Michael Hatton (Blaxland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I hope not, Philip. I may be considered an alien by some but I hope not. Sometimes I think I might be.

The checking was so intense that the person who got through quickest was a nun who was about 40 or so. She got through in 15 minutes. I do not have a problem with that, and I do not have a problem with officials dealing with it in the way that we have Australian Customs officials dealing with it. I actually think it is really important.

Here I would put to the Attorney-General that we should have a complete change of culture at our airports and ports. I am speaking about the changes with security cards, including the maritime security identification card and, as I have spoken of before, the aviation security identification card. The Attorney will have been apprised of the fact that our amendments go to the manner in which they were rolled out, although that did not occur during his time as Attorney. I will trust that the demerits in that roll-out will be fixed by Mr Ruddock as Attorney-General, because this is fundamentally important. Slow, careful, detailed work in this area is critical. Why?—because we have had plenty of examples, at Kingsford Smith airport in particular, where the process for the security identification cards has not been right. It has not been adequate or complete, and that has left us very vulnerable.

It is difficult to understand this at the contracting-out level because people generally think of contracts in terms of cleaning contracts, where companies like Spotless, Totalcare or someone else take the head contract. They have employees and they have control of those employees, and you would pretty much be able to determine, if something went wrong, what was happening. It is in the nature of the security industry in Sydney in particular—I know this is Australia-wide but my experience is in Sydney—at Kingsford Smith airport and elsewhere, that you are not dealing just with a head contractor. The head contractor subcontracts, that subcontractor subcontracts and that subcontractor subcontracts. In a country where we have contractors for just about everything—there are no employees left in this area—you have people contracting right down at the bottom. The control over those people—a casualised workforce with people moving in and out—is not what it should be.

It has not been envisaged by the Attorney-General or by the government—it has been envisaged by me previously, by the member for Banks now and more generally by Labor—that the whole lot should be cleared out. I would get rid of Wackenhut, SNP and all the rest of them. Clear them all out. Let us, in this instance, follow the lead of the United States government and put Australian government employees—as we have in Customs and APS—into the key roles where we check baggage and cargo, because it is vitally important.

Our amendments are significant in terms of the security identification cards in the aviation and maritime areas because unless this system works adequately we will not have the kind of protections we have had. In his second reading speech on this bill the minister indicated that the government has moved in a series of areas where we have pressed hard—such as the hardening of cockpit doors—and circumstances have also pressed hard so that we have passenger screening for all regular passenger jet flights, upgraded closed circuit television and monitoring capability. As the member for Lowe has pointed out time and again, you have to make sure that it works. Although there is monitoring, it may be turned off, allowing terrible things to happen, and our security may be trammelled because processes are not undertaken properly because we have not got to the core of the problem.

The government have taken a series of other measures that I have spoken on recently with regard to maritime security. This area really needs to be got to the bottom of. This system has to work, and it has to work well. That is why I support what is being fundamentally done in AusCheck—because bringing together the disparate elements of this into one approach under AusCheck, under the Attorney-General, is the right way to do it. Other members have indicated that there are some areas where it may be rolled out and extended later. The shadow minister and the member for Banks have underlined those areas. I will leave my comments with regard to that at that.

There are areas that need to be answered in that regard, but in terms of the broader area—we have spoken about this in other circumstances, but it is fundamental—permitting foreign flag-of-convenience ships to carry dangerous goods on coastal shipping routes without appropriate security checks is a recipe for absolute disaster. And, where the crew and cargo details of ships are not available 48 hours before arrival, this is a significant area of danger for Australia—particularly with major ships carrying ammonium nitrate from one end of the planet to the other—unless you pin this down very finely.

There is a danger to our ports and to a place like Sydney. When you have a load of ammonium nitrate in a boat you could blow the whole of the CBD up. That is fundamental and critical but the government have not taken those steps; we recommend they give serious consideration to it. We are committed to doing it because we think it is important. Likewise, we urge the government—and also give them a whack over the back of the hand—because they have failed to X-ray or inspect 90 per cent of containers. They promised to provide security in this area but they have been lax in this regard, and we do not think that they should be—it is too important.

Something that the government will not do is provide for an Australian coastguard—to establish it and properly fund it. They have relied upon the Navy exclusively. Let us use the example of the United States and its coastguard. It has not destroyed that country to have an independent coastguard as an adjunct to its naval capacity and activities. I have been on the Fremantle class boats and I have also inspected the Armidale class boats as the deputy chair of the defence committee. These boats are being used to do splendid intervention work in Northern Australia and off the coasts of Western Australia and Queensland. They are doing fantastic work, and we need to support them as much as we can. Their job is so immense that we need to support them with an interleaved capacity. This can be achieved by having an adjunct whereby a group is dedicated to the work but other people assist them in doing it.

The United States is not afraid of such a facility. It too is continental. It too has the kinds of challenges we have. We argue that that kind of facility should be brought to bear here and that we should establish a department of homeland security to better coordinate security in Australia. This is not something that the government wishes to take on but something that we have underlined. Attorney, we propose the establishment of a department of homeland security to better coordinate security in Australia—but, interestingly, what is AusCheck doing? It is better coordinating security checking in Australia under one aegis. That is the operative in this bill. It is the core of what it is about: to bring all the disparate elements together so that we can have a better view and better control of them. We think that is a smart thing and an intelligent thing to do.

Where is a department of homeland security—I think I have heard of that before—operating? It operates in the United States. They understand the gravity of the situation. They understand that there is a particular utility in focusing on one area. Generally, the Australian government has been against that idea, because it is our idea and it is natural for governments not to appreciate the ideas of oppositions—

See this speech in context