David Feeney (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Defence) Share this | Hansard source

Before we go to that point, it is probably appropriate for me to put some other comments on the record in relation to Senator Ludlam’s amendments (18) and (19). I apologise for not having raised these at an earlier juncture.

With respect to Greens amendment (18), it is the government’s position that that amendment would remove the element to do with an organisation that ‘directly praises the doing of a terrorist act’ from the definition of ‘advocates’ and, further, that the amendment to this provision in the bill, which will provide that such praise will only constitute advocacy if there is a substantial risk that it will lead a person to engage in a terrorist act, responds to concerns raised about this provision and ensures that it does not have an unintentionally broad effect.

With respect to Australian Greens amendment (19), it is the government’s position that that amendment is not necessary. The question of whether an organisation advocates the doing of a terrorist act is a question of fact to be determined in the light of the relevant circumstances of each case. Where one or more individuals who are members of the organisation advocate the doing of a terrorist act, consideration must be given to whether the actions of those individuals constitute actions that can be attributed to the organisation itself. Lastly, in determining whether an organisation advocates the doing of a terrorist act, all relevant information would be taken into account, including but not necessarily limited to the matters outlined in your amendment (19), Senator Ludlam.

Question negatived.