Attorney-General
The Hon Michelle Rowland MP
E&OE
SUBJECTS: Appointment of Commonwealth Solicitor-General; NDIS; Middle East Conflict; Wagering Reform; Copyright & AI; National Gun Buyback Scheme; Freedom of Information; Hate Preachers; Newspoll; Senate OPDs.
MICHELLE ROWLAND, ATTORNEY-GENERAL: Good afternoon. It's my pleasure to join you to announce that the Government intends to recommend to the Governor-General the appointment of Dr Ruth Higgins SC as the next Solicitor‑General of the Commonwealth of Australia. Dr Higgins appointment will make her Australia's first ever female Solicitor-General. The Attorney General in Australia is known as the first law officer of the Commonwealth and the Solicitor General as the second law officer. For the first time in Australia's history, both of these positions will be held by women.
Today's announcement, as I said, is one that the Government welcomes, because of course, Dr Higgins is an eminent barrister with over 20 years legal experience, including close to 10 years as senior counsel. She is regarded as a leader in the legal profession and regularly appears in complex cases in the High Court and Federal Court of Australia. Throughout her distinguished legal career, she has served as President of the NSW Bar Association, Director of the Australian Bar Association and the Law Council of Australia, and has lectured in Law at Corpus Christi College, Oxford University, and was a Visiting Scholar at Columbia University. The role of Solicitor-General is vital and it touches the lives of many Australians. In addition to representing the Commonwealth in significant matters in court, the Solicitor-General provides advice to Government on questions of law as they arise, especially as they relate to ensuring that Government decisions are constitutional and adhere to the rule of law. Dr Higgins' significant experience, ability and acumen will see Australia well represented in future significant legal matters and I have every confidence in her ability to undertake this most important work. I thank her for her willingness to serve her fellow Australians as only the 12th Solicitor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia. I also acknowledge the work of the previous Solicitor-General, Dr Stephen Donoghue KC, now Judge of the Victorian Court of Appeal, and thank him for his distinguished service. I also give my thanks to Mr Andrew Buckland KC and Mr Tim Begbie KC, each of whom has acted as Solicitor General in recent months. Dr Higgins will be appointed for a five-year term commencing on the 8th of June. I'll now hand over to Dr Higgins to say a few words.
DR RUTH HIGGINS SC: It is a great honour and a commensurate responsibility to be recommended for appointment to this role. The rule of law forms a basic assumption of our constitutionally prescribed system of government, yet its maintenance relies on the integrity of the individuals and institutions that constitute the administration of justice. When I take up this role, I will commit the best of myself to providing independent advice to, and advocacy for, the Commonwealth Government to ensure the lawful and effective exercise of its considerable power. I immigrated to Australia 25 years ago. Since then, this country has given me so much. I am grateful for this opportunity to give something back to my fellow Australians. Thank you.
ROWLAND: We're both happy to take questions.
JOURNALIST: Ms. Higgins, you previously said the material in which the law works is human life. Humans identify more naturally with individuals and institutions and as a result, when it comes to trust, individuals and leaders matter. How do you see this role in terms of a leadership role within the legal profession? You've always held a fairly vocal and public role in the legal profession, do you see that continuing, or do you plan on stepping back from that?
HIGGINS: I think the institutions of law matter terribly, and I think the individuals who hold senior positions in them also matter a very great deal. They must always represent those institutions with integrity, independence and excellence and that will remain my view.
JOURNALIST: You will be the first Solicitor-General of Australia that hasn't gone to the ANU, the University of Sydney or University of Melbourne. I mean, having lectured at universities, do you think that having that different background will inform your work in any way?
HIGGINS: Listen, I like to think I'll be the first Solicitor-General who went to the University of Glasgow. But I think it may… I did my undergraduate studies at Glasgow, which is historically a civilian legal system. I then studied at Oxford, which is a common law system, and taught in that common law system and had my qualifications recognised here. So, I have occupied different kinds of legal systems and kinds of legal thinking, and hopefully those complementary modes of reasoning will be reflected in my discharge of the role.
JOURNALIST: Dr Higgins, what was your involvement with the NZYQ case and to the Attorney General, does the Albanese Government take pride in appointing women to senior roles that have, in some instances, never been held by women before?
HIGGINS: I acted for an interviewer in the High Court in NZYQ.
JOURNALIST: What did you learn from that case?
HIGGINS: I learned to be aware of the possibility of all contingencies, including in the High Court, and that one must be prepared for all eventualities.
