Mr DEAN (Windermere ) - Mr President, I thought that I probably should get up and just say a couple of things. It is a police bill that I could talk about without referring to quotas - and the latest, Mr Leader, if you have heard about them, are the IAMs.

Mr Wilkinson - IAMs?

Mr DEAN - I do not know whether any other honourable member has heard of them, Mr President, but I will be referring to them later on -

Mr PRESIDENT - I do know a few.

Members laughing.

Mr DEAN - What this stands for is the independent assessment management program or scheme which backs up the quota system so each individual police officer now has a quota that they must get each night. Where it used to be on the district at one stage or on a section -

Mr Parkinson - Each night?

Mr DEAN - now, each night, each day, a police officer goes out and must reach a certain number of bookings for certain things and they are given that as a list.

Mr Wilkinson - What happens if they don't work at night? Charge the wife?

Mr DEAN - They come out during the day.

Mr President, these bills really are about anti-terrorism and serious crime. They relate to very serious crime as has been referred to and, predominantly, criminal acts across the borders. This has caused police concerns for decades, in fact.

I can recall in my 35 years of policing, going back to my very early days as a detective, of having to be engaged and involved in investigation of crime that started in this State and then moved across to other States which really did create a lot of concerns for us. It was difficult to investigate and sometimes a thread was lost in trying to follow up those investigations in other States. I want to refer to two crimes that I was involved in that come to mind and it is -

Mr PRESIDENT - You were involved in the solution of them?

Mr DEAN - Thank you very much, Mr President, for that. I was involved in the investigation of them, you are right. I certainly was not involved in the commission of them, no. The investigation of these two crime became quite difficult because they crossed borders and in one instance they crossed a number of borders.

Case one involved a ring of criminals, well-to-do criminals, and a lot of these people had very good positions but they embarked on stealing runabouts and highly valued runabouts, motor boats and trailers and everything that went with them. The crime started in Victoria, went across into New South Wales and the boats were in fact all being sold here in Tasmania. They were being shipped across in the ferries, collected at the ferry depot by a certain individual and then they were moved right around this State, and it was a situation of the receivers not really knowing that they had been stolen. But the prices were such that any reasonable person must have been terribly suspicious of the activity. The deals were being done through an infamous west coast hotel, or a hotel on the way to the west coast, down the west coast. It involved hundreds of thousands of dollars, about $1 million worth that we were able to estimate . In fact, it was a lot more than that and I am talking about 20 years ago, so it was certainly a huge crime, when one looks back.

Case two involved the armed hold-up and kidnapping at the Elimatta Hotel in Devonport which some members here might still recall. Of the offenders, two were Tasmanian and one was Victorian. A lot of violence was used, kidnapping of the victims, et cetera and that crime was committed here. As I said, then it crossed to Victoria and the proceeds went to Victoria and were distributed around the area.

Mr Wilkinson - Were those people involved with boats as well?

Mr DEAN - No, it was a separate group involved in those two crimes. But I used these to emphasise some of the issues that I am going to raise.

Both investigations were difficult because of the inability of police to effectively work across borders. It really was difficult and in the main, there was a reliance on colleagues in the other States to sometimes go out on a limb to do the investigative work that was necessary. Some of these things could be overcome by police from one State being sworn as special constables in another State, but this, Mr President, only came with limited authority and was not as effective as it will be with the introduction of these new bills. The ability to use all those weapons that now will become available just was not available then. I look back now on the two previous matters and realise how much easier it would have been had that ability been there to use surveillance equipment, tracking devices, listening devices to jump those magical borders to do so. There was this screen; the borders were there and you could not jump those borders. It really made policing difficult.

Reciprocal rights for police throughout the country is the basis of contemporary policing and is the one way that our police will have a level playing field - that is, a similar playing area to that of a criminal element. They know no boundaries, they know no State borders and neither does Bass Strait interfere with their ability to commit crime. However, boundaries, borders and water have been impediments to good policing and these bills will get rid of those obstacles. National laws are indeed necessary and supported.

I previously mentioned the need for special authorisations for police to operate in another State. That is, it was at the whim of the Commissioner of Police in the other State to sign a document giving limited authorisation for the member to work in that State, and that is what it came down to. Mr President, this legislation coming forward changes this position and provides the Commissioner of Police in the State of the police officer to provide authorisation to operate in another State. How I would have appreciated this legislation during my time as a detective. What happens now is the commissioner here can sign and give the authorisation, as I understand this legislation, to go across to Victoria, to New South Wales, or any other State and to carry out the activities and functions of a police officer in the conducting of the investigation into that matter that they have authority to investigate. If I am wrong, I would ask the Leader to explain that to me. As I understand the legislation, that is the position.

