Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Attorney General) Share this | Hansard source

The member for Denison, in this amendment, which proposes the deletion of section 29(3) of the Intelligence Services Act 2001 has drawn the attention of the parliament to the limited functions of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security. As the member for Denison has just observed, unlike the House of Commons Intelligence and Security Committee and the equivalent committees of the US Congress, which do have access to and oversight of operational matters concerning intelligence, the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security of this parliament does not have such powers.

The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security is, of course, an unusual committee of this parliament in that it is one of the small group of committees that are constituted by statute rather than under the standing orders. As a consequence, we look to the statute which establishes it for its role, which is set out in section 29 of the Intelligence Services Act. Sections 29(1) and 29(2) confer clear functions which include reviewing the administration and expenditure of the intelligence agencies and reviewing any matter in relation to the agencies that the minister or either house of parliament asks the committee to engage in. It has a particular review role in relation to a sunset provision of some particular powers given to ASIO in 2006 and it can request the minister to refer matters to it. It also has another function in relation to proposed listing of terrorist organisations under the Criminal Code, which appears in other legislation.

We then see in 29(3) that there is a specific exclusion of the committee from reviewing the intelligence gathering and assessment priorities of the agencies, of reviewing the sources of information, reviewing particular operations and a range of what can be described as 'operational matters'. There should be some consideration of expanding the role of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, which I think needs to take place as part of consideration of the whole scheme of oversight of our intelligence agencies. We need to ensure that the whole of our community has confidence in our intelligence and security agencies. One of the ways in which that confidence can best be achieved is through oversight and integrity bodies. We already have a range of oversight and integrity bodies which includes the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, the National Security Committee of cabinet has oversight, as does the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor.

I pause to note that, although the government has abandoned its ill-conceived proposal to abolish the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor, the office of the monitor remains vacant. I would urge the government to fill that vacant position. If ever there were a time when we needed an independent national security legislation monitor it is now when we are considering the new powers being conferred on our agencies with this bill, the new powers that are proposed to be conferred on our agencies by the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (Foreign Fighters) Bill, which is now in the Senate, and yet further as yet unexplained changes to the national security legislation which the government has mentioned. You could add as well an oversight role, the role of the Attorney-General, and of course this parliament has a role in overseeing the activities of our intelligence and security agencies and in particular the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security.

It is worth considering whether the role of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security should be expanded but the way proposed by the member for Denison is not the way to do it—by simply deleting a section of the act which sets up the committee. Serious consideration needs to be given to what particular functions should be conferred on the committee and what expansion of the role of the committee is appropriate. That needs to be done through a process of parliamentary scrutiny, through a process of public consultation and through a properly considered proposal, not something on the run on the floor of the House.

I thank the member for Denison for drawing the attention of this parliament to the constraints that have been placed by legislation on the role of the intelligence committee and for drawing the attention of the parliament to the differences in the UK and the United States.

See this speech in context