ROWLAND: In answer to your question, it is a matter of pride that Prime Minister Albanese has given his blessing to this appointment. It is one that I think is going to be so well served by Dr Higgins. Her appointment will come as no surprise to those in the legal profession. She is extremely well regarded. She has a prodigious legal mind. But above all else, this appointment is about finding the best person for the job, and in this case, it is Dr Ruth Higgins.
JOURNALIST: Attorney-General, just on the NDIS growth rate, are you of the view that getting down to an annual growth rate for NDIS spending of 5 to 6% is the right target, or would you like to see it lower than 5%?
ROWLAND: Well, firstly, I want to acknowledge the tremendous work that has been done across government and a number of Ministers, including under former Minister Shorten in getting the NDIS into a far more sustainable position. Having been a former member of the Expenditure Review Committee in the last term, I can assure you that this has been a constant focus of the government and it hasn't been to obtain savings for their own sake. It's been to ensure that this reform can operate as it was intended. So, I have every confidence that the path that is being pursued by Minister Butler, Minister McAllister, and driven ultimately by the Prime Minister, is one that over time will result in a more sustainable system. It will also require, as we've seen with the Thriving Kids program, it will require cooperation of the states and territories as well. Because I think ultimately, the fact that this now stands as one of the great pillars when it comes to supporting Australians, Medicare, superannuation, the NDIS, are all now fundamental tenets of how we operate as an economy and as a society. Of course it needs to be made sustainable. Of course we need to crack down on rorts, but of course it needs to also be reformed to ensure that it functions in the long term in the way that it was intended. So, I have every confidence in the path that is being pursued by both our health and economics team.
JOURNALIST: Attorney-General, overnight the US President renewed his threat to target civilian infrastructure in Iran. I accept the Government doesn't do a running commentary on Donald Trump's tweets, but are you concerned of the legality issue there, that that could constitute war crimes? If there was to be targeting of civilian infrastructure, how can you guarantee that Australia's involvement in the Middle East theatre will never extend to being supportive, indirectly or otherwise, of a potential war crime like targeting civilian infrastructure?
ROWLAND: Well, what I can assure you is that we take very seriously our international obligations. We are well aware of them, and they have guided all our decisions that have arisen out of this conflict. In terms of the US actions, again, just as the Prime Minister, the Defence Minister and others have reiterated, we are not in a position to comment on that, but we have every confidence that the measures that we have taken are consistent with our obligations under international law.
JOURNALIST: In the last term of government, you were the Communications Minister, and you were working on a response to the Peta Murphy report on gambling. We know there was a draft response to that report created in late 2024. How close to your proposal was the plan announced by the PM last week at the Press Club, and as someone who's obviously spent a lot of time thinking about this area of policy and reform, will these reforms do enough to address gambling harms?
ROWLAND: These are transformational steps forward. Until the announcement by the Prime Minister last week, the most significant reforms in curbing gambling harms were done in the last term, including banning the use of credit cards online, setting up BetStop, instituting changes to the framework around classification, including ensuring that people had an understanding of their activity statements and had greater transparency of the kinds of money that they were spending online for wagering. Since last Thursday, we can say that these are now the most significant reforms that have been undertaken. Let's be very clear, Peta Murphy's legacy, as espoused by her husband, Rod Glover, is one that has been honoured by the fact that Rod Glover himself has taken to saying that these are significant, transformational changes that should be welcomed, and they should be welcomed. Making sure that we've got ad free, live sport when it comes to wagering. Making sure that we've got caps on the number of ads that can be shown within hours. Again, this goes to the fundamental issue of the three principles that we have always been trying to address here in our extensive consultations with stakeholders. Making sure that we protect children, who are the most vulnerable, making sure that we break that nexus between wagering and sporting, and making sure that we address that saturation and that targeting of gambling advertising, particularly towards young men. So, this is an incredibly positive step forward, and even reforms like making sure that when you're not watching or listening to broadcast sport, when you see the field of play, you're not going to have players running around advertising gambling, you're not going to see it in the stadia. These are all incredibly important reforms. I think, as I said, the fact that the late Peta Murphy's husband has welcomed these changes should cause us all to pause and think about giving this the credit that it deserves in terms of being transformational. We've come a very long way to where we were when this government first took office in 2022, and in the years to come, when we see the impact of the reforms we did last term and also this term, I'm confident that we will see a reduction in the amount of gambling harms when it comes to online wagering.
