Mr FILING(11.39 a.m.) —I just want to make a couple of comments. I indicated earlier that I was going to move to have the matter referred to the main chamber and I have considered that in more detail. I was interested in the comments made by the minister at the table. I think he was perhaps not being serious when he suggested that impeding the bill's progress through the Main Committee was somehow going to impede its progress as a piece of legislation through the parliamentary process, which is obviously not true.

I support the bill and I support the bill's intentions. I just make the comment that the bill was introduced into the Senate. One of the reasons for that is that the Senate has a standing order that requires bills originating in the House to be presented by 30 May in order for them to be considered by the Senate within a particular time frame. One of the consequences of the relatively late start of this new parliament has been that bills which must desperately be passed—and I consider this to be one of them—have to be introduced in the Senate. Otherwise they will end up in the Senate backlog of legislation and not be dealt with for some time.

If I can just paraphrase the words of Winston Churchill, it is probably fair to say, in relation to police and the criminal justice system, that Australia's criminal justice system is probably the worst in the world, apart from all the others. I make that comment in view of the fact that, of all the police and criminal justice models around the world, the Australian one does have some particularly strong advantages. Of course, it has disadvantages, and disadvantages are highlighted in this particular bill.

I commend the work of a colleague, the former independent member for the South Coast, John Hatton, who served for some considerable time in the New South Wales parliament. He pursued the issue of police corruption in New South Wales almost incessantly, to the extent that he was able to cause to be initiated a royal commission into the New South Wales police force. He pursued that against the backdrop of considerable criticism from both sides of politics. In the last phase of his career in the New South Wales parliament, he was given a pretty hard time and was considered by some to be almost obsessive in his pursuit of that particular objective. If anybody is a hero of modern times in relation to our criminal justice system, then John Hatton, the former independent member for the South Coast, is one of them.

A police force, more often than not, reflects the society which it serves; another truism that is reflected in the bill. We face considerable difficulties in our community at present with behaviour—that is, what is considered to be acceptable behaviour in relation to what is considered to be, let us say, a fair return for one's effort. The whole of the service of police force members around the country has to be taken into consideration against that backdrop. In other words, you get the police force you deserve. We must, as a community, ensure that our police forces around the country are operating to the highest possible standards. However, in parts of the country, there are serious concerns and, unfortunately, as the member for Corangamite (Mr McArthur) has indicated, those concerns reflect on every member of the police force. That is an extraordinary imposition on the men and women who diligently serve their communities as police officers.

We have a community that every night of the week watches television programs with police themes: cop dramas. The community is fed a perception about police behaviour and police techniques that is often wildly different from the reality of day-to-day policing. One of my favourite programs is The Bill. It is probably the police drama that most closely reflects actual police work. That is because it looks at the day-to-day operation of a police station and, of course, the interaction of police officers as a consequence. More recent Australian dramas such as Blue Heelers have, I think, given a much greater and more realistic, sometimes gritty, feel to the reality of day-to-day policing in a modern Australian society. Some of the shows that were on television when I first arrived in this country, including Homicide and Division 4, were romanticised to a large extent, probably reflecting the romantic view that people had of the police forces. After all, a police force, as I mentioned, reflects the community. As communities develop, there is a pressure on police forces to develop as a consequence.

It is clear from the Wood royal commission that, in the case of the Australian Federal Police and, of course, the New South Wales police, there are significant problems with corruption. There have been significant allegations and compelling evidence, I would have thought, of corruption. Quite clearly, it requires a sensible resolution and this bill provides that, particularly in relation to the role of the commissioner of police as the chief executive officer of a modern police force.

When I first joined the police force in Western Australia, the commissioner was probably second only to the Premier in terms of the perception of the role as a significant public official. I certainly remember, when I first joined, that the commissioner was seen in a sort of revered way, up on the horizon, somebody of considerable authority. That authority, when I was a junior policeman, was very strong in the force. In fact, the commissioner had quite extraordinary powers to dismiss police officers whom he or his advisers considered to be unsuitable to remain in the force. It is obvious that, if you have a situation where human beings are police officers, you are going to get human problems.

I spoke earlier about the insidious problem of drug importation and drug trafficking in our community. The problem is probably compounded by the extraordinary and enormous rewards that can be achieved by those who participate in that sort of criminal behaviour. You have a situation wherein the police forces are rubbing up against this sort of corrupt, criminal, conspiratorial behaviour. They see the rewards. The problem is that in some instances, as we have clearly seen in the Wood royal commission, the temptation is overpowering. It is clear that we have to deal with this, as a community, in a way that properly reflects the reality of the situation.

Mr Tanner —Reform the drug laws.

Mr FILING —The member makes a comment about the reform of drug laws. There is some scope for the reform of certain drug laws. But, in the final analysis, if there is a profit it does not matter what sort of drug it is; whether it is marijuana, an amphetamine or one of the latest chemical drugs. It does not matter what they are; where there is a criminal profit to be gained, you are going to have people attracted into participating.

We have seen people who were even prepared to risk their lives to bring back drugs from South-East Asia, knowing that they were facing the possibility of a death sentence. They are

so significantly attracted towards the profit, through their own drug addiction or just through sheer greed, that they are prepared to risk their lives—and, in many cases, risk 30 years in some of the worst prison conditions in the world—in order to either make that profit or feed their own drug needs.

It is clear that, in modern policing and the reform of modern policing, there is a need for greater visibility and scrutiny. If that requires the sort of authority that this bill provides the commissioner of the Australian Federal Police with, then that is absolutely necessary. In some ways, it probably reflects some of the past standing of commissioners of police as being people with considerable authority in directing the day-to-day operations of their forces.

