Anthony Byrne (Holt, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I'd just like to second the comments that were made by the Chair of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security with respect to the Intelligence Services Amendment Bill 2018. I think that now what the Australian people should know, and what this parliament should understand, is that this legislation clearly is needed by the security agency in question, which is ASIS, to keep Australians safe, to allow it to discharge its duties. Often in this committee, with the subject matter that we talk about, we're very constrained in what we can say, but I can assure the Australian public that, on an ongoing basis through this committee process, these sorts of legislation—and this report that we're looking at and the legislation which will go through this House—are subjected to intense scrutiny. A bill like this is subjected to the sort of scrutiny and consultation that may not be seen in other parliaments.

I'd like to commend in particular the chair of the committee, the member for Canning, not just for the work that he's done with this Intelligence Services Amendment Bill 2018 and this committee process but for his chairship during the entire parliamentary term. I say this in the context of some discussion in the media about bipartisanship. Bipartisanship is not easy. Bipartisanship is hard. It's easy take the low road. It's easy to take the easy pathway out, to point a finger at one side and make accusations about one person being, say, 'weak on terrorism' or, it might be, about another person being 'weak on security'.

The parliament and the Australian people should know that this bipartisan committee, which has looked at something like 18 or 19 pieces of legislation, is almost unique in the Western world for the outcomes that it has delivered to the people in keeping the Australian community safe, plus the safeguards that have been built into this legislation. I look at the United States of America, where they have a dysfunctional oversight system, where they have chairs off briefing the President of the United States, or disunity. What you can see with respect to disunity is that you have the enemy that seeks to exploit that disunity. So, when people ask, 'Why are you bipartisan on this committee?' the answer is that it's because we put the national interest first. When we look at security, when we look at legislation that's brought before this parliament, we do so in the national interest, and it's only by looking at national security in a bipartisan way that we can give it its full just measure, its full consideration.

As I said, it is easy to be partisan in this place, and it's easy to get the media headlines when you're not bipartisan. It's hard to be bipartisan in this place, but that's what this country's craving. It wants bipartisanship; it wants a way forward; it wants people working together in the national interest; and this committee gives that to it.

See this speech in context