“Sneaky laws which declare you as guilty in the eyes of the law the minute the police say you are guilty” - Turnbull Government legislative overreach continues in 2018?

Sydney Criminal Lawyers, 16 August 2018:

A Senate committee has just given the Turnbull government the green light to nationalise a scheme that allows government to seize citizens’ assets unless their legitimate origins can be explained, even if the owner of the wealth hasn’t been charged with let alone convicted of an offence.

On 6 August, the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee recommended that the federal government pass the Unexplained Wealth Legislation Amendment Bill 2018 without any changes.

Unexplained wealth laws currently exist in every Australian jurisdiction, but the new scheme provides a broader model allowing for federal and state authorities to work in collaboration across jurisdictional borders to target serious and organised crime.

“The scale and complexity of this criminal threat has necessitated an enhanced focus on cooperative, cross-jurisdictional responses by Australian governments,” home affairs minister Peter Dutton said in the second reading speech of the bill.

However, critics of the scheme warn that existing unexplained wealth laws undermine the rule of law and broadening their scope will lead to a further erosion of civil liberties. And while these laws are meant to target untouchable crime bosses, they’re actually being used against petty criminals.

Presumption of guilt

“These beefed-up laws bring down all the secret surveillance and the swapping of scuttlebutt masquerading as intelligence on everyone in Australia,” Civil Liberties Australia CEO Bill Rowlings told Sydney Criminal Lawyers.

“The unexplained wealth laws completely overturn the presumption of innocence, which is part of our rule of law in Australia,” he continued. “They are sneaky laws which declare you as guilty in the eyes of the law the minute the police say you are guilty.”

Unexplained wealth laws are a recent development in Australia. But, unlike other proceeds of crime laws that allow for the confiscation of assets derived from prosecuted criminal acts, unexplained wealth places the onus upon the individual to prove their wealth was legally acquired.

“People don’t understand, under these laws the government can confiscate your assets even if you haven’t been found guilty of anything,” Mr Rowlings stressed.

Broadening the reach

The current Commonwealth unexplained wealth laws were introduced in 2010 via amendments made to the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Cth) (the Act).

These laws apply where there are “reasonable grounds to suspect” an individual’s assets have been derived from a committed federal offence, “a foreign indictable offence or a state offence that has a federal aspect.”

There are three sorts of orders that can be sought in relation to unexplained wealth. Section 20A of the Act provides that a court can issue an unexplained wealth restraining order, which is an interim order that restricts an individual’s ability to dispose of property.

Section 179B of the Act allows for the issuance of a preliminary order, which requires a person to appear in court to prove their wealth is legitimate. And under section 179E, an order can be issued requiring that the payment of an amount of wealth deemed unlawful be made to the government.

The new legislation amends sections 20A and 179E, so that these orders can be issued in respect to relevant offences of participating states, as well as in relation to territory offences. Relevant state offences will be outlined in state legislation that enables participation in the national scheme.

Sharing it around

The legislation broadens the access authorities have to an individual’s banking information in relation to an unexplained wealth investigation.

Section 213 of the Act allows certain authorised Commonwealth officers to issue access notices to financial institutions. This provision will now be extended to states and territory law enforcement agencies.

Proposed section 297C of the Act outlines how federal, state and territory governments will divvy up the seized wealth. A subcommittee will be established to distribute the money. And while any state that opts out of the scheme will be eligible for a share, it will be a less favourable amount.

The legislation also makes amendments to the sharing of information provisions contained in the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act 1979.…..

Backdoor revenue raising

The NSW government has already introduced legislation into parliament, which enables that state to participate in the national scheme. The legislation sets out that the relevant offences the laws apply to are set out in section 6(2) of the Criminal Assets Recovery Act 1990.

NSW police minister Troy Grant told parliament that the legislation allows the state to refer matters to the Commonwealth, which then authorises the Australian federal police to use certain NSW offences as a basis for the confiscation of unexplained wealth.

But, Mr Rowlings states that the nationalising of the scheme will actually streamline a process that sees the unwarranted confiscation of wealth to prop up government coffers.

“The cash seized is paying for extra government lawyers to help seize more cash,” Mr Rowlings made clear, “so it’s a devious upward spiral where more and more unconvicted people will have their assets taken, and then have to prove their innocence or the government gets their assets.”

Read the full article here.

Corruption in the Australian public sector

All three tiers of government in Australia have recorded instances where public service employees allegedly participate in potentially criminal activity.

