Transcript Multi Department raids-Vanda Hamilton

MULTI DEPARTMENT RAIDS
What? Where? Why? Who? When? How? And
does it matter anyway?
Presented by Vanda Hamilton
St Kilda Legal Service
What are these operations?




Operations which target certain industries, although may not
be confined to industries.
Most likely to be cash economy industries.
Therefore workers who, for various reasons, don’t want to be
traced.
The most commonly targeted industries are:








Taxi
Courier
Agricultural workers (primarily those who work seasonally ie fruit
pickers, vineyard workers)
Hospitality
In bound tourism operators
Tow-truck industry
Brothels (illegal & legal)
Chicken factories



The federal agencies involved can be all
of, or a combination of, Centrelink, ATO,
DIMIA and Federal Police.
State agencies can be all of, or a
combination of, State Police, Taxi
Directorate, EPA, Sheriffs, transport
departments, brothel inspectorates and,
in one bizarre instance in Queensland,
the Office of Fair Trading.
Local councils are sometimes also
involved.
How do they work?








As a general rule, the federal agencies need a state agency
with coercive powers
Centrelink, DIMIA and ATO don’t have general coercive
powers.
Nor can the Federal Police step in unless federal laws are
being broken.
This is where the state agencies come in.
Most of the operations involve pulling over vehicles.
Vehicles from particular industries – taxis etc - or vehicles
taking workers home from the workplace of interest ie fruit
pickers.
Visits to worksites can be facilitated by agencies which have
power to enter worksites and ask questions ie brothel
inspectorate.
So a typical operation might involve a roadside inspection area
to which taxis, for instance, are pulled over.






Police do licence checks etc
EPA, if there, do a compliance check.
The taxi directorate would check whatever it is
taxi directorates check – identification etc
presumably.
Sheriffs, if there, check for outstanding
warrants.
The federal agencies do their own checks. Now
it gets murky
None of them have the right to ask the drivers
for their details, or get them from one of the
other agencies.








I spoke to a co-ordinator of these operations from Centrelink,
Joe Judge.
Asked him if Centrelink officers told workers they did not have
to give Centrelink information.
He said of course they did.
He would say that, wouldn’t he?
Taxi drivers tell a different story.
People just appear at their window and ask questions. They
don’t tell you why, and they usually don’t identify themselves.
A small article in Meter, the NSW Taxi Council magazine,
detailed complaints from drivers after operations. These
included drivers details being passed to unnamed, plain
clothed people without explanation.
The drivers also complained of lack of respect and extreme
rudeness, with one driver saying he was reduced to tears by
unreasonable demands placed on him during an operation at
The Rocks.





Results of operations tell their own
story. Why give details if you know
you’re doing something wrong?
But people obviously do.
DIMIA uses mobile technology to check
people’s visa status immediately.
Centrelink checks later, but probably
also has access to, and uses, mobile
technology.
Interpreters used? Unlikely.


Would be interesting to know how the
operations involving pulling over buses
transporting farm workers work.
Although the police can ask for the
driver’s details, they can’t ask anyone
else (legally, anyway) – so how do they
get the information?






Operations could also be targeting general public.
Victoria Police media release in April this year gave
details of Operation Drive Safe on 27 April.
Took place between 8am & 4pm on one road in an inner
city suburb.
As well as police, included Taxi Directorate, the EPA,
DIMIA, Sheriff’s Office and Centrelink.
1500 vehicles checked. 113 found to be unroadworthy,
42 were taxis. Clear that majority of cars pulled over
were not taxis.
Press release doesn’t tell us whether officers from the
federal agencies approached all cars pulled over or only
taxis.




In March spokeswoman for Joe Hockey talks
about another operation in Melbourne
involving taxis.
Claims that operations are like a random
breath test, and says that the program is much
bigger than just catching taxi drivers.
“It’s not just taxi drivers, but couriers and any
drivers”.
Doesn’t qualify whether she means private
drivers pulled over at random are also targets
of these operations.




