Josh Wilson (Fremantle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

() (): On behalf of the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties I present the committee's Report 210: Timor-Leste cooperation in the field of defence and the status of visiting forces; Serbia social security agreement.

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

by leave—I'm glad to make a statement on the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties Report 210 into the Agreement between the Government of Australia and the Government of the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste on Cooperation in the Field of Defence and the Status of Visiting Forces and, separately, the Agreement between Australia and the Republic of Serbia on Social Security.

The Timor-Leste agreement establishes a legally binding framework to effectively structure enhanced defence cooperation between Australia and Timor-Leste. It serves to facilitate a range of cooperative activities, including the conduct of maritime military and other operations, exchanges and exercises, international and humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, and educational training and logistics support. The agreement represents the maturing of the longstanding bilateral relationship between the two countries and will contribute to the future enhancement of military cooperation and training. The committee believes that having the forces of another country in one's own sovereign territory, as a matter of common sense, represents a significant degree of trust, closeness and cooperation.

Submissions to the inquiry came from various parts of the community—from academia, non-government organisations and government. The committee held a public hearing into the agreement and heard evidence from the Department of Defence and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

The second agreement—the Serbia social security agreement—is broadly in keeping with the more than 30 such bilateral agreements that already exist. The purpose of these agreements is to allow each of the participant countries to pay a benefit that reflects a person's entitlements under that country's social security system. For Australian the agreement covers the age pension while for Serbia it covers both the pension and disability insurance. The agreement would allow for a claim to a relevant benefit to be lodged in either country and assessed under the applicable social security rules. Ratification of the agreement would improve Australia's ability to provide greater access to social security benefits, particularly for people who migrate between countries, and Australia will also likely receive economic and social benefits from this agreement. Those who would potentially benefit under the agreement include: Australian residents who wish to move to Serbia in retirement; Australian residents who have previously worked in Serbia; former Australian residents living in Serbia; or Australian employees who second workers to Serbia.

The committee held a public hearing into the Serbia social security agreement and heard evidence from DFAT, the Department of Social Services and Treasury. Some of the key issues raised included the sharing of information, the value of social security agreements, consultation, waiting periods and indexation. On the topic of consultation, the committee did note the agreement featured a period of stakeholder feedback only after the agreement was signed, and the period of time was less than a fortnight. The committee does consider that, as a general principle, undertaking consultation after signing an agreement is not best practice for informing agreements where the input of relevant stakeholders should be sought.

The report also contains the committee 's consideration of several minor treaty actions. It's worth the community understanding that the role of the JSCOT is to scrutinise these minor treaty actions following referral from a minister, and the committee is able to make a recommendation without undertaking a formal inquiry or report because of the relatively minor nature of those treaty actions. That's because the actions are generally procedural or administrative amendments that could be updates to existing agreements and, looked at in their essence, they have a negligible effect in Australia and are regarded as not substantially or significantly impacting the national interest. The committee retains the right to undertake an inquiry into minor treaty actions if it sees fit to do so, and of course we'll always consider whether there are good reasons for that to occur. In the majority of cases, for the reasons I have described, the committee decides that an inquiry is not necessary, and that is properly the case for the minor treaty actions reported here.

The committee supports both treaties and has recommended that binding treaty action be taken on behalf of the committee. I commend this report to the House.

See this speech in context