Here is the most recent……

WA Crime and Corruption Commission, 16 August 2018:

The Corruption and Crime Commission (CCC) has today tabled in State Parliament a comprehensive report into corrupt activity at the North Metropolitan Health Service (NMHS) that went undetected for up to a decade. 

The Report into bribery and corruption in maintenance and service contracts within North Metropolitan Health Service highlights serious misconduct at its most shocking – corrupt relationships between the private and public sectors resulting in the gross misuse and fraudulent misappropriation of hundreds of thousands of dollars of public funds.

The Commission heard evidence of corruption and serious misconduct involving public officers who:

• accepted tens of thousands of dollars in gifts of interstate and overseas travel and accommodation from contractors in return for awarding them work;

• accepted tens of thousands of dollars in gifts of expensive restaurant meals, entertainment, alcohol and other gratuities in return for awarding work;

• received thousands of dollars in cash payments from contractors in return for awarding them continued work;

• facilitated contractors to fraudulently invoice NMHS to cover the costs of the corrupt benefits of travel, accommodation, meals, entertainment and cash they received;

• colluded with particular contractors in 'bid rigging' activities for the purpose of subverting the WA Health and NMHS procurement processes; and

• a senior public officer used contractors to renovate his private residence at a discount and then facilitated the building contractors to fraudulently invoice NMHS approximately $170,000 for works carried out on his private residence.

The Report recommends that prosecuting authorities consider preferring criminal charges against three former public servants (including a former Executive Director of Facilities Management at NMHS and a former Executive Director of Perth Children’s Hospital Service Integration) and no fewer than 10 private sector contractors.

Read the full media release

Media release - CCC report reveals corruption within the North Metropolitan Health Service and serious warnings for public sector agencies and private sector contractors.pdf 

Download the Report

Report into bribery and corruption in maintenance and service contracts within North Metropolitan Health Service

ABC News, 16 August 2018:

Senior WA Health bureaucrats corruptly reaped hundreds of thousands of dollars in gifts and travel paid for by contractors in exchange for winning work on Government projects, an explosive new report has found.

One senior bureaucrat allowed contractors to fraudulently bill the North Metropolitan Health Service (NMHS) for $170,000 in renovations carried out on his private home, while he and another accepted benefits that included overseas travel, restaurant meals, entertainment, cash bribes and alcohol in exchange for the awarding of government contracts.

The Corruption and Crime Commission began investigating after a tip-off from a junior whistleblower within the department in 2014.

Its report recommends charges be considered against three former senior health bureaucrats and nearly a dozen contractors, for what was described as sustained efforts to engage in and cover up bribery.

The report named former NMHS executive directors John Fullerton and David Mulligan, as well as former facilities development manager Shaun Ensor, as the bureaucrats involved in the corrupt conduct.

"This report details more than a decade of corrupt conduct reaching into senior levels within WA Health," the CCC report stated.

"It exposes a culture of contractors freely giving gifts and benefits to public officers, with the expectation of thereby winning work and recovering the costs of the gifts through fraud.

The report uncovered extensive efforts by contractors to shower Mr Fullerton with gifts and other benefits in exchange for government work.

Examples of corruption found by the CCC:

Lavish lunches at restaurants including Nobu, Rockpool and Coco's totalling more than $50,000

A three-week business-class trip to the UK for Mr Fullerton and his wife, Jacqui

A business-class trip for the Fullertons to Canada to attend their son's wedding

A three-week US holiday for Mr and Mrs Fullerton

Annual trips to Melbourne for Mr and Mrs Fullerton

Trips to Canada, Bali, Hong Kong, China and Dubai for Mr Fullerton and his wife

An all-expenses paid trip to the UK for Mr Mulligan

A night at the Galaxy nightclub including paid hostesses

Melbourne Cup lunches and AFL grand final tickets

Gifts of cologne, shoes, business suits and shirts worth thousands of dollars

Cash payments of more than $25,000

Over about a decade, Mr Fullerton received thousands of dollars in cash and $150,000 in gifts including flights, meals, perfume and clothes paid for by contractors, according to the report.

"In return, those contractors obtained regular work at NMHS," the report stated.

"For the majority of contractors, this was the price of doing business with Mr Fullerton."……

The CCC said prosecution should be considered for 10 contractors involved in the corruption, as well as the three senior bureaucrats.

"On occasion, money added to NMHS invoices [was] purely for greed rather than to recoup money spent on 'gifts'," the report stated.