Operation Cinnamon on the Gold Coast
involved Queensland Office of Fair Trading,
police, Queensland Transport and federal
Department of Industry, Tourism and
Resources and Centrelink in a blitz on tour
operators and tourist shops.
Operation aimed at so called ‘rogue’ tourist
operators, and interpreters were used to tell
more than 1100 tourists their shopping rights.
No explanation of Centrelink’s involvement.
What were they doing there? Who did they
interview? And why?







Operation Grasstree conducted in the Lismore and Nimbin
areas over four days in July this year.
Police patrolled streets around Lismore with dogs, manned
roadblocks into Nimbin, along with DIMIA.
Centrelink officers visited hospitality and harvesting industries
around Nimbin, cancelled or suspended payments of 19
people, and targeting 78 more for further investigation.
The newspaper articles don’t go into how they found the
workers who were on benefits.
DIMIA found nobody with immigration irregularities.
The police charged 21 people with possession, but found no
commercial quantities of drugs
These are all incidents in which it would appear the general
public have been targeted either specifically by operations, or
as result of a targeted operation.
When did they start? And
why?



The Cash Economy Taskforce established by
Commissioner of Taxation in November 1996.
Objective to examine nature of cash
economy, determine likely compliance issues
& develop a view about additional steps the
ATO could take to address tax evasion in the
cash economy.
In July 1997 the task force presented its first
report to the commissioner of taxation.




One finding was ATO couldn’t address issues of cash
economy alone.
So one recommendation was ATO should work
cooperatively with tax practitioners, industry and
community groups and other government agencies
on cash economy initiatives.
Inter Agency Cash Economy Working Group,
comprising ATO, DIMIA & Centrelink, was
established.
ATO lead agency of the group, focus was compliance
with tax requirements, rather than the requirements
of the other agencies.


Activities group identified as important were
sharing of information and data matching.
By 1999, Phillip Ruddock, in his then role as
minister for immigration and multicultural
affairs, told parliament activities of
interagency cash economy working group
included investigating possibility of
undertaking joint prosecutions for taxation
and social security offences, outposting
Centrelink officers to ATO sites and
identifying potential joint activities.




Two years later focus of group seems to
morph from ATO compliance activities to
DIMIA activities.
In December 2001 DIMIA issues media
release detailing its multi agency operations
since September 2001.
Operations occurred in Victoria, NSW and
Queensland and led to 175 people being
detained by DIMIA.
Focus on DIMIA’s operations may have been
a result of 9/11.




By 2003 Centrelink seemed to become the dominant
agency.
Funds provided to Centrelink in the 2002-03 budget
to implement national program of inter-agency field
investigation projects as an ongoing fraud detection
measure.
This announcement seems little odd, given Centrelink
had been involved nationally since inception of group,
perhaps allowed more officers to be allocated.
Whatever the reason, result seems to be that
Centrelink now the lead agency in driving the
process.




Asked Joe Judge who initiated multi-agency
operations. He claimed initiative could come from any
number of agencies.
He said that, if the police, for instance, were planning
a roadblock on taxis or couriers, they might invite
federal agencies along.
At other times Centrelink or DIMIA might express
interest in a certain area and approach police to
organise operation.
Tried over some days to find someone in Victoria
Police who might be the contact person for the interagency group, but to no avail.





It wasn’t until the start of this year that inter-agency
group mentioned again in parliament.
In early March, Joe Hockey, Minister for Human
Services, told parliament he could now report on a
“previously unreported operation”, Operation Oxford,
conducted by Victoria Police and Centrelink in
February.
According to Joe Hockey only Victoria Police and
Centrelink were involved, but there were probably
more agencies.
The operation involved a roadblock and 500 vehicles
were stopped for inspections and licence checking.
Of these, 220 were taxi and courier drivers who were
questioned by Centrelink.




Out of those 220, 13 people were identified
as receiving benefits whilst working without
declaring their income.
The tenor of the speech was very much that
this was somehow a new project, which
Centrelink had been undertaking as a series
of ‘covert’ operations in the past year.
Hockey then put out a press release about
Operation Oxford.
May have done this because first operation to
get widespread publicty.



