Mr RUDDOCK (Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs)(4.25 p.m.) —I move:

That the bill be now read a second time.

This bill is one of a package implementing the government's decision to move the migration advice industry towards voluntary self-regulation through a period of statutory self-regulation.

The measures contained in the principal bill are consistent with the government's commitment to reduce unnecessary regulation of small business. At the same time, it maintains and strengthens consumer protection for those people in the community who are vulnerable to exploitation by unscrupulous or incompetent migration agents. The measures will also contribute to the integrity of the migration program by actively promoting an ethical and competent migration advice industry.

A review of the existing scheme for registration of migration agents was commissioned by the government in June 1996. This scheme was the first regulatory arrangement to be reviewed by the Commonwealth as a party to the competition principles agreement. The review focused on the impact the scheme has had on consumer protection and on the costs of regulation borne by business.

The review was conducted by a task force within my department and was guided by a reference group of independent experts chaired by Mr Ian Spicer, the former Chief Executive of the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry. The reference group also included:

.   Ms Pamela O'Neil, Chairperson of the Migration Agents Registration Board;

.   Mr Ian Tonking, a Sydney barrister and consultant editor of the Australian Trade Practices Reporter ;

.   Ms Cheryl Webster, a grant-in-aid worker for Careforce, the Anglican Home Mission;

.   Mr John Hodges, Queensland State President of the Migration Institute of Australia and a former immigration minister; and

.   Ms Pauline Matthewson, National Committee Member of the Migration Institute of Australia.

The review found that the existing scheme had achieved a measure of consumer protection. It also found that its credibility had strengthened somewhat in the time since the scheme was reviewed by the Parliamentary Joint Standing Committee on Migration in 1995. The review found that the existing scheme had not adversely affected competition in the migration advice market, although it recognised that there was a need to improve competency standards in a way that would not affect the level of competition in the industry.

In considering the findings of the review, the government concluded that, although it would be possible for the industry to be self-regulating in the future, this was not immediately achievable for two main reasons. The first reason is the vulnerability of the consumer group. This group may have difficulties making an informed choice about the quality of the migration advice they are purchasing. There is a history of exploitation of consumers of migration advice by a number of unscrupulous and unethical migration agents.

The second reason is the fact that the migration advice industry is not yet `mature', in the sense that there is limited cooperation occurring between the three main occupational groups and the Migration Institute of Australia. These occupational groups are lawyers, agents in the private sector of the industry, and agents in the voluntary sector. At present, the Migration Institute of Australia, as an industry association, covers only 10 per cent of registered agents.

The government has decided to introduce a form of statutory self-regulation as an interim measure for two years, commencing on 21 March 1998. This bill will provide for the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs to appoint the Migration Institute of Australia as the Migration Agents Registration Authority. The Migration Institute of Australia is willing to take on this role and strongly supports the government's intention to maintain a professional and ethical migration advice industry.

The institute has acknowledged strengths in the areas of competency, education and ethics. However, it will require time and support to develop the infrastructure to undertake the full range of regulatory functions and to achieve coverage of the whole industry.

The legislation before the House today will provide the necessary statutory backing for this to occur. In addition to the statutory backing provided by the principal bill, I intend to enter into a formal agreement with the Migration Institute of Australia.

The agreement will spell out the details of how the institute will carry out its function as the Migration Agents Registration Authority and will include provisions in relation to:

.   performance requirements;

.   financial accountability;

.   complaints handling and discipline processes

.   referral of instances of unregistered practice and fraud to my department for investigation; and

.   support to be provided by my department.

The proposed scheme will be reviewed by the government before 21 March 2000. The review will determine the extent to which the Migration Institute of Australia has developed the capacity and infrastructure to undertake the role as industry regulator in a fully self-regulating environment.

This bill retains all of the important elements of the existing scheme for registration of migration agents. For example, it will continue to be a mandatory requirement for all persons who wish to practise as migration agents, including members of the legal profession, to be registered. All applicants for registration will be required to satisfy the registration authority that they are of good character and have the necessary knowledge to give quality migration advice and assistance. As is now the case, unregistered practice will be an offence. My department will continue to rigorously investigate and pursue those who provide immigration advice without being registered.

As with the existing scheme, the bill provides for the investigation of complaints made against migration agents who act in an unprofessional or unscrupulous manner. However, it will also introduce significant improvements in the complaints handling process to address the review's finding that the existing process was expensive, slow and insufficiently responsive to consumer concerns. For example, the bill provides for the registration authority to be able to refer a complainant and the relevant agent to a mediator. The intention is to enable the parties to a dispute to negotiate a mutually acceptable outcome without having to resort to lengthy and expensive disciplinary processes.

The existing legislation allows for disciplinary action to be taken against an agent who, for example, is found to have breached the code of conduct or is found not to be a person of integrity. Such disciplinary action can take the form of a caution or the agent's registration can be suspended or cancelled. These sanctions will remain.

