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

I regret to inform you, Senator, that the government does not support this amendment. Defence is conscious of the fact that exporters require quick, clear decisions to be competitive. For routine applications, the assessment time is up to 15 working days, commencing from the date a complete application with all the supporting documentation is received. For sensitive applications requiring referral to members of the Standing Interdepartmental Committee on Defence Exports, the assessment time is up to 35 working days. DECO will inform applicants of this referral.

There can be exceptional circumstances where an assessment may go beyond 35 days. These are cases usually raising very complex and sensitive matters of foreign policy and national security. It is not always possible to resolve such matters in the additional 20 working days, especially where competing interests need to be considered by multiple departments and ministers. While such cases are relatively rare, Defence obviously works to resolve them as quickly as possible.

DECO processes approximately 2,500 applications each year relating to goods controlled on the Defence Strategic Goods List under regulation 13E of the Customs Act. These applications are assessed within the government's time frame of 15 working days for routine applications and 35 days for sensitive applications, except for a very small number of very sensitive applications which do take longer—and of course they take longer because of their very sensitivity. DECO also processes approximately 300 cases each year under the Weapons of Mass Destruction Act catch-all legislation. Noting that approximately 2,500 cases are processed each year, current statistics indicate DECO has fewer than 30 cases that have exceeded the normal time frame.

Let us be clear: what we are talking about here is a very small number of cases. These cases raise the most sensitive of foreign policy and national policy issues. They are difficult to resolve. Many people and agencies are involved, and this does take time.

The government says it is not in Australia's interests to have legislation that automatically allows the most sensitive and difficult cases to proceed without there being adequate assessment—a sentiment with which I am sure you would agree. This would have a very serious consequence if potentially dangerous technology was put in the wrong hands, and the kind of technology that could be involved might then go on to commit human rights abuses, develop chemical, biological and other weapons and, of course, equip foreign military forces—with implications for global security and stability. In these cases it would be very easy to say no due to the potential risks involved. However, where these risks can be properly assessed and where that assessment indicates that an export will not contravene our policy criteria, it is obviously in Australia's interests to allow that trade or collaboration to proceed. So I guess our final pitch to you on this one, Senator, is: is it better to say no quickly or sometimes in those rare number of cases to take a little longer but be able to say yes with a sense of confidence and assuredness?