CCC commissioner John McKechnie said covert surveillance discovered some of those involved discussing plans to destroy evidence and create falsified records to cover up their wrongdoing.

"It's staggering, the extent of this in North Metro Health and the fact it has continued for so long," Mr McKechnie said.

"We think serious consideration should be given to prosecuting not only the public officers but some of the contractors.”

BACKGROUND

Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission, 17 July 2018:

Public sector corruption refers to the misuse of public power or position with an expectation of undue private gain or advantage (for self or others). It may include:

bribery

embezzlement

fraud

extortion

trading in influence

perverting the course of justice

exchanging goods for money or information.

Corrupt conduct can occur directly through the improper or unlawful actions of public sector officials, or through the actions of individuals operating in the private sector who attempt to inappropriately influence the functions of government.

Organised crime groups try to corrupt public officials to gain access to public funds, information, protection and other services to facilitate criminal activities. These officials are likely to be from law enforcement agencies, border agencies, and agencies that issue identification documents.

Corruption has a serious impact on government, industry and national security. It prejudices the rule of law and distorts markets. It can inhibit foreign investment and international credit ratings and damages Australia’s reputation as a safe reliable economy in which to invest and trade. It can also harm cooperation and relations with foreign governments and law enforcement agencies.

Corruption of public sector officials has substantial multiplier effects and benefits for organised crime. There may be significant links between corruption in the public sector and organised crime groups that, by their very nature, remain hidden. The key challenge in identifying and investigating corruption is that corrupt conduct occurs in secret, between consenting parties who are frequently skilled at deception.

A definitive list of the far right nutters within the current federal Liberal Party?

Sky News stated this as a list of those in the Liberal party room who backed, then Minister for Home Affairs and now backbencher, Peter Dutton's attempt to overthrow Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull:

A Who’s Who of those voting against Malcolm Bligh Turnbull in the Liberal party room leadership ballot on 21 August 2018:

Peter Dutton himself,
Michael Sukkar, MP for Deakin (Vic) & Assistant Minister to the Treasurer,
Greg Hunt, MP for Flinders (Vic) & Minister for Health,
Tony Abbott, MP for Warringah (NSW) & former sacked prime minister,
Zed Seselja, Senator for ACT & Assistant Minister for Science, Jobs and Innovation,
Steven Ciobo, MP for Moncrieff (Qld) & Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment,
Michael Keenan, MP for Stirling (WA) & Minister for Human Services,
Alan Tudge, MP for Aston (Vic) & Minister for Human Services,
Angus Taylor, MP for Hume (NSW) & Minister for Law Enforcement and Cyber Security,
Concetta Fierravanti-Wells, Senator for NSW & Minister for International Development and the Pacific,
Tony Pasin, MP for Barker (SA),
Jason Wood, MP for La Trobe (Vic),
Andrew Hastie, MP for Canning (WA),
Kevin Andrews, MP for Menzies (Vic),
Eric Abetz, Senator for Tasmania,
Ted O'Brien, MP for Fairfax (Qld),
Amanda Stoker, Senator for Queensland,
Andrew Wallace, MP for Fisher (Qld),
Karen Andrews, MP for McPherson(Qld),
Jim Molan, Senator for NSW,
Luke Howarth, MP for Petrie (Qld),
Nicole Flint, MP for Boothby (SA),
James Paterson, Senator for Victoria,
David Bushby, Senator for Tasmania,
Ross Vasta, MP for Bonner (Qld),
Ben Morton, MP for Tangney (WA),
James McGrath, Senator for Queensland,
Rick Wilson, MP for O'Connor (WA),
Scott Buchholz, MP for Wright (Qld),
David Fawcett, Senator for SA,
Dean Smith, Senator for WA,
Ian Goodenough, MP for Moore (WA),
Andrew Laming, MP for Bowman (Qld),
Jonathan Duniam, Senator for Tasmania,
Bert Van Manen, MP for Forde (Qld).

What a gathering of 'entitled' climate change denialists, followers of King Coal, members of the IPA, homophobes and hardened welfare recipient bashers.

All in all, a handy list of who not to vote for at the forthcoming federal election if one prefers a world where Peter Dutton never becomes Prime Minister of Australia.

And the warnings continue about My Health Record.....

Financial Review, 13 August 2018:

One of the world's leading experts in cyber security policy has warned the manipulation of health data is one of his biggest concerns facing society, as debate continues to rage about the long-term viability of the government's controversial opt-out My Health Record.