Operation Oxford was subsequently reported
in the Sydney Morning Herald as the ‘first trial
of a CSI-style program’, which Joe Hockey
‘claimed credit for’ in parliament.
Article went on to say that ATO, which had
been criticised by the Auditor-General for its
cash economy program, would not be setting
up similar roadblocks, and would not
comment on the Centrelink program.
Maybe they were sulking.
So where are we now?






Majority of press releases on operations in past few
years come from Hockey’s office.
Other agencies surprisingly quiet about their
involvement.
Press release put out by the Victoria police in April is
the only press release of any state police force in
Australia on the subject.
DIMIA is surprisingly quiet on them as well.
Last press release from DIMIA is from December
2003.
The ATO has never put out a press release in relation
to the operations.




Politicians are similarly pretty silent.
Have been only two mentions in federal
parliament of the group’s activities.
There is no mention of the operations to be
found in any state hansard – haven’t checked
the territories.
Media on the operations has been totally
unquestioning, and appear to simply rehash
press releases.


One of the biggest hassles getting people to
realise there is problem is the agencies
involved fog the matter by making it seem as
if checks and operations which arise through
intelligence are exactly the same as the interagency operations.
A further complicating matter is that interagency operations become conflated with
operations like raids on illegal brothels, which
often find sex slaves and are therefore seen
as being worthy and not open to criticism.





A report on a recent raid on an alleged illegal brothel
in Heathmont, in outer suburban Melbourne, is a
case in point.
Whilst it didn’t find any sex slaves, was initiated in
response (allegedly) to complaints from residents.
The place had been issued with a warning by
Maroondah Council in March, which was apparently
ignored.
In response, on 22 August eight police, DIMIA, an
officer from Maroondah Council, representatives from
Consumer Affairs (they would have been from the
prostitution control board), the ATO and Centrelink
turned up on the front doorstep.
There were four people inside.






Press releases on operations stress intelligence related activities,
rather than trawling expeditions.
Both Centrelink and DIMIA are constantly pushing their dob-in
lines
In 2002-03, Centrelink undertook 58,788 reviews based on tipoffs from the public, resulting in 12,565 payment reductions.
Dimia estimates that, in 1999-2000, tip-offs assisted in 19% of
what it calls ‘priority’ locations.
Certainly in these agencies interests to make it seem to the
public that operations come about as a result of tip-offs.
However the reality is, most of these operations are probably
trawling expeditions – not operations on workplaces where
Centrelink knows they have ‘customers’ or DIMIA has
intelligence there are workers with visa irregularities.



Another good example of how the agencies get away with
taking liberties in these operations came in a conversation I had
with Peter from the NSW Taxi Association (subsequent to the
conference).
I asked him if, after the complaints received from members
(detailed earlier), they had checked out the legalities.
Peter told me that, after a long time, the police and the taxi
directorate came back to the association and told them that, as
taxi drivers signed a release form allowing the directorate to
pass on info to other agencies, this allowed the directorate to
hand over drivers’ info at a road block operation.


I said I doubted this was correct – the release
probably permits the directorate to hand over
the info if an agency comes to them with a
reasonable suspicion – ie, Centrelink has had
a tip-off that a customer could be driving a
taxi, and has a name to be checked.
But I doubt it allows the directorate to just
hand over information for no reason except
that they are asked.



Peter said they had not had that information
checked by a lawyer.
When I expressed surprise that the
association would let this happen to its
members, he said that he understood what I
was talking about, but that ‘it’s only a
principle’.
In other words, the day to day practicalities
of working in the industry preclude making a
stand against the illegal use of workers’
information, and he said as much.
Who cares anyway?





There’s good reason for the legal community and the
wider community to be much more concerned than
they are.
Even being aware would be a good start.
Inconceivable such large, intimidating operations
could be taking place and no-one is complaining.
No media organisation has even questioned these
operations.
Says a lot about what we have become habituated to
and what we expect to be subjected to.







