Mark Vaile (Lyne, National Party, Deputy Prime Minister) Share this | Hansard source

I thank all members on both sides for their contributions to this debate on what is, as was pointed out by the member for Blaxland, a very important issue. The Inspector of Transport Security Bill 2006 and the Inspector of Transport Security (Consequential Provisions) Bill 2006 provide for the Minister for Transport and Regional Services to initiate independent, no-blame inquiries into transport security matters. The purpose of an inquiry by the inspector will be to make recommendations, following such inquiries, to improve transport security in Australia.

Just by way of information, given the contribution by members, the role of the inspector is to undertake inquiries in transport security and offshore security matters. Transport or offshore security matters would include a transport or offshore facilities security incident considered by the minister to be a major incident, a series of minor incidents or occurrences that indicate a failure or weakness in security systems that could be considered systemic, or a major incident that occurs outside Australia that the minister believes may provide useful lessons for Australian transport and offshore facilities security. A transport security matter is one that is likely to involve serious breaches of regulatory obligations by regulated parties, security related incidents leading to injury or death, or an event or pattern of events pointing to transport security vulnerabilities.

I am pleased that during the debate the opposition has spoken forcefully in favour of the bill. I am particularly pleased that the opposition specifically supports the strong protections for information gathered in the course of an inquiry. I note that, despite its enthusiasm for the bill, the opposition has proposed a number of amendments.

Firstly, the opposition claims that the inspector is not independent because the inspector cannot self-initiate inquiries. Let me remind the opposition that the purpose of the bill is to provide a legislative framework for inquiries into major transport security incidents or systemic weaknesses in the transport security regime. Thankfully, such incidents or weaknesses are rare, and it is a matter for the Minister for Transport and Regional Services—who is in the best position—to determine when such an inquiry is needed. I reject the assertion that the inspector is not independent. The bill specifically provides that, in undertaking an inquiry, the inspector is not subject to any direction from the minister or the department.

Secondly, the opposition has criticised the bill because it provides that the inspector may be appointed on a part-time basis. This is the case, and I am grateful that there is currently no need to have a full-time position of Inspector of Transport Security. Should the transport security environment deteriorate, the bill allows for the appointment to be full time if required.

Thirdly, the opposition would like to see the Leader of the Opposition consulted on the appointment of the Inspector of Transport Security. In proposing this amendment, the opposition has likened the role of the inspector to that of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security. The opposition fails to acknowledge that these roles are significantly different. The Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security oversights Australia’s intelligence agencies; the Inspector of Transport Security will conduct no-blame investigations, a role that is more akin to that of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau, which conducts no-blame investigations into safety incidents.

Fourthly, the opposition is seeking access to final reports of the inspector in all situations. The bill already provides that the minister may provide the final report to any person, including the Leader of the Opposition. This judgement will be made on a case by case basis, taking into account the public interest. Our government has always taken the view that the Leader of the Opposition should be briefed on issues of national security and national interest, and that position will continue in relation to this bill.

Lastly, the opposition would like to see all final reports tabled in parliament. I acknowledge the importance of public accountability in relation to the activities of the Inspector of Transport Security; however, I cannot guarantee that in every possible instance it will be appropriate for a final report to be tabled in parliament. Therefore, the public interest test that allows a report to be tabled in parliament and that is already in the bill should remain. In conclusion, the government is not going to support unnecessary amendments to this bill. However, I thank the opposition for their support of this bill and look forward to its passage.

See this speech in context