs. Through a number of key committees, EMA provides leadership and builds national capacity, capability and consistency in emergency management at all levels of government.

In this context, a major task in the year was to follow through on the Augmented Australasian Police Ministers’ Council resolution to develop the Australian Emergency Plan, including a National Catastrophic Disaster Response Plan, These were approved by the Australian Emergency Management Committee (AEMC),1 which met in September 2006 and April 2007. The Ministerial Council for Police and Emergency Management (MCPEM)2 met in November 2006. These meetings considered a range of strategic issues.

Australian Emergency Plan

Plans and arrangements are in place across Australia to manage almost every possible type of disaster. The Australian Emergency Plan will provide the framework that brings these plans and arrangements together, giving assurance to governments and communities that necessary arrangements are in place to deal with disasters of all sizes and scales, no matter what their cause. An AEMC Working Group was formed in 2006 to progress the development of the Australian Emergency Plan, with EMA providing the secretariat.

National Emergency Management Strategy for Remote Indigenous Communities

The strategy was developed through a collaborative approach between the States and Territories, the Australian Government, local government, remote Indigenous communities and relevant community leaders and organisations. The strategy will be launched by the Attorney-General in July 2007.

Climate change

The AEMC agreed to support the development of strategic alliances with the climate change sector including the Australian National Greenhouse Office and the Insurance Council of Australia. This will ensure that emergency managers understand the impacts of climate change, and that the climate change sector understands emergency management.

Rapid damage assessment methodology

At its meeting in November 2006, the Ministerial Council for Police and Emergency Management agreed to establish a national rapid damage assessment capability. Queensland, in consultation with other jurisdictions, will identify the range of skills and resources required by a field-based team undertaking rapid damage assessment in light of existing current capability at a jurisdictional level and will report back to the AEMC in August 2007.

Australian Disaster Information Network—AusDIN

The AEMC and the MCPEM endorsed AusDIN, the Internet portal that links the public to emergency management information sources across Australia. Funding for this national project was obtained through the ‘Working Together to Manage Emergencies’ Australian Government initiative. It was a collaborative effort with each State and Territory emergency management agency. The portal is hosted by the Department.

National Community Safety Working Group

The National Community Safety Working Group is conducting a national review of community education, awareness and engagement programs designed to enhance community safety for natural hazards on behalf of the AEMC. Research will be completed in December 2008, following which the Working Group will identify appropriate means of disseminating principles and creating capacity within State and Territory emergency service agencies to implement the outcomes.

The first stage of this two year project involved preliminary consultations with selected key stakeholders to assess the scope of current community safety activities to provide the basis for data gathering, which is now under way. The AEMC will consider referring any matters relating to community safety (including communications to the public and warning broadcasts) to the Working Group for action to ensure appropriate coordination of resources.

Emergency Services Infrastructure Assurance Advisory Group

The Emergency Services Infrastructure Assurance Advisory Group facilitates the sharing of information related to generic threats to, and vulnerabilities in, critical infrastructure in the emergency services sector, as well as measures and strategies to mitigate risk. Issues for the Advisory Group in 2006–07 were testing interjurisdictional emergency management capacity and capability and delivering emergency services during a pandemic. The group is chair