If officials from Centrelink or DIMIA walked up to people in the
street and started asking questions, there would be outrage.
These operations are tantamount to these agencies doing
exactly that.
Possibly one of the reasons why there has been so little
comment is that workers in the industries involved operate on
the margins.
Likely their English may not be very good.
Likely their ability to access agencies which might make
complaints on their behalf is limited.
More than likely they just want to keep their heads down –
particularly if they are not Australian citizens.
A bit strange that people who were pulled up in roadblocks
haven’t said anything (although may have been canvassed in
talkback).




Also always attitude from general public that, if you’re not doing
anything wrong, you shouldn’t complain about being pulled up.
We seem to be becoming increasingly complacent about how far
authorities can intrude into our lives, not when it has been
proven there is any wrongdoing, or there is even the suspicion
of wrongdoing, but in order to actually find out if there is any
wrong doing.
In Victoria and NSW, (and other states?), police have taken to
patrolling the streets with sniffer dogs, looking for drugs.
But apart from the creeping nature of our increasing tolerance
of authoritarian measures, there is another reason why we
should be very wary of, and concerned about, anything which
involves Centrelink being given more power.








Centrelink increasingly becoming government’s arm of sweeping
intrusions into our lives.
Proposal for smartcard is a good example of this.
Community as a whole will cop measures that mostly impact on
the vulnerable and marginalised.
This makes Centrelink ideal agency for government to introduce
programs that affect us all.
Rhetoric surrounding the smart card has been that it will make
life easier for those on benefits and cut down on welfare fraud.
This makes the card easier for the community as a whole to
accept.
It seems to have gone under the radar that the card will also be
needed to access Medicare, which means that we will all need
one, unless you decide never to claim a Medicare benefit.
Still need it to access PBS rebates on drugs. Only the rich will be
able to avoid having a smartcard. The rich, and those who
never get ill.






Centrelink already at the heart of systems which can access
every citizens’ private records.
Automatic data-matching program involving federal agency data
banks being extended to state governments and private sector.
These are systems which constantly trawl through millions of
records looking for slightest change in personal circumstances.
Data match data from Centrelink, ATO, DIMIA, child support
agency, Medicare, Department of Health and Aging and
Department of Employment and Workplace relations.
Various agencies from state governments are being gradually
linked in.
This includes horse racing regulators, land title offices,
workcover authorities, building and construction authorities,
state revenue authorities and vehicle registering authorities.






Centrelink also involved in pilot projects to electronically match
data with banks, insurers, Coles and Woolworths.
DEWR building connections to swap information with Centrelink
and the private sector agencies which make up the national
employment network.
Novell was contracted early last year to provide Centrelink with
31,000 fingerprint scanners.
These are supposedly a security system for staff using
Centrelink networks.
However Centrelink only has 25,448 employees.
Despite being asked, Joe Hockey and his spokespeople have
refused to comment on whether the scanners are going to be
used for fingerscanning clients.


I should note here that Joe Hockey has said
that the new smart card will simply ‘unlock
your ability to get a medicare payment’ when
you go to a medicare office (not sure why
this has to be fixed – it’s pretty simple as it
is).
He claims there will be no ability for agencies
to search across other agency databases, so
if you’re not a centrelink customer, centrelink
won’t know about you.



The head of the access card project, Kerri Hartland,
says that large amounts of info won’t be held on the
card, but rather it will be a set of ‘keys’.
She claims there will be no provision of card
infrastructure to the private sector.
Although she does say that ‘what’s been endorsed’ is
the provision of infrastructure to support
pharmacists, GPs and emergency workers – I’m not
sure why she thinks GPs and pharmacists aren’t part
of the private sector!



Also, neither she nor Joe Hockey have addressed in
their statements the fact that identifying details will
be, by virtue of the card, in the centrelink system.
This probably means they will be vulnerable to being
involved in the wider automatic data-matching
system.
Joe Hockey and Kerri Hartland are assuring the
current inquiry into the card that earlier mooted
proposals like having bio-metric information on the
card, or using it to hold small amounts of cash so it
can be swiped for, say child-care centres, will not go
ahead.

