Ph 3259 1900 (24 hours) - Queensland Police Union

Nationwide
As a result, the Police Federation of
Australia (PFA) has written to and been
lobbying the government, expressing
concern about such a decision.
It appears to be in complete
contravention of the commitment given
to the PFA by the government in the
lead up to the 2010 Federal election
in response to our proposal for an
Australian Crime Prevention Program.
Currently, payments from the
Confiscated Assets Account under
the Proceeds of Crime Act provide
significant opportunities for community
programs and innovation in crime
prevention and law enforcement,
both of which assist Australia’s police
considerably.
Payments under the scheme have
previously been made for valuable
government projects such as:
• A scoping study into The
Automated Number Plate
Recognition project
• Studies into The Minimum
Nationwide Person Profile (MNPP)
Project
• The Sentinel Strategy
• The Enhanced National
Intelligence Picture on Illicit Drugs
(ENIPID)
• The Enhanced IT Intelligence
Functionality (Project Walshingham)
It has also injected much-needed
funding into community programs
that seek to address the root causes of
crime and drug dependency, such as:
• Supported accommodation
centres for drug rehabilitation
• Recreation and life skills programs
for at-risk youth
• Centres and activities that
facilitate positive relationships
between certain sections of the
community and the police that
interact with them
These valuable opportunities for
innovation and community programs
would likely not have been possible
without the funding from the
Confiscated Assets Account, and
would be neglected were it not for
s298 of the Proceeds of Crime Act.
In our correspondence and
lobbying, the PFA strongly urged the
government to allow the community
to continue to benefit from these
initiatives, by continuing payments
under s298 of the Proceeds of Crime
Act.
In addition, we argued that the
Proceeds of Crime Act has an
increasingly significant role in the
fight against serious organised crime,
and therefore believe that the amount
of assets that will be confiscated in
the future will increase.
Given that sections 297 and 298 of
the Proceeds of Crime Act only allow
payments from the Confiscated
Assets Account for a limited number
of purposes, we have asked the
government how they intend to
achieve the redirection of payments
from the Confiscated Assets Account
‘to support other government
priorities’.
Section 297 limits payment from the
account to payments for equitable
sharing programs, other forfeiture
orders, payments to the Official
Trustee, and satisfying court orders,
and payments under s298 are also
limited to the sorts of initiatives
outlined above.
Therefore the redirecting of s298
payments to other government
priorities would require legislative
amendment. If legislative amendment
is required, we have advised the
government the PFA will strongly
oppose it.
The PFA believes that the only
appropriate use of the funds
confiscated from criminal activity
is crime prevention and law
enforcement. Money seized
from drug traffickers and money
launderers should not be used to fill
government coffers.
Money seized from drug traffickers
and money launderers should be
used to stop further drug trafficking
and money laundering. It is in
the interests of justice and the
community that money confiscated
from criminal activity is used to
prevent further criminal activity.
The PFA argues that assets taken
from those who have wrongfully
obtained them should be reinvested
in crime prevention.
There is something very fitting about
proceeds of crime being used to
prevent crime. Such a process has a
circularity that is both morally and
poetically just.
We have therefore urged the
government to reverse the decision
to defer payments under s298 of the
Proceeds of Crime Act.
50
Queensland Police Union Journal August 2012