Andrew Bartlett (Queensland, Australian Democrats) Share this | Hansard source

Yes, we can read the reports. They are usually quite well-argued reports, I might say. In fact, every one I have read has been fairly well argued, even when I have disagreed with it. Nonetheless, that does not substitute for being on the committee itself. I simply wanted to emphasise that point. I did not want to divert to having a big whinge about it but I wanted to indicate that the mechanisms for scrutiny of ASIO that are there do have significant limitations. Again, as all senators would know from any committee they have been on, when you take evidence in camera, that in itself immediately puts a very problematic limitation on what you can do with that evidence.

This parliament has basically given ASIO that privileged position for many years. I am not suggesting that should be changed, but it is an extra reason why giving them carte blanche for a decade in relation to powers which are very extreme and without review is simply extraordinary. In my view, it is unjustified but, obviously, it is justified in the view of the majority of this place. Again, I ask government senators to recognise that even their own members on that committee recognised that and put forward a very moderate—and I think too moderate—recommendation for a shortened sunset clause of 5½ years. To reject even that shows that, once again, this government has no commitment to accountability, no commitment to transparency and no commitment to some of those fundamental building blocks of what used to be called liberalism. It is still called liberalism except in Australia, where you cannot use the word because people think you support legislation like this if you call yourself a liberal. I read from time to time that there are meant to be one or two liberals still left in the Liberal Party. This is an opportunity for them to demonstrate that.