Former Pentagon chief strategy officer for cyber policy and newly appointed head of cyber security strategy for data centre security company Illumio, Jonathan Reiber, told The Australian Financial Review the health data of MPs and business leaders would be of particular interest to cyber criminals.

"If I'm a malicious actor wanting to cause discontent, I would be interested in that," he said.

"If you get access to the health information of key leaders, you can understand what they like, who they are and what their problems are. [Cyber criminals] would want to look at a segment of 50 to 100 key leaders in the country, figure out data for intelligence purposes and then manipulate the data for the negative."

Earlier this month Health Minister Greg Hunt announced that the government would redraft the legislation surrounding My Health Record to restrict police access and allow records to be deleted permanently. 

He had previously copped criticism for saying the digital health database had "military-grade security", despite not having two-factor authentication protocols.

The Sydney Morning Herald, 14 August 2018:

Labor's health spokeswoman Catherine King said the government's decision to switch to an opt-out model, which Labor originally supported, gave rise to "a whole range of significant privacy and security issues that we don't think were thought of in the original enabling legislation".

"Are they then able to opt-out when they become adults? What's happening in terms of survivors of domestic violence and the capacity through the creation of a record by an abusing partner, of a record for their children or agreement to a record for their children, what security is in place to ensure that they are not traced?"

Legal experts have warned that the system provides a loophole for a violent person to create a record for their child without their ex-partner's consent, potentially allowing them to track down their estranged family's location, as revealed by Fairfax Media last month.

Ms King also highlighted concerns raised about access to medical records by health insurers, including in relation to worker’s compensation claims, which the government has said will not occur.

"We want to make sure that's not the case and we want to make sure that's not the case under the law," she said.

Australian Privacy Foundation:

Some people may find their My Health Record places them at risk of stigma and discrimination or may cause safety issues.

You may wish to carefully consider whether you want your health records held or shared if you:

* have a criminal record or are affected by the criminal justice system

* use or have used drugs

* live with a lifelong transmissible condition such as HIV or hepatitis B

* have or had hepatitis C

* are not on treatment after it was recommended

* are sexually active and test regularly for STIs

* are or have been a sex worker

* are transgender or intersex

* are bisexual, lesbian or gay

* have lived with mental health issues

* have been pregnant or terminated a pregnancy

* are a health care worker.

Gloucester community's landmark climate change case began in NSW Land & Environment Court, August 2018

Environmental Defenders Office NSW, 14 August 2018:

CASE SUMMARY

Gloucester Resources Ltd and Stratford Pty Ltd
v Groundswell Gloucester and Dept of Planning & Environment 

The Client: Groundswell Gloucester, a residents’ community group concerned with the environmental, social and economic future of the Stroud Gloucester Valley near Barrington Tops in the upper Hunter.

The Case: Represented by EDO NSW, Groundswell Gloucester was joined to proceedings that will determine the fate of the Rocky Hill Coal project, a greenfield open-cut coal mine less than 5km from Gloucester township.

Representation: Matt Floro, solicitor for EDO NSW, has carriage of this matter for Groundswell Gloucester and our Principal Solicitor, Elaine Johnson, is the solicitor on record. We are grateful to barrister Robert White for his assistance in this matter.

Experts: Emeritus Professor Will Steffen will for the first time give evidence in an Australian court that no new fossil fuel developments can be approved if we are to avoid overspending our carbon budget. Professor Steffen is a Climate Councillor on the Climate Council of Australia, Member of the ACT Government’s Climate Change Council, and was previously a Climate Commissioner on the Australian Government’s Climate Commission.

Energy analyst Tim Buckley will explain the financial mechanisms and market changes that are driving investments away from coal and creating a risk that Rocky Hill will become a stranded asset. Tim Buckley is Director of Energy Finance Studies, Australasia, Institute of Energy Economics and Financial Analysis.

60 community objectors include farmers, doctors, Traditional Owners and young people. This is also the first time in an Australian court that young people will talk about the impact of climate change and the impact of the mine on their communities, and future generations.

Timeline:

2016 - Community celebrations after AGL withdraws its application to drill 330 coal seam gas extraction wells in the area.

December 2017 - celebrations continue when the Planning Assessment Commission (PAC) refuses consent to the Rocky Hill Coal Project proposed by Gloucester Resources Limited (GRL). The PAC found that the mine was not in the public interest because of its proximity to the town of Gloucester, significant visual impact and direct contravention of the area’s zoning plans.