This allows them to neatly side-step the
fact that the information it will contain –
name, address, dob, dependents, photo
and signature – are more than enough
for current data matching systems to
match up information during data
‘trawls’.



Australian Government Information Management
Office is running internal trials of wikis, web-based
software tools that allow internet communities to get
together and collaborate on establishing information
services.
IBM got the contract earlier this year to overhaul
DIMIA’s IT system.
IBM’s head of innovations, Brad Kassall, says DIMIA
and Centrelink want to create a new application that
can access travel and financial information and feed
in news from wherever net users have been or are
going and then, based on all this information, know
instantly who they want to scrutinise more closely.




Centrelink seems to be the lead agency in
these operations.
Classic case of function creep, or something
more
Focus has shifted from original ATO project.
Budget papers this year also alluded to
Centrelink fraud investigators being given
more power.




As we get more habituated, or maybe resigned to,
intrusions like multi-department operations, easier it
becomes for agencies to introduce new tools and
measures.
DIMIA already use sophisticated mobile technology
on these operations.
If Centrelink is not already doing the same thing
(although it has less imperative to than DIMIA)
probably will be soon.
Given existing and new technology, imagine the
information these two agencies alone will have at
their fingertips the minute they get a name.



Will these federal agencies be given power to
ask anyone their personal details.
Even the police can’t just walk up to people in
the street and demand their name and
address.
Point needs to be made to these agencies,
and it needs to be made now, that they
cannot get away with bluffing and bullying
people into giving them their details.




And just one further point – state agencies which
have been given coercive powers for specific reasons,
aiding federal agencies which haven’t been given
coercive powers, for good reasons, to do their dirty
work.
Looked through Victoria’s state constitution to see if
there’s any provisions which could stretch their
interpretation to prevent this co-operation, but there
is none.
Perhaps those here from other states could do the
same thing.
Possibly most likely constitution to have such a
provision is the WA constitution, given that WA
refused to be part of the federation process.
What to do?





Tad stuck on this!
At the meeting a couple of months ago, discussed
whether putting out information sheets on your rights
in these situations would be a good approach.
Probably waste of time.
Very difficult to distribute, hard to know range of
languages they should include and can’t necessarily
rely on the most vulnerable of the target groups
being literate.
Information on electronic media would run into the
same problem, although it maybe wouldn’t hurt to
post some info on backpacker’s sites.




Legal action to see if they could be prevented from
either forming multi-agency groups or be forced to
provide information about who you have to disclose
information to would be a good option.
Even if it failed, the resultant publicity would be
excellent.
However I’m not clever enough to come up with the
grounds.
As I said before, I’ve trawled the Victorian
Constitution, and had a good hard look at the
Federal Constitution, but it doesn’t seem to me
there’s any basis for a constitutional challenge.

But I’m not a constitutional lawyer so
I’m sure someone else could perhaps
find a ground I know nothing about –
could the authority for the forming of
the multi-agency group be traced back
to a head of power that doesn’t allow
for its operation??







Complaint to HEROC if it looked like they were indulging in
racial profiling, but I don’t think that’s got a chance.
For a start we’d need a complainant, probably not an easy
person to find..
Anyway, no one race is being targeted.
Those who are targeted while they are working could perhaps
challenge their employer on the basis of being bullied and
harassed while at work.
A courier or a tow truck driver may be the go here, as taxi
drivers employment arrangements are often highly suspect.
Those who are pulled up in vans outside work might not be able
to run the same argument, although if the farm is providing the
van they may have an argument.
But once again this relies on people being willing to complain,
and I just don’t see it happening.


A media campaign perhaps.
Feel there’d be a bit of interest, but
probably all DIMIA would have to say is
‘we’ve found so many illegals’ and all
Centrelink would have to say is ‘these
operations have saved the taxpayer $30
million this year’, and our argument
would be lost.