This bill proposes changes to the way disciplinary action against agents who are also practising lawyers will be handled. The changes will make it possible for the Migration Institute of Australia to refer disciplinary matters involving lawyer agents to the relevant professional bodies for disciplinary action. This will place the responsibility for handling malpractice within the legal profession itself, where it properly belongs.

The bill also proposes a number of new provisions aimed at strengthening consumer protection and improving the competence of agents. The present definition of `immigration assistance' does not extend to migration advice given in relation to sponsorships or nominations. This means that a person can provide assistance and advice to potential sponsors or nominators without being required to be registered as a migration agent. Both the Joint Standing Committee on Migration and the recent review conducted by my department recommended that this loophole be closed, noting that a growing number of sponsors and nominees were effectively unprotected from poor advice or unscrupulous practice.

The government also recognises that travel agents, in advising non-citizen clients of the need to have a visa for travel to and from Australia, could arguably be required to register as migration agents under the existing scheme. This bill amends the definition of `immigration assistance' in a way which will clearly exclude the limited forms of assistance provided by travel agents and interpreters. The bill, therefore, removes an area of unnecessary regulation and uncertainty for the tourism industry. The government wants to ensure that all clients of migration agents are fully protected by the legislation.

Under the current arrangements, agents operating in the voluntary sector are not required to meet the same knowledge test for registration as agents operating in the private sector. Some of these agents have fully met the knowledge test and are recognised as highly competent and ethical practitioners. However, many have not. In practice, this has led to the development of two different standards of competency in the industry, with some of the most vulnerable clients receiving a lower standard of service.

The bill addresses this inequity by requiring all agents in the voluntary sector to fully meet the knowledge test in order to qualify for registration as a migration agent. Because many agents in the voluntary sector would be unable to meet the test without further educa tion and training, the bill provides for a six-month period of grace to enable them to qualify. In addition, my department is making funding available for the provision of training courses to enable agents in the voluntary sector to obtain the level of knowledge required for full registration.

At present, agents operating in the voluntary sector and providing their services free of charge are not required to pay a registration fee. The recent review of the existing scheme found that this arrangement resulted in agents in the private sector cross-subsidising agents in the voluntary sector. It also found that fee levels were higher as a result because the cost of processing a registration is the same in all cases.

The two charge bills included in this package reduce this cross-subsidy by ensuring that charges are imposed on voluntary sector agents. The government proposes, however, that the regulations will provide a lower rate of charge for voluntary sector agents in recognition of their lesser capacity to meet the full costs of registration.

At present, once an agent is registered, there are no incentives for them to maintain or improve their knowledge and professional competency. Clients, therefore, have no way of knowing whether an agent has made the effort to keep abreast of changes to the Migration Act and regulations. The bill contains provisions designed to improve the competency and ethical practice of all migration agents. From 21 March 1999, all agents seeking to re-register must demonstrate that they have met criteria in relation to undertaking continuing professional development. The details of this requirement will be set out in regulations.

Agents who fail to meet this requirement will be refused re-registration and will not be permitted to continue to practise in the industry until they reapply and meet the requirements. I am aware that this is a serious measure. It potentially affects the livelihood of some people in small business. But it is necessary both in the public interest and in the interests of consumers.

Members would appreciate that the integrity of the government's migration program can be compromised by unscrupulous and exploitative practice by migration agents. Currently, consumers have no guarantee that the agent they are paying to give them professional advice is, in fact, fully competent. If this requirement for continuing professional development has the effect of dissuading some agents from remaining in the industry because they do not wish to improve their practice, then the industry and the community would be better off without them.

Two charge bills are being introduced in tandem with this bill. Together with the provisions in the principal bill, they will provide a more flexible vehicle for setting the level of fees applying to applications for registration. After appointment as the Migration Agents Registration Authority, the Migration Institute of Australia will be authorised to collect fees on behalf of the Commonwealth. The principal bill includes an appropriation to the Migration Institute of Australia to ensure that it recovers the costs of running the new scheme.

The Renewal Charge Bill will be repealed on 21 March 1999. After that time, renewal of agents' registration will no longer be automatic. Instead, agents will be required to apply for re-registration and meet the new continuing professional development requirements. The principal bill also includes a series of transitional arrangements. These are designed to enable a seamless transition to the new scheme.

Agents who registered under the old scheme will continue to have their registration and renewal dates recognised by the new registration authority. Those who submitted their application for registration close to the expiry of the old scheme will be able to be registered by the new registration authority. In addition, unfinalised complaints and disciplinary processes will be able to be brought to completion by the new registration authority.

In conclusion, I would like to emphasise that this package of bills provides a unique opportunity for government and the industry to work together to ensure the development of a competent, reputable and ethical migration advice industry. The government believes this will be of benefit both to consumers and the broader Australian community. I commend the bill to the House. I present the relevant explanatory memorandum.

Debate (on motion by Mr Martin Ferguson) adjourned.