Phillip Thompson (Herbert, Liberal National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Defence) Share this | Hansard source

I want to take this opportunity to make a few comments on these two very important defence bills that we are considering today—the Defence Amendment (Safeguarding Australia's Military Secrets) Bill 2023 and the Defence Trade Controls Amendment Bill 2023. I would like to acknowledge my friend the member for Solomon and the member for Wills and his contribution just then and the importance of both of these bills.

As my colleague the member for Canning has already mentioned, the coalition will be supporting this legislation. The Defence Trade Controls Amendment Bill 2023 is a critical path to a smooth implementation of the AUKUS security pact, ensuring that we have the seamless transfer of technology that we and our partners need to enable it. The Defence Amendment (Safeguarding Australia's Military Secrets) Bill 2023 is crucial to making sure that our foreign militaries and governments aren't given a leg up by somebody who knows the ADF from the inside. I will touch on the second one first and then come back to the trade controls bill.

The Defence Amendment (Safeguarding Australia's Military Secrets) Bill 2023 came about after concerning reports that a former RAAF fighter pilot may have provided training to Chinese pilots. The reports, quite rightly, triggered an investigation by the joint AFP-ASIO Counter Foreign Interference Taskforce and Defence, looking in part at how the department managed security clearances and other controls for people taking jobs after their military careers. Following the investigation, it was deemed that there was enough evidence to show that more work needed to be done to ensure that the system was rock solid. This bill today is the product of that work.

The vast majority of our former defence members do the right thing. They sign up for service out of national pride and a determination to protect the sovereignty of our nation. They would never dream of sharing military secrets with a foreign military. But, for the extreme minority—a very small group—that might do the wrong thing, there must be absolutely no excuse, no reason and no allowance for that to happen. We are in the most challenging strategic circumstances since World War II. Members of our ADF are naturally targets of foreign intelligence services. ASIO Director-General Mike Burgess said in his February 2023 threat assessment:

Third party companies have offered Australians hundreds of thousands of dollars and other significant perks to help authoritarian regimes improve their combat skills.

In some cases, we and our partners have been able to stop the former insiders travelling overseas to provide the training, but in others, legal ambiguities have impeded law enforcement's ability to intervene.

However the individuals rationalise their decisions, the bottom line is they are transferring highly sensitive, privileged and classified know-how to foreign governments that do not share our values or respect the rule of law.

Our military secrets are not for sale. That's why former defence staff and ADF members must be prevented from working for and transferring sensitive information to foreign militaries, governments or government entities without authorisation from the Minister for Defence. It's why this must also extend to the Australian citizen and permanent residents. There must be a strong deterrent, and, where a person undertakes these activities without authorisation, the maximum penalty is 20 years in prison. We must support the intentions of this legislation to safeguard our national and military secrets, and the coalition will work on a bipartisan basis with the government in the best interests of Australia's national security.

Of course, we need to have some exemptions, and it's important that the minister have the power to make those exemptions to enable cooperation with our security partners. Under this legislation, the minister may grant a foreign work authorisation, cancel an authorisation, suspend an authorisation or vary an authorisation. The minister can also determine a foreign country is not a relevant foreign country, meaning it is not necessary to obtain a foreign work authorisation to work or train there. This means that former members, now veterans, who have critical skills, knowledge and abilities that may be used in a low-risk setting or one of our partners can still work overseas.

What the minister must ensure is that there aren't significant delays in processing requests for foreign work authorisations in those relevant foreign countries. We know how difficult it is already for veterans who leave to figure out where they want to take their lives after service. Sometimes, that means a job overseas in a position that matches some or all of their skills and abilities. I and the member for Solomon both worked overseas post our defence careers. I think we both worked in the Middle East for different organisations. We want to be able to ensure that streamlining of any authorisations is quick, because contracts come up quickly, and we don't want people to be worse off because of any red tape.

There must be absolutely enough time given to examine each case properly and in detail; that must be a priority. The minister must ensure the department has the resources to conduct those processes without us seeing large backlogs or any wait times. We also need to ensure our people—our ADF members and APS employees—are well aware of their obligations under this legislation when they leave their employment. Twenty years is an extremely significant penalty, and it needs to be. But those who could potentially face it must be educated and warned about it so that there is no ambiguity. No-one should be able to say that they didn't know.

Finally, on this bill, it is reassuring that the definition of 'defence staff' does not include Defence's external workforce, consultant contractors and outsourced service providers, as we know contractors are equal to nearly 50 per cent of Defence's APS workforce. The caveat is that they will still, of course, fall under the 'Australian citizens and permanent residents' definition. The coalition will support the Safeguarding Australia's Military Secrets Bill in demonstration of our commitment on this side of the House to the safety and security of our nation.

The Defence Trade Controls Amendment Bill 2023 is critical to strengthening Australia's defence exports framework and facilitates the seamless transfer of technology contemplated by the AUKUS agreement. To do this, we need to have a robust control regime and a streamlined flow of defence trade and technology collaboration with the UK and US. This will include the establishment of an export license treaty environment, which will support industry, education and research sectors in all three nations.

This bill will regulate the supply of certain items on the Defence and Strategic Goods List, or DSGL, and military or dual-use technology to foreign persons within Australia. It will regulate the supply of certain DSGL military or dual-use goods and technology from a place outside of Australia to another place outside of Australia or to a foreign person. It will regulate the provision of services in relation to DSGL part 1 military goods or technology to foreign persons or entities. And it will remove the requirements to obtain a permit for suppliers of certain DSGL goods and technology and the provision of certain DSGL services to the United Kingdom or the United States.

These are positive steps as we move forward with AUKUS and they are steps that will open up further opportunities for small and medium enterprises in Australia. We do want to see the defence minister's words—that Australia will achieve a 'seamless defence industrial base' between Australia and the US—come to fruition. But, at the same time, we need to ensure that industry isn't burdened with extra red tape and costs. I think it's important to note the submission of Ai Group to the exposure draft. They welcome the intent of these amendments and are excited about the licence-free environment with our AUKUS partners, but they are concerned about the impact of additional compliance costs and legal risks to their members and have asked for clear guidelines on the new measures as well as training programs to educate members about the new regulatory regime. We understand the government will propose a range of amendments to the DTCA Bill to address these concerns, and we welcome that.

It's true that there has been a fairly condensed amount of time provided for the consideration of these bills. We understand the time constraints in both the UK and the US that have required us to be dealing with these matters this sitting fortnight, and so, as I've said, we will be supporting passage of this legislation through the House. But, as a result, it is important that we have safeguards and points of review to ensure this legislation is operating as it should. That's why the coalition's support has been provided on the basis of enhancing the co-design of regulations for the defence export framework, with recommended industry working groups participants representing Australian sovereign SMEs and a statutory review time frame of three years from commencement to evaluate the functioning of the updated defence export legislation and framework.

In addition, and probably most importantly, we have a commitment from the Deputy Prime Minister to establish a new statutory parliamentary joint committee on defence as soon as possible. This will be a committee that can have proper oversight of defence matters, including the ADF and the Department of Defence, with access to classified information. Without it, parliament can't exercise proper civilian oversight of our military and defence public servants. It has been a long process to get to this point, but it is good that we have secured a commitment that draft legislation to enable it will be available within weeks, not months. With those assurances in mind, I commend these bills to the House.

See this speech in context