The independence of the police force is a very important facet of the balances within our criminal justice system. In more recent times, some of this independence has been imposed upon. I believe that is to the detriment of a better and more responsive, efficient and decent police force effort around the country. In particular, in the case of the Australian Federal Police, the role of the commissioner is absolutely critical. The commissioner's role should be as independent as is possible within the relationship between the commissioner's office, the minister and the parliament to whom the minister is responsible.

In the case of rewards, one of the areas that I have wanted to see changed and enhanced is that of the remuneration and benefits that are available to police officers in our day-to-day community. After all, when police officers are well paid, in relative terms, compared to other members of the community, and they are secure in their employment in terms of doing the right thing, getting the job done properly and being decent and honest members of the force, obviously that is a greater deterrent to succumbing to the attractions of criminal profits or becoming involved in conspiracies with organised crime or other criminals.

That is something that we all have to look at. If we want to have police forces that are going to be impeccable, efficient, responsive and answerable to the community, we ought to make sure that not only are we getting the best possible personnel into those forces but also they are well renumerated for their work, so that they are seen within the community as being higher than perhaps they have been in the past.

Over the last 20 to 30 years, the standing of police officers in the community was reduced steadily until they became, in many cases, the butt of abuse. To refer to my own particular experience, I can recollect that, when I first joined the job, in social terms a police officer was almost seen as a pariah. If you turned up to a social gathering, it was almost as though you had suddenly put the pall of doom over it. Of course, people started whispering in corners—

Mr Tanner —Perhaps they were using all those drugs!

Mr FILING —That is an interesting observation; perhaps the member could expand on that, at a later stage, from his own personal observations. I agree that it is a question of perception and myth. We took on the British police model as our role model in the formation of our Australian police forces. We adopted, changed and developed that within the Australian context, both in the states and nationally, with the Australian Federal Police acting as the federal police force.

Amongst those things that we took on, as opposed to other police jurisdictions around the world, was the concept that a police officer should be a part of the community, interact with the community and live in the community, as opposed to the barrack style police forces on the mainland of Europe and elsewhere. I must say that I think that is one of the great advantages. Community`visibility is absolutely critical. One of the things that is occurring in some police jurisdictions is the bringing of detectives back into uniform so that they are visible going about their duties. It is something that in the past I have opposed but, in the light of some of the circumstances of recent times, I think it helps the visibility of police practices and helps the community and the police to interact to ensure that they have very high standards.

The other aspect is the scrutiny of the courts. I have to commend the former Minister for Justice, the member for Denison (Mr Kerr), on this issue. Some years back, when he first introduced the requirement for Australian Federal Police officers to videotape interviews, I was a critic of his. I thought that at times, particularly in remote areas of Australia, videotaping would pose significant problems of access, facilities, distance and time involved after apprehending a suspect, interviewing, and going through the further processes that are applicable under the relevant statutes.

This, I believe, has now proved to be a significant advantage. It has enhanced police work. It has also meant, in the context of prosecution of cases in the courts, that the courts are able to see the accused at the point when they are being interviewed by the police in a way that often reveals more about them than mountains and mountains of written or oral evidence could possibly do. I would say from my discussions with other police officers, particularly the ones I consider to be thoughtful about these processes, that I believe that they are all in agreement with the changes that have been brought in, in particular the changes relating to videotaping of interviews. Also, videotaping is a critical part of the element of visibility, which I mentioned earlier. It means that people can see the process, with the benefit of hindsight to a certain extent. It is there on the record in physical evidence, visual and in sound. That is something that permits the courts to have a greater scrutiny of police practices and police behaviour.

I reiterate some of the comments made earlier in relation to cuts. But, if we are going to have a police force and an Australian Federal Police that is going to be effective, it has to be as independent as possible. In other words, within the communal justice system it must be able to exercise its statutory responsibilities in a way that is consistent with the basic principles of a proper, responsive criminal justice system. Also, it is not to be interlinked or merged in joint standing facilities with other agencies. That is something I have criticised in the past; it is something from the former Minister for Justice that I have criticised. I felt that the joint standing operations between the NCA and the Australian Federal Police were to the detriment of both organisations. I believe that each should be self-standing and clearly separated so that they are clearly answerable in their own ways to their own particular statutes and, at the end of the day, via the minister, to the parliament.

Our processes are critical to a criminal justice system. It is fair to say that in the past, particularly in New South Wales, if the legislators had been more diligent in looking over the operations of the New South Wales Police, we would have had a different situation. There were all sorts of allegations in the 1950s, the 1960s, the 1970s and the 1980s in relation to the interlinking of corrupt behaviour in the police and some of the political figures of the times. But it is fair that we must ensure that the police force's activities, its responsiveness, its efficiency, its effects, and its method of operations are as clearly visible as possible so that the community can see, to their satisfaction or otherwise, that they are getting a service that they deserve.

I said at the beginning that you get the police force you deserve. If we have got police forces that are less than satisfactory, we have to look back at our own community and we have to make the decision to reform the police forces in ways that are consistent with what we ask the community to do themselves. After all, police officers are human beings. A vast majority of them around the country perform their duties honestly and decently, as best they can. In many cases, as we saw recently with the Port Arthur massacre and in other instances, they go far beyond the call of duty to provide services that many other citizens would probably find themselves completely unable to do.

We ask them to do that on our behalf. In order to ensure that they have the standing in the community, we have got to ensure that they are able to work in the sorts of administrative and organisational settings that enhance their honesty and their commitment to their work, and at the end of the day give the public the satisfaction that it is getting the best possible police service that it deserves.

I commend this bill to the Main Committee. As I mentioned earlier, it is important that this bill is passed as soon as possible. As a consequence I have refrained from referring it back to the main chamber.