But again, because I've got the opportunity to say it, I will put out a public service announcement for BetStop. BetStop is the single biggest reform that enables people, with basically one touch, to self exclude themselves from online wagering. It's shown to be an incredible success and if anyone is listening or watching this or you know someone that may be in need of help, then check out BetStop, because it might just save a life.
JOURNALIST: Do you accept though, without a full advertising ban, that the Government is redistributing the advertising and that well-funded wagering companies will find a way to get through to vulnerable Australians?
ROWLAND Well, again, I think we need to recognise that this was only announced a couple of days ago and it will come into effect in the very near future. We should let these reforms show what they can do. I think it's important for everyone in this Parliament to get behind them as an important step forward. It is true that when the Coalition was last in Government, there was tinkering around the edges, which actually resulted in an increase in the number of ads that could be shown. But these reforms that the Prime Minister has announced are not tinkering. They are in fact going to those three fundamental principles that I outlined, and when combined with the other reforms that we instituted in our last term, will make a measurable difference.
JOURNALIST: Attorney-General, you said that you will not water down copyright law to facilitate AI. That's fine, but you've also said that you're consulting on reforms in the copyright space. Can you just tell us where things are up to? Are you still open to other forms of licencing or facilitating forms of licencing to bring rights holders and AI together, or is it basically now just the focus on the ability of rights holders to be able to pursue copyright breaches in some other way?
ROWLAND: Well, firstly, the consultations that we've been undertaking have been very useful in terms of stakeholders addressing issues that need to be considered in an AI world. They include everything from having an easier way to enforce rights through a small claims tribunal, to ensuring that people are actually able to enter into these licence agreements. But I make this key point, and that is that the Copyright Act exists right now, is a robust instrument and parties are able to enter into agreements right now under its framework. I think that the most important thing that Australians should be aware of is the position that we took some months ago as a government to say that we would not be entertaining a text and data mining exception. This is now one that has been copied in the United Kingdom, which previously said that it was looking and was open to having that. So, they have flipped. In the United States, it remains a contested space, but we all want to get to the same end point here. That is, we do want to realise the benefits of innovation and the benefits that AI can bring to productivity, but we also need to recognise that our creative industries, our media, our artistic ventures in this country, they are the lifeblood of our culture and of our economy and we will not be selling them short. We have a framework in place at the moment that allows those benefits to be realised.
JOURNALIST: Can you provide an update on the national gun buyback scheme? Given that the deadline has passed and not all states have signed up, will that still go ahead and what will it look like?
ROWLAND: Well, again, this is for the states and territories to answer for. We've been very clear in both legislating and as part of the police ministers meetings, which I actually attended earlier in the year. The Government's position at the Commonwealth level has been crystal clear. States and territories need to make sure they get on board and if they don't, they will need to explain that to their own constituencies.
JOURNALIST: Given they haven't gotten on board, do you now progress with the scheme with the limited number of jurisdictions that are involved? Do you wait until more sign up?
ROWLAND: We are confident that the states and territories will appreciate that this is a reform that has the overwhelming support of the majority of Australians and will get on board, and we continue to encourage them to do so.
JOURNALIST: Attorney-General, when the Freedom of Information Bill was shelved in the Senate, Katy Gallagher said it would be returning in an altered form. Could you give us a timeline of when that would happen, is that something that will happen in this term of Parliament? What alterations will be made so that it can find support either from the Greens or from the Coalition?
ROWLAND: Well, the fundamental issue is that our freedom of information system is broken. We've been discussing AI. In a world of AI, we have no way of knowing, when it comes to anonymous requests, whether these are being made for nefarious purposes by bad actors. There is not a single stakeholder who will tell you that freedom of information is fit-for-purpose. We have a number of areas in which we have committed as a Government to continue making progress, freedom of information is one of them. We have also committed to overhauling and introducing the next stage of our whistleblower protections and only in the Parliament last week I introduced new secrecy laws to repeal some 300 pieces of the secrecy framework. So, we will continue with our agenda when it comes to integrity and transparency of government, and when I have more to say on precise timing, I will make that known in due course.
JOURNALIST: Attorney-General, in the past week, two Islamic preachers have had their visitor visas cancelled over previous antisemitic comments. Given the fact that they were still able to come into the country and in some cases speak to audiences, does that suggest that there needs to be better checks and balances?
