Gavin Pearce (Braddon, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Health, Aged Care and Indigenous Health Services) Share this | Hansard source

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Modernisation) Bill 2022. I do so after a couple of decades in the Defence Force in the signals intelligence community, in the Royal Australian Corps of Signals, from a tactical and operational perspective, so this is an important subject for me. The subject of classified material and intelligence security is uppermost in my mind. I reflect back to my time at the 7th Signal Regiment (Electronic Warfare) unit, based in Cabarlah in South-East Queensland. It is a role that 7 Sig has done for many decades—intercepting and prosecuting enemy transmissions in the area of operations in the defence of Australia.

Those young men and women that are up in that unit are often involved in what we call the black arts of defence, cloaked in secrecy and cloaked in security. Their stories often aren't told. But I want to make it very clear—I want to put it on the record today—that those young men and women of the 7th Signal Regiment and our signals intelligence operators are absolutely professional and force multipliers when it comes to prosecuting a target in the area of operations. They have saved lives on many, many occasions. They have been on every deployment and every operation, both disclosed and undisclosed. They use cutting edge equipment in satellite communications in tactical areas such as radio communications, broadband communications and the like. Together with the two-shop—that is, general intelligence—the formulation of that intelligence picture is then painted to the commander on the ground, which makes that commander's job that much more efficient and effective. So let me state that this is an important subject. This is important at the tactical level, but once we get above the operational level and start getting into strategic protection of intelligence, particularly signals intelligence, that is of the utmost importance for me.

This bill amends the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security Act 1986, the IGIS Act, to ensure that legislation governing the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, IGIS, is adapted to reflect contemporary circumstances. Everyone in this room and everyone in Australia understands the changes in geopolitical tensions throughout the region, particularly in the Indo-Pacific region. Defence plays a big part in that, and intelligence is at the forefront of that defence. This includes technical amendments to clarify and to modernise drafting expressions and to remove redundant provisions, so it cleans the act up. The bill also provides amendments to ensure and enhance that IGIS's oversight functions and powers are maintained at all times and are commensurate to the risk. It's important to note that these measures do not seek to expand IGIS's jurisdiction—that's an important thing to have on the record—but merely to enhance IGIS's oversight of the agencies within existing jurisdiction.

Australia's dedicated oversight body, the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, is crucial to our nation's ongoing security and maintenance of all types of classified material and intelligence. Created in 1986, the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security has become our independent watchdog over intelligence and security agencies more broadly. For 35 years, the inspector-general has performed a critical role in ensuring that Australia's intelligence agencies act legally and with propriety. The powers of the intelligence and security agencies have evolved significantly over this time and they continue to evolve. It's important that the inspector-general's powers and jurisdiction evolve commensurate to that. Our domestic and international threats have changed, as I said earlier, and the way in which intelligence and security manage those ever-present, ongoing threats has also changed in those 35 years, but the powers of the inspector-general have not changed to meet this evolution. It's therefore necessary and paramount that we make sense of the powers of the inspector-general and that they are adaptive and responsive to this rapidly changing environment.

To that end, I think this bill amends that and meets those challenges. It amends the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security Act 1986, the IGIS act, and other Commonwealth legislative frameworks to enhance the oversight of the Office of National Intelligence, the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation, the Australian Secret Intelligence Service, the Australian Signals Directorate, the Australian Geospatial-Intelligence Organisation and the Defence Intelligence Organisation.

Importantly, this bill also implements two recommendations of the Comprehensive Review of the Legal Framework of the National Intelligence Community. This was a wide-ranging review of Australia's laws governing intelligence and security, undertaken by former Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Chief Dennis Richardson. It was released in 2020.

Recommendation 172 deals with IGIS's independence and their eligibility to be appointed to IGIS. Recommendation 174 relates to inquiring into employment related grievances for staff at the Office of National Intelligence. The coalition agreed to both of these recommendations when in government, and we were pleased to see them implemented in this bill also. So, well done to the government.

In relation to PJCIS's examination of the bill, as the previous speaker has already alluded to, on 7 February PJCIS went through an extensive investigation of these matters. Government referred this bill to the PJCIS for inquiry and report. Subsequently, on 20 March, the report of the committee was tabled. The PJCIS made five recommendations, two of which are relevant to this specific bill, as far as I'm concerned. Recommendation 2 suggests amending the provisions around the aggregation of privilege so that they align with the privileges for other integrity agencies. Recommendation 4 suggests excluding people employed by any intelligence agency for an appropriate period of time. The government has indicated that it is not acting to amend the basis of these recommendations but will consider the recommendations, particularly recommendation 4, in the next tranche of IGIS legislation.

From our position, we support this legislation. We also note other matters raised by PJCIS, particularly the need for greater information sharing, as a previous speaker alluded to; greater sharing of intelligence and matters between IGIS and PJCIS; and the need for an expanded oversight of the PJCIS and IGIS to cover of the entirety of the national intelligence committee. I think it needs to have a holistic, strategic position in this big picture. That interface, between the committee and the commissioner, is absolutely paramount.

While I've learned from two decades of dealing with classified signals intelligence particularly is that the overclassification of those matters tends to lead to mistakes happening. We can be too secretive, we can be too cloaked and too compartmentalised. So I'm pushing for this particular recommendation, that the delineation of responsibility between the committee and the commissioner is highlighted, is clarified and is clear for all to see.

Finally, the government should give these matters serious consideration. I appreciate the chance to speak on this important matter and commend this bill to the House.

See this speech in context