Suggestions which came from the
conference were to work out the real
cost/benefit analysis of these raids, get
questions asked in parliament/s, run
media campaigns.
Also felt that it would be good to link
into other campaigns ie the anti-smart
card campaign.
Sources


Improving Tax Compliance in the Cash Economy ATO, April 1998
The Cash Economy under the New Tax System, ATO, September
2003




Our Accountability – Centrelink, 2002-03
Onshore Compliance – Visa Overstayers and Non-Citizens
Working Illegally – DIMIA – 2004-05
Review of the ANAO Audit Reports 1998-99: Management of Tax
File numbers, House of Representatives Standing Committee on
Economics, Finance and Public Administration, 6 March 2000
Hansard, House of Representatives, 3 June 1999






Hansard, NSW Legislative Council, 19 September 2002
Hansard, House of Representatives, 2 March 2006
175 detained in Major Compliance Operations, press release,
Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, 20
December 2001
Police nix civil liberties, Maryke Steffens et al, NewsDay 2002
UTS
Viking storms on despite media coverage, ABC Newsonline, 24
May 2002
Crackdown on Welfare Cheats, press release, Department of
Family and Community Services, 1 August 2003

Cash workers busted, Kimberley Echo, 18 September
2003

Centrelink Raid catches 14 Welfare Cheats, ABC News
Online, 2 October 2003

Immigration Raids Catch 126 Illegals in Sydney, press
release, Minister for Immigration and Multicultural
Affairs, 14 December 2003

Centrelink’s orchard blitz, Veronica Buck, Donnybrook-

Traffic Blitz moves to Southern Cross, ABC News Online, 16

Operations net more than 30 illegal workers in Sydney, press




Bridgetown Mail, 16 December 2003
March 2004
release, Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, 17
September 2004
Immigration Blitz sees pair face deportation, ABC Newsonline,
15 March 2005
Centrelink backs up fingerprint scanners with Novell, Renai
LeMay, ZDNet Australia, 16 March 2005
Respect for law abiding drivers, Meter (magazine of the NSW
Taxi Council, June/July 2005
Blitz nabs harvesters, Berwick Gazette, 16 November 2005

Cops, Lebs, and the new civil war, Patrick Carlyon et al, The
Bulletin, 1 February 2006

Taxi Crackdown sees five cab drivers fired, ABC Newsonline, 17
February 2006

Road Blitz on welfare cheats, Press Release, Joe Hockey, 2
March 2006

Taxi Drivers collared at Centrelink roadblocks, John Garnaut, 3
March 2006


Australia mulls fingerpring scans of welfare recipients, Julian
Bajkowski, Compterworld, 22 March 2005
Inbound Tour Operators Blitz, press release, Queensland Office
of Fair Trading, 30 March 2006

Operation Cinnamon blitzes inbound tour operators
on the Gold Coast, Licensing Line News, Queensland
Government

113 canaries in eight hours, press release, Victoria
Police, 28 April 2006

Operation Rosalind cracks down on cash economy,
press release, Department of Human Services, 20
June 2006





Policing Blitz targets Lismore and Nimbin, Will
Jackson, Northern Star, 4 July 2006
Nimbin mum ‘felt like a crook’, Will Jackson, Northern
Star, 5 July 2006
Centrelink’s fraud blitz tops $1million, press release,
Minister for Human Services, 26 July 2006
Canberra looks at Wiki Services, Andrew Colley, The
Australian, 1 August 2006
Crime & Prejudice, Christopher Kremmer et al,
Sydney Morning Herald, 4 August 2006






Operation Marcellus and Operation Chorus crackdown on
Victoria’s cash economy and welfare fraud, press release,
Minister for Human Services, 7 August 2006
Net tightens on cheats, Ben Woodhead, The Australian 8 August
2006
Hatched, matched and dispatched, Ben Woodhead, The
Australian, 15 August 2006
Raid in the Suburbs, Brigid O’Connell, Maroondah Leader, 22
August 2006
Access Card for Access Only, Karen Dearne, The Australian, 5
September 2006
Back to a basic card, Karen Dearne, The Australian, 5
September 2006