Andrew Wilkie (Denison, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

by leave—I move amendments (1) and (2), as circulated in my name, together:

(1) Page 80 (after line 8), after Schedule 5, insert:

Schedule 5A—Functions of the Committee on Intelligence and Security

Intelligence Services Act 2001

1 Subsection 29(3)

Repeal the subsection.

(2) Schedule 7, items 31 to 40, page 110 (lines 5 to 24), omit the items.

Before we address the question, I have a few questions for the government to really bring some clarity to what has gone on this morning. Much of the discussion this morning—and, in fact, the discussion in the other place and elsewhere—has centred around the fact that the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security has inquired into these proposals on two separate occasions. In fact, that is correct. The first inquiry ran from May 2012 to May 2013—12 months. And, as someone who was involved in that inquiry, I am pleased to say that it was very robust and did as good a job as it could do. The second, more recent, inquiry went a matter of days or weeks at best, and, compared to the first inquiry, might be described as flimsy. So much then rests on the first inquiry. Yet, when you go to the chair's introduction in the report from the first inquiry, he says:

… the Committee was faced with three key difficulties. Firstly, the terms of reference were very wide ranging as they contained 18 specific reform proposals containing 44 separate items across three different reform areas. Secondly, the lack of any draft legislation or detail about some of the potential reforms was a major limitation and made the Committee’s consideration of the merit of the reforms difficult.

That ultimately led to recommendation 41—and I will read it in full:

The Committee recommends that the draft amendments to the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979 and the Intelligence Services Act 2001 , necessary to give effect to the Committee’s recommendations, should be released as an exposure draft for public consultation. The Government should expressly seek the views of key stakeholders, including the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor and Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security. In addition, the Committee recommends the Government ensure that the draft legislation be subject to Parliamentary committee scrutiny.

Through you, Mr Deputy Speaker Vasta, I ask this question of the government and of the minister: why, Minister, does the government keep claiming that the PJCIS supported these reforms in its 2013 report when the committee repeatedly said that its inquiry was limited by the absence of a detailed proposal or exposure draft? Through you, Mr Deputy Speaker: why is the government making so much of a report that, by its own admission, says it cannot address the issues in any detail?

See this speech in context