ROWLAND: Well, I would note that as soon as it was known, in terms of the nature of what these people were preaching, and the fact that this government and this country indeed has zero tolerance for the kind of hate preaching that was noted, their visas were quickly cancelled. That should send a very strong message to others that exactly the same will apply to them, but also discourage them from making those decisions in the first place.
JOURNALIST: Why wasn't this realised during the application process?
ROWLAND: Well, again, I'll point out that when it was known and when it came to the attention of authorities, their visas were cancelled quickly.
JOURNALIST: On FOI, you mentioned the national security sort of implications potentially about anonymous requests and so forth. There are already many, many numerous avenues for government department, staffers, to redact information. I think every one of us in this room would have gotten FOI requests back, which is walls of black text, redacted documents and that sort of thing. Why are the current redaction sort of avenues not sufficient in your point of view? I think other people will say FOI is broken in the way that you get so little information back rather than too much.
ROWLAND: Well again, this is not only about the issues that you raise, it's the fact that we've actually had recommendations, including from the Royal Commission into Robodebt, that simply stamping something as cabinet in confidence should not make it so. These reforms go right across the breadth of FOI, and as I said, there would not be a stakeholder who says that this is working efficiently and effectively. The fact that it is consuming some millions of hours of taxpayers time, often for fishing expeditions, often in cases where it is not known whether or not these are real people that are being dealt with and for what purposes I think says everything about the need for reform.
JOURNALIST: Attorney-General, the latest quarterly analysis of Newspoll shows 9% of voters who voted for Labor at the last election have switched to One Nation. In your mind, how big a threat is One Nation to Labor and how do you combat One Nation at the next election?
ROWLAND: Well, indeed, we all need to bear in mind we're not even one year out from the last election. But as someone who has consistently represented a marginal seat since 2010, I can tell you that people are focused on one thing. They're focused on Governments who deliver on the promises that they made. So, this Government has an unashamedly delivery focused outlook. We'll continue to have that. We now have three right wing parties in Australia, with Labor occupying the sensible centre. Governments in Australia govern from the centre and the Prime Minister continues to demonstrate with a focus on cost of living, including in the incredibly challenging circumstances we have at the moment, Governments need to not only do everything that they can to understand the pressures that people are under, but deliver on the promises that we made. That is what we will offer to the Australian people at the next election. But in the meantime, this Prime Minister undertakes a proper Cabinet Government with proper processes and at a time like this, that's what Australians deserve.
JOURNALIST: That recommendation about Cabinet FOI from the Robodebt Royal Commission, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that was in the most recent legislation you introduced. All that you were introducing was an exemption that would basically make it easier to just reject FOIs if you believe that they were cabinet in confidence from the outset without checking the document themselves. So, you're saying that as part of this new tranche, that will be one of the measures that you'll introduce? And then just one more go on the copyright question. So, is it the case that you are not looking at any changes to licensing regimes? Full stop? Obviously, the existing system, you're right, people can make deals under it. No one's questioning that. But is it the case you're not looking at any other changes to the licensing regime?
ROWLAND: Well, look, we continue to consult broadly with other stakeholders and when we've got something to announce, we'll certainly do that. But in the meantime, my point to you is that the Copyright Act stands as it does right now and is capable of functioning. We know this because deals are being entered into, rights holders are being fairly compensated. You know, in the last term and the term before it, we had to deal with a situation where the platforms under the News Media Bargaining Code decided that they would no longer function according to the terms of that legislation that was passed. We need to recognise that the power of big tech here will not override the fact that our creative industries are the lifeblood of Australia. Media organisations in Australia who produce public interest journalism should be properly recompensed. Artists should be properly recompensed for their work and we will not be undertaking anything that compromises that. Of course, we are looking at other ways in which the copyright system can be improved in the age of AI. However, we have specifically ruled out a text and data mining exception. In terms of FOI, I think if you examine the proposal that we took to the Parliament in this term, you'll see that it, in effect, achieves exactly as I outlined, in terms of making sure that something genuinely had to be cabinet in confidence, and merely stamping something as such did not make it so. So, we were very conscious of ensuring that we struck a better balance when it came to FOI, and our future reforms will seek to do the same.
JOURNALIST: On the Government's transparency agenda, considering that the Senate has been clogged up for some period of time with these OPDs. You mentioned fishing expeditions before, that's been a criticism of them. Would the Government be willing to appoint, or would you be interested in appointing an independent legal arbiter, as there are in some states that could oversee that program and take the side?
ROWLAND: Well, in terms of OPDs, I respect the Senate, I respect the Senate rules and the Senate is the master of its own destiny.
