Coddington Deborah: Courts and Criminal Matters Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Coddington Deborah: Courts and Criminal Matters Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:626;Page:21720] 
DEBORAH CODDINGTON (ACT) 
: 
 I come back to this issue of whether this legislation will work. The privacy issue is one reason why we can see that it absolutely will not work at all. It comes back to the issue of forcing everyone to be nice to each other before we even get round to trying to get money off them. 
If we look at section 103(2A) inserted by clause 19 we see that a bailiff or member of the police cannot execute a warrant to arrest an individual unless that person has been informed of the intention to execute it. The police could get a warrant then find out the person is going off on an overseas trip. A police officer could ring up the person and say: “Well Mr Richard Barker I hate to have to tell you but when you get to the airport we are going to execute this warrant.” When the police get there before executing the warrant they would have to give the person the opportunity to confirm whether he or she was the individual named in the warrant. 
How will that work when we have already with a previous Supplementary Order Paper amendment removed the opportunity to share information regarding aliases? It is well known that crims use aliases all the time. When they are arrested they give a false name. We heard a few examples before. We could have “Myrtle Ardern” and all sorts of aliases being used. Getting rid of the aliases provision and bringing in the Privacy Act wipes out the whole way that this legislation can even be used. 
The Hon Tony Ryall drew our attention in the debate on the last part to the fact that we will try to catch people who have racked up traffic or parking fines etc. but he also asked about those people who are fined in the High Court for selling drugs. We have this Customs and Excise Act so what about the people who are fined—if they are ever brought before the court—for downloading child pornography on the Internet? I say “if they are ever brought before the court” because we have such a useless and hopeless Minister of Police. Not only does he sit around and wait until  
Time 
 magazine humiliates this country in front of the rest of the world about the number of paedophiles here known to be downloading child porn on the Internet—and the information was handed to us on a plate by Interpol—but he still sits there and does nothing. When he finally does do something will those people be prosecuted under the Films Videos and Publications Classification Act which the Government has just tightened so that such people can be imprisoned? No. They will be prosecuted under the Customs and Excise Act which relates just to importing indecent and objectionable material. Such people probably will not even fall under the category in this bill because the fines they get are so pathetic. They will be able to go off to Thailand get more of those child videos and indecent films bring them back and distribute them on the Internet. They will not even be caught under this legislation. 
I come back to the issue I raised before of the cost-benefit analysis. My colleagues in the National Party kindly provided me with the facts on that. It is unbelievable that we are spending this time in urgency to pass legislation that to all and intents and purposes looks good and looks like it will do a lot but that as we find when we drill into it will be very lucky to catch even the 117 people we talked about before. We are putting everything in our way to assist those people. Members should look at this. In the first year it is estimated that we will collect $1.5 million but that it will cost us $1.7 million to do that. It is just like the old Liable-parent Contributions Scheme that was set up. The Government is still hopeless at collecting money owed under that legislation.