Nola Marino (Forrest, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I certainly support the government's Defence Amendment (Call Out of the Australian Defence Force) Bill 2018, in front of us today. As you would understand, Deputy Speaker Bird, and the members in the House know, the world today is a very different place from that which existed in 1903, when this type of legislation was formed. The threats we face today are, unfortunately, greater and far more complex than those of many years ago and even in 1903.

Essentially, this bill makes it easier for the state and territory governments to request ADF support in circumstances of a terrorist attack. These amendments complement the practical measures already being rolled out by our government to enhance the ADF's support for national counterterrorism arrangements. As we all know and as we've seen all too regularly both overseas and in Australia, acts of terrorism are hugely challenging. Think of the truck attack in Nice, the attacks in London, the Lindt cafe siege in Sydney, the hijacking of a commercial airliner or a mass casualty or mass hostage event. When incidents such as these happen, local police are put under an enormous pressure, and they respond and react very, very well, but often long and drawn-out or multiple-perpetrator and multiple-location attacks require perhaps additional and specific responses. Under our Constitution, the circumstances where the Commonwealth, through the Australian Defence Force, could step in were very, very limited.

As I started to say, they date back to 1903 and were set out in the Defence Act. Laws were tweaked somewhat in 2000, prior to the Sydney Olympics, to ensure that the New South Wales police had sufficient federal support to provide what was described, as we all know, as the best Olympics ever. Unfortunately, as we're aware, the world keeps changing—certainly since the end of 2000. We all remember the events in 2001; we've all experienced the impact they've had around the world not just in air travel but in airport security, security in public transport and security even here in Parliament House.

As has been said before, the government's first duty—any government's first duty—is to protect its citizens. We have a very proud and enviable record with national security and with supporting our men and women in uniform, and that includes our Defence Force people as well as our people in our local and state police. It's about supporting troops here or overseas, and even our local police. Those of us who live and work in regional areas see the extraordinary work done by our local police with our own families in our own communities. I acknowledge and thank them for what they do every single day.

On the details of this bill: the bill implements the recommendations of the review of Defence support to domestic counterterrorism arrangements. That was announced by the Prime Minister in July 2017. The government initiated the review in response to the changing nature of the threat, demonstrated by the attacks around the world. We've seen so many of those. The key factor in launching the review was actually the Lindt cafe siege in Sydney, which was one of the most significant terrorist incidents in Australia's history. The resultant inquiries, including the coronial inquest, found, among other things, that the option to call out the ADF in support of the New South Wales police was considered but rejected due to the complexity of the process and the criteria involved.

This bill seeks to change those criteria. The government is keen to ensure that states can determine when to call on the ADF to assist in a way that is rapid, effective, predictable and transparent and, ultimately, where it would be beneficial to a potential situation. The changes in this bill remove the threshold requirement that says the state:

… would not be, or is unlikely to be, able to protect the Commonwealth interests against the domestic violence …

Changes will also require that, in deciding whether to call out the ADF, Commonwealth authorising ministers consider the nature of the violence and whether, specifically, ADF support would be likely to enhance the state or territory's ability to protect itself or the Commonwealth's interests. It's a key issue.

Police and other emergency services are, and will remain, our first responders in this country. It is the immediate responses and actions of these first responders that can, and often do, have the greatest impact in terms of saving lives, protecting people and neutralising any threats. Each state and territory police force has specifically trained personnel who have expert capabilities to respond to terrorist attacks—hopefully not on Australian soil, but, as we know, we have to be prepared for whatever may befall us. We have to be prepared for what may be ahead, and there may be times when state and territory police actually need additional support to respond in the most effective manner. I see some young people in the gallery today listening to this. All of us in this chamber desperately hope that there is not a major terrorist incident in Australia that affects any of you. The reason we make the laws in this place is to protect young people and people of all ages just like yourselves.

While the Australian Defence Force's primary counterterrorism role is offshore, the ADF has the personnel, resources, specialist skills and assets that can assist our emergency services to respond in the event of a terrorist attack. The support can include capabilities such as tactical assault forces and any form of response and recovery that's required. For this reason, it's really essential that the defence forces are actually able and enabled to contribute effectively to our domestic counterterrorism efforts in every environment. In all honesty, we do not know what's ahead. We are aware of some of the threats and risks, but some are yet to unfold.