The PAC also refuses consent to a Modification of the consent for the nearby Stratford mine - operated by a related company of Yancoal Australia Limited - that proposed the receipt, processing and railing of coal from the Project.  The PAC found that the Modification would have no critical purpose or utility outside the Project.

Planning Minister grants both mining companies the right to appeal the refusal of consent to the Land and Environment Court.

February 2018 - Our client, Groundswell Gloucester, seeks to be joined to the proceedings.

April 2018 - following a full-day hearing, the Land and Environment Court orders that Groundswell Gloucester be joined to the proceedings brought by GRL.
In relation to the climate change ground, on joining Groundswell Gloucester, the Court noted that:
“GRL submits that the raising of the climate issue as proposed in a domestic Court if the Intervener were joined would not serve the purpose of improving this particular planning decision; and, instead, would be a “side show and a distraction”. I do not agree.”

Our client has been permitted by the Court to present expert evidence on climate change and the social impacts of this new mine. The Court will hear anthropological evidence about the social impact of mining on the community.

This is the first time an Australian court will hear expert evidence about the urgent need to stay within the global carbon budget in the context of a proposed new coal mine.

Key dates: 
13-14 August 2018
Opening submissions at the Land and Environment Court, Macquarie Street, Sydney
15 August 2018
Site visit (parties only) Gloucester
16-17 August 2018
Hearings in Gloucester (community objectors)
20-24 & 27-31 August 2018
Submissions and expert witnesses at the Land and Environment Court, Macquarie Street, Sydney

Background

This is the first hearing of its kind since the historic Paris Agreement in which a superior jurisdiction Australian court will hear expert testimony about climate change, the carbon budget and the impacts of the burning of fossil fuels.

For years EDO NSW has supported the Gloucester community, providing legal and scientific advice. This contributed to a recommendation from the Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) in 2016 to the Planning Assessment Commission (PAC) to refuse GRL’s greenfield mine application, known as the Rocky Hill Coal Project (the Project) and the associated Stratford modification.

In December 2017, the Planning Assessment Commission (PAC) refused consent to the Project and the modification, finding they were not in the public interest because of proximity to the town of Gloucester, significant visual impact and the area’s zoning under planning laws.

In deciding how the Project and modification would be assessed, the NSW Minister for Planning granted unusual merit appeal rights to GRL and Yancoal who are now joined together in aggressively challenging the refusal in the Land and Environment Court.

Both coal companies have recruited their own legal and scientific teams. However Groundswell Gloucester was not told about the merit appeal until February, two months after GRL filed the case.

EDO NSW case page: www.edonsw.org.au/groundswell 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Concerned citizens can donate to the Environmental Defence Fund here.

William Fraser Anning - an ugly aspect of far-right politics in Australia

The Sydney Morning Herald, Fraser Anning

William Fraser Anning then a member of Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Party was declared elected to the Australian Senate on 10 November 2017, as a replacement for the recently disqualified dual citizen Malcolm Ieuan Roberts.

Less than seven months later he had joined Katter’s Australian Party.

In the 2016 general election Anning had received a grand total of 19 votes (59 if transferred votes are counted) out of a possible 2.72 million Queensland ballots cast. The Queensland electorate had firmly rejected him.

Hansard shows that at 17:06pm on Wednesday 14 August 2018, nine months after taking up his seat, Anning made his formal First Speech on the floor of the Senate.

This is how The Sydney Morning Herald reported this speech on 14 August 2018:

Queensland senator Fraser Anning has praised the White Australia Policy and called for a plebiscite as "the final solution to the immigration problem" in the most inflammatory maiden speech to an Australian Parliament since One Nation leader Pauline Hanson's in 1996.

The Katter's Australian Party senator, formerly of One Nation, used his first speech to the Senate on Tuesday to lament the demise of "our predominantly European identity" of the 1950s and '60s.

The Guardian’s opinion piece on 15 August 2018 pointed out the dangers before us:

Fraser Anning is in the parliament by accident. Having fluked his way into the Senate chamber because One Nation needed a replacement for Malcolm Roberts, he now wants your attention, and judging by his performance in the Senate on Tuesday night, he doesn’t care what lines he crosses to get it.

What we are witnessing in national politics is the latest manifestation of Australia’s cultural cringe. Far right political operatives, and the media voices prepared to give them succour, are importing the nationalist debates that have sprung up in the shadow of the global financial crisis – the biggest economic dislocation since the great depression.

