Andrew Hastie (Canning, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, I present the committee's report on its Review of Administration and Expenditure No. 14.

Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e).

by leave—This report meets one of the committee's key statutory oversight responsibilities to review the administration and expenditure of the six Australian intelligence agencies. The report I am presenting today relates to the 2014-15 financial year. The committee received submissions and conducted private hearings with each intelligence agency and the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security during the 44th Parliament. The committee's final hearing was conducted on 2 May 2016, shortly before prorogation of that parliament. The review lapsed on prorogation and was resumed early in the 45th Parliament.

The period under review was characterised by significant changes to Australia's national security legislation, to meet evolving security threats, especially posed-by terrorism, and protect the Australian people and our interests. Four separate bills were reviewed by this committee during 2014-15. Following passage of those bills, agencies gained new or expanded powers.

In August 2014, the government announced a cross-agency funding package to support counter-terrorism measures. At the same time, the government announced that the efficiency dividend would no longer apply to the Office of National Assessments and the Office of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security.

The committee welcomes these measures. In relation to the Inspector-General, the committee considers it necessary that as the intelligence agencies are additional powers that the parliament also strengthens its oversight of those agencies. This includes ensuring that the Inspector-General's office is resourced so that it can discharge its responsibilities. I am pleased to report that the committee considered the six intelligence agencies to be overseeing their administration and expenditure appropriately.

While the funding pressures faced by agencies were alleviated during 2014-15 by the additional Commonwealth funding to support counter-terrorism capabilities and other initiatives, the committee noted that ASIO and ASIS continued to face pressure in other areas as sought to detect, disrupt and defeat threats to the Australian people. The committee, bipartisan in composition, takes the task of securing Australian people very seriously and therefore wants to make sure that our agencies, especially those in the field, have everything they need to get the job done.

For a number of years now, the committee has monitored the impact of the efficiency dividend and other savings measures on the intelligence agencies. As in previous reviews, the committee again sought assurances that each agency continues to have the necessary resources to address Australia's national security priorities. ASIO and ASIS are now the only two intelligence agencies that are not quarantined from the efficiency dividend. The committee has questioned why the efficiency dividend should continue to apply to those organisations, noting in particular that a January 2015 review of Australia's counter-terrorism machinery by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet recommended that, in addition to ONA and the Office of the IGIS, the efficiency dividend be removed from or significantly reduced for the operations of ASIO, ASIS and the AFP.

The committee has recommended, in line with the PM&C recommendation that the efficiency dividend be removed from all ASIO, ASIS and AFP operations. As we saw yesterday, and as the minister outlined during question time, with the arrest of Harsem Zahab, the threat of terrorism inspired by ISIS is real and close to home. It is our duty to make sure ASIO, ASIS and the AFP—those charged with protecting us from those who would do us harm—have everything they need to be operationally effective.

Our intelligence and security agencies need sufficient base funding to meet all of their obligations. This means that funding is required to not only to deal with the increased threat to the community from terrorism, but also other significant external threats such as foreign espionage and cyber attacks. The committee will continue to monitor the effect of funding decisions in its future reviews.

I commend the report to the House.

See this speech in context