Thursday, 29 August 2024

Financial discrimination

David LIMBRICK (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (17:47): (1102) My adjournment matter today is for the attention of the Attorney-General and is related to the issue of debanking. I raised this issue a couple of times during the last term of Parliament. It is an issue that affects sex workers, bitcoin traders, gold bullion dealers, firearm dealers and others. It is also not unique to Australia, and as with other jurisdictions it is usually tied to anti money laundering and terrorism financing laws. These laws create a risk-averse environment, particularly when poorly drafted. Our federal laws are indeed poorly drafted, particularly section 235 of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006. This was noted nearly 20 years ago by the Australian Human Rights Commission, which identified the possibility of this clause enabling discrimination.

Matthew Roberts, a sex worker here in Victoria, recently concluded legal action against Mint Payments and First Data Merchant Solutions in the Magistrates’ Court, with Maurice Blackburn acting on his behalf. This was enabled by this government’s reforms last term which made it illegal to discriminate on the basis of employment. In other words, the laws here are working, but it should not be this hard. Libertarians believe that the free consensual trade of goods and services is the pathway to a prosperous society that allows people to benefit from their ideas and their labour. For sex workers this is not just about financial wellbeing, it exposes them to significant risk. If they are dishonest in banking applications due to concern about being debanked, it makes it harder to initiate a chargeback if a client makes a fraudulent payment, which let us remember under recent Victorian law meets the definition of a sex crime. Despite the law changes in Victoria, the issue persists.

Other cases that have occurred throughout Australia involving sex workers or bitcoin traders have all involved section 235 of the federal money laundering and counterterrorism act. There may be hope, though. The federal Attorney-General’s office are currently reviewing these laws, with over 100 submissions published on their website just today. As you would expect, several of these were from bitcoin enthusiasts. Libertarians are generally not in favour of more regulations, but in this circumstance we currently do not have a bitcoin economy that can provide an alternative pathway for meaningful financial transactions. Without digital merchant services and digital banking it can become very difficult to conduct trade. Whilst I do not have any particular insight into what the federal government are proposing, it is possible that they have already identified this issue and are proposing solutions. In the interests of ensuring that this issue is adequately addressed, my request for the Attorney-General is to consider the impact on Victorians and write to her federal colleague to request a meeting or simply to request that section 235 is addressed in future proposed legislation.