We are building our own tinder box, bit by bit.

Debates about race, and sovereignty, and immigration have caught fire elsewhere because of deep resentments felt by the losers of globalisation. Australia didn’t suffer the biting effects of the global financial crisis, and the prolonged economic downturn that followed it. By comparison to the visceral experiences elsewhere, in this country we experienced a chilly, stiff breeze.

Notwithstanding these facts, we are importing the outrage consciousness that exists elsewhere, validating it, willingly projecting an alternate reality onto our own domestic circumstances as a grotesque form of entertainment.

We are building our own tinder box, bit by bit.

This would be pathetic. Almost laughable. Except in terms of race and politics, we are now in the most explosive period we’ve been in since John Howard sailed into choppy waters with his feelings on Asian immigration in the 1980s.

There is nothing to laugh about. Right now, there are all the ingredients of a perfect storm.

The first ingredient is a fractured bunch of far-right leaning political voices in mortal competition with one another for votes. The last 24 hours has been a public competition between Anning, and his new running mate Bob Katter, and One Nation, for attention. Anning and Katter apparently want to establish a new beach head, charting territory where Pauline won’t follow. Just let that happy thought settle on you for a minute or two.

The second ingredient is a polity profoundly disaffected by the repeated failings and default narcissism of Australia’s major party politics, frustrated by their congested cities and low wages growth and by governments who spent more time fighting their fractured internals than navigating the future. The third is a disrupted media landscape where conflict – the louder and more notorious the better – is hard currency.

Fraser Anning used his first speech to parliament to spin his own obscurity into notoriety: to try on a troll suit in full public view.

The Monthly spoke of  Anning as "unrepresentative", "accidental swill" on 15 August 2018:

Fraser Anning’s execrable first speech in the Senate yesterday, proposing a “final solution” on Muslim immigration, marks a new low for Australian politics, but assuredly not for long. Things are likely to get worse before they get better, as a bunch of illegitimate right-wing nobodies in the Senate compete for race-hate shock value in the lead-up to the next election. The combination of a double dissolution in 2016 and the citizenship crisis has burdened us with the least representative Senate in living memory. The crossbench is populated by senators who won on the donkey vote, defected, were elected on a countback or were hand-picked mid-term and are yet to face the people. Most face electoral oblivion in 2019. We are used to hearing of “unrepresentative swill” in the Senate, where one vote, one value has never applied, but a record number of our current senators literally don’t deserve to be there. Call them accidental swill.

Anning’s speech, in which he called for a return to the White Australia policy, did not come out of the blue. We have been building up to this steadily. From Pauline Hanson’s return to parliament, to Tony Abbott’s dog-whistling on immigration policy, to Peter Dutton’s attacks on “African gangs”, to Andrew Bolt’s comments about Chinese, Cambodian, Indian and Jewish communities“changing our culture”, to Sky News airing an interview with neo-Nazi Blair Cottrell, the trend is clear: we are sliding ever-faster down a slippery slope towards an ugly, divisive race-card election.

Although his formal first speech was somewhat tardy, according to They Vote For You Anning has been busy voting strongly in support of:

Adani's proposed Carmichael coal mine

Changing the wording of section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act

Decreasing ABC and SBS funding

Getting rid of Sunday and public holiday penalty rates

Increasing investment in the coal industry

Live animal export

Making more water from Murray-Darling Basin available to use

Offshore processing of asylum seekers

Privatising government assets

Privatising the ABC

Putting welfare payments onto restricted debit cards

Reducing the corporate tax rate

Regional processing of asylum seekers

Speeding things along in Parliament (procedural)

Civil celebrants having the right to refuse to marry same-sex couples

On 14 August 2018 lawyer Richard McGilvray, an adviser to Senator Anning, resigned his position in protest.

Posting on Linkedin that: "I do not condone SenatorAnning's speech. His reference to 'the Final Solution' was not something I had seen, heard of, or discussed prior to his remarks last night and as a consequence, within hours of Senator Anning's speech, I resigned my position effective immediately. I'd like to thank many of you for your messages of support and encouragement this morning."

It is understood that the adviser who drafted Anning's First Speech was Richard Howard, who was formerly a staffer for One Nation's Malcolm Roberts and Liberal Democrat David Leyonhjelm.

As is to be expected Anning's speech has been fact checked and found to contain numerous errors.

To date, Senator Anning has not issued an apology for elements of that speech.