Power Simon: Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Bill — In Committee 
Power Simon: Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:653;Page:2216] 
Hon SIMON POWER (Minister of Justice) 
: 
 I follow the member who has just resumed his seat Clayton Cosgrove and I will make a couple of comments in response to his remarks. Of course Part 2 of the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Bill contains some of the clauses that matter in this part of the legislation. The previous speaker is right in that I did spend some time in South Australia recently looking at the gang legislation but also meeting with academics and the local law society to get a broad view of that legislation. One of the things I learnt while I was there was that we are actually a bit ahead of the game on this particular work. Yes other jurisdictions are looking at the complete outlawing of gangs by way of what could be described as the equivalent of domestic terrorism legislation. I suspect that that is the best way to term it. New Zealand is leading in some respects with this particular bill. 
Exactly what we are doing here should not be underestimated. This bill flips the burden of proof in respect of the confiscation of assets in quite a remarkable way. Rather than the prosecution having to meet a certain standard in order for forfeiture to occur the burden is flipped to a civil standard to allow those assets—and in “assets” I include cash—to be seized. Of course then the burden of proof that the assets were not gained from criminal activity is placed upon those seeking to recover the assets or cash that has been up to that point confiscated. Safeguards exist in the legislation for innocent third parties who might find themselves caught up in this regime. Those avenues give plenty of opportunities for matters to be rectified when a perceived injustice has occurred—for example in regard to a spouse or partner of some criminal whose family home has been caught up in this regime but without his or her knowledge of the criminal activity that was occurring. 
We should neither underestimate the strength of what is proposed here nor turn from the fact that both major political parties in the House have supported this legislation from the start when it was introduced right through until this point. That goes to show how seriously the Parliament takes this issue. The Hon Clayton Cosgrove is right in that to go to the heart of the power of these organisations is to take from them the assets and cash they derive from illegal activity. Therein lies the modern equivalent of the cry made by I think Norman Kirk to “take the bikes from the gangs”. In fact the modern equivalent of that cry is to “take the assets and the cash”. 
The bill that appears in the Committee stage today had a fairly good working-over in the Law and Order Committee under the watchful eye of Martin Gallagher who ensured that a fair and robust discussion was allowed to occur without implanting his own personal views on the proceedings of the committee. That was helpful because I was not sure what they were. Part 2 contains a fair chunk of the operative clauses here. I will listen with interest to contributions from members and I look forward to hearing their views on some of the clauses contained in this part.