There are a number of key underlying principles that inform the operation of the amended call-out provisions. The ADF should only be called out to assist civilian authorities. If the ADF is called out, civilian authorities will remain paramount, but the ADF members remain under military command. And, when called out, ADF members can only use force that is reasonable and necessary in all of the circumstances, and they remain subject to the law and are accountable for their actions.

These factors do not limit the range of matters that authorising ministers can take into account. The amendments here will allow states and territories to request that the Commonwealth call out the ADF in a broader range of circumstances, making the process what we need, which is more flexible and responsible to the needs of states and territories, whilst at the same time recognising and respecting the different requirements of each state and territory. Importantly, the amendments do not mean that the ADF will be called out to respond to every threat; however, they will be given greater flexibility to respond to the wide range of threats that may arise—and we hope they don't arise, but we have to be prepared for them—and the range of response capabilities of every jurisdiction. It will also give responding state or territory authorities more flexible options to deal with an incident. They will make the call.

Recent terrorist attacks in cities like Paris and London have also prompted a reassessment of the scope of the ability to preauthorise call-outs of the ADF. It's known traditionally as the contingent call-out, which allows Commonwealth ministers to preauthorise the ADF to respond if specific circumstances arrive. This removes any potential delay, which is so critical. Time is critical in these situations. We've repeatedly seen how important time and timing is. It also removes any potential delay in seeking ministerial authorisation to act once an incident is actually taking place, and it enables the ADF to already be on the scene and ready to assist the police response. Contingent call-out is presently limited to only aviation and the protection of Commonwealth interests. From the passage of this bill, these amendments will extend contingent call-out to be available to protect state and territory interests, whether they are on the land, in the air or in the maritime domain.

In light of the current threat environment, where terrorist incidents can be over in a matter of minutes, these amendments provide additional options when planning for and dealing with anticipated terrorist threats. It is the case that terrorist threats can be highly mobile and can occur in multiple locations simultaneously. That is what we are dealing with. It's more than conceivable that a threat may arise in one jurisdiction and rapidly move to another; therefore, it's critical that legislative arrangements do not hinder an ADF response in this context. These amendments will enhance the ability of the ADF to respond to incidents across state or territory borders by allowing for call-out orders to authorise the ADF to operate in multiple jurisdictions, as well as an offshore area.

The government recognises the importance of the ADF working cooperatively alongside state and territory authorities by increasing the consultation requirements to work closely with first responders if called out. Under these amendments, the ADF will be required to consult with every state and territory affected by a call-out order to the extent possible in those circumstances. They also require that the ADF be utilised only in accordance with the written requests of the police force of the jurisdiction in which the ADF is operating—again clarifying the circumstances where the ADF is involved and limits on their involvement.

The bill further clarifies the powers of the ADF members that may be exercised by organising the powers into three distinct divisions. They will apply in both onshore and offshore areas to facilitate the ADF's ability to respond to multijurisdictional incidents and to streamline the legislation.

One important addition is the inclusion of the Minister for Home Affairs as a named alternative minister. Under the existing legislation, in an extraordinary emergency an expedited call-out can be made by the Prime Minister acting alone or, if the Prime Minister is unable to be contacted, the Minister for Defence and the Attorney-General acting together. If only one of the authorising ministers can be contacted, an expedited call-out order can be made by either the Minister for Defence or the Attorney-General together with an alternative minister, including the Deputy Prime Minister, the Minister for Foreign Affairs or the Treasurer. Following the reorganisation of the security agencies into the Home Affairs portfolio, the Minister for Home Affairs now plays a key role in counterterrorism coordination. He is a member of the National Security Committee of cabinet, with important security agencies falling within the Home Affairs portfolio. These amendments will add the Minister for Home Affairs as a named alternative minister for the purpose of expedited call-out.

In conclusion, can I say that it's a dreadful statement of fact that the world has changed. Many of us in this place are very concerned about what's ahead. It's changed significantly since 1903 and it's changed even more significantly since 2000. One of our important duties as a government—the most important duty—is to keep our citizens safe. The measures in this bill will ensure that Defence's specialist counterterrorism capabilities are readily available to states and territories if and when they are appropriate and needed. It will ensure the most rapid response possible, which is absolutely critical given the importance of timing and, equally, the current threat environment. The bill represents a huge improvement to the Commonwealth's ability to support national counterterrorism arrangements. While we in this place hope that they never need to be utilised, these changes, if they're needed, will help save Australians' lives in the event of a significant domestic terrorism threat. I commend the Attorney-General for his work and I commend the bill to the House.

See this speech in context