That is a huge move forward. And vice versa of course, the commissioners in the other States can do the same there and give the authorisation to a police officer in New South Wales to come into Tasmania and do exactly the same thing. The boat investigation, the one I referred to, would have been much easier and less complicated and probably would have brought about better results had this legislation been in place. In fact it would have done. We would have recovered a lot more boats. We would have locked up a lot more criminals.
I should imagine that when this does happen there will be a requirement - and if it is in there, I have probably missed it - that the Commissioner of Police providing that authority will need to brief the Commissioner of Police in the State to which the authority relates. Once again, perhaps the Leader can just advise me. I should imagine that would just be a commonsense thing and would be a part of this legislation, Mr President, otherwise you could have police officers from another State running around investigating, for instance, in this State without the knowledge of the commissioner and one of course can only imagine some of the situations that could arise if that were the case.

These bills are all about the investigation of serious crimes. Other less serious matters, I take it, will be investigated in the traditional ways. That is, normally a file would be forwarded to the other jurisdiction and a request made for the investigation to continue. That indeed is how most serious crime was previously investigated; a file would be forwarded to another jurisdiction where there would be consultation and they would be asked to continue that investigation and follow through with it. It would need to be an extremely serious crime before a police officer from a State would travel to another State.

I wanted to make a brief comment on this and no doubt the member for Nelson will make more comment. Where a police officer is lawfully able to commit crime by legislation then very clearly there must be very strong legislation in place to control such activity. It would be relatively easy, I would suggest, for an authorised person, a police officer, to get caught up in a web - hyped up and at a time of high adrenalin activity - to abuse that authorisation. Therefore the necessity for strict control and severe penalties for transgressions is necessary, and that is provided for within the acts.

There have been interesting issues raised. What offences can be committed, what length will an undercover operative be able to go to protect the operation and probably protect their identity? If a police officer undercover is tracking terrorists or a large drug-smuggling ring, it is not unreasonable to believe that fairly serious offences might need to be committed.

I note that in the controlled operations bill, the authority to provide for the operation is to contain a clause limiting the operants to certain activities that would otherwise be unlawful were it not for this bill. That, Mr President, gives me heart and I dare say would give most other people heart in the fact that police officers, undercover operants, will not be able to go out there and willy-nilly commit offences and do the other things that they might want to do. It is controlled, it is part of the authorisation, as I understand it.

I note also that no offence likely to cause death or serious injury or involve sexual offences or involve, as I understand it, serious damage to property is permitted or will be permitted. This will not be easy to control and you would like to think it will never be needed but I think if one believes that then one very clearly also believes in fairies, and the member for Rosevears would clearly remember that term that was used by the previous member for Murchison. It is happening, and some services have been practising these activities for decades. You only need to watch television to get a good grounding on what is happening.

Ms Forrest - What happens on television police shows is real?

Mr DEAN - A lot of it is very real and it is frightening to police, I might add.

Ms Forrest - I might say the health ones aren't too good sometimes.

Mr DEAN - You are right.

Indemnity is also provided to operants acting with the proper authorisation and very clearly that is necessary.
Mr President, just in conclusion, and having gone through the bills, it is really national legislation. It mirrors the legislation that is currently in place in the other States or is being enacted in the other States. It brings us in line and, as I said, is a national method of policing. I have spoken to the police officer who in fact had the responsibility of looking after these bills. He is currently absent from the State and would otherwise have been here of course but he said that he was perfectly comfortable with the bills and that they provide a good position.

Mrs Rattray-Wagner - What about the people on the ground; have you spoken with them?

Mr DEAN - I have spoken to a number of police of course and wherever the police powers are increased, why would police not like them? The police like the opportunity to be able to do their job properly and you do not need to go out and ask the general coalface police officer because they will say to you, 'This is legislation that is necessary. Of course we want it'.

Mrs Rattray-Wagner - What about resourcing it?

Mr DEAN - I have no doubt the resources will be there. When we look at terrorism and where that is heading, the State is very much aware of where that is going, the police are, and I have no doubt that the resourcing will be there. I do have concerns at times that the resourcing, whilst it moves in that direction, may go somewhere else. It is my concern that some other areas of policing will probably miss out and that is something that I would not like to see, but unfortunately that is a fact of life. We would like to get an undertaking that that will not be interfered with in any way.

Mrs Rattray-Wagner - It might come out of the levee funding.

Mr DEAN - No, it will probably come out of the money that the Treasurer has that he got back from the Launceston City Council for the pool - that $8 million . It will probably come out of that.

I have spoken with the Police Association of Tasmania, Mr President, and they are perfectly happy with this legislation as well and believe that it will certainly give their members protection and allow their members to better prevent criminal activity throughout the States and throughout the country.

I have spoken to some members of the public and they are delighted with the legislation, Mr President. The only group that I have spoken to that are not delighted are the criminals who say that the powers are not needed.