Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

Labor will not be supporting this bill. This is the same position that Labor has held since a version of this bill was first moved in the parliament in 1985. In the nearly 30 years since the first bill requiring parliamentary approval for military deployment was moved, Labor's concerns have still not been addressed.

I will briefly provide some information on the context in which this bill is being moved. Right now, there are thousands of ADF personnel posted around the world—many to places which the people listening might not be aware of. We have got 25 people in Egypt, 19 in South Sudan, 12 in Israel and Lebanon, 250 on the HMAS Toowoomba in the Middle East, 550 at Al Minhad Air Base in the UAE, 400 in Afghanistan and many others throughout the region and the world. ADF personnel are capable of being deployed in a range of roles, including humanitarian and disaster relief, antipiracy, peacekeeping, mentoring, monitoring, training, anti-insurgency and traditional military operations.

Before I outline Labor's concerns with the bill, let me reassert the position that I put earlier in the week. Labor firmly believes that it is the role of parliament to debate and discuss military deployments before, during and after Australian troops are sent into harm's way. This is the most serious decision that any government should face and it should never be taken lightly. We are all sent to the parliament to represent the views of our constituents, and that most certainly includes any decision to send troops to war.

I note the update that the Prime Minister provided to the parliament earlier in the week and the debate and discussion which followed here and in the other place. That update continues a long tradition in this place and one which was supported wholeheartedly when Labor was in government. Labor believes that it is important for the parliament and the Australian people to be fully informed of the progress of our overseas deployments.

I note the commitment of the Prime Minister and the Minister for Defence to continue to keep the parliament updated. This will ensure that there are frequent opportunities for debate and discussion about the merits or otherwise of the government's decision to deploy troops overseas. I have been heartened that all of our debates in the parliament and the community, in recent years, have been focused on government policy. I know that the hardworking men and women of the ADF enjoy the full support of all parliamentarians and the Australian community, and I am confident that will continue to be the case.

On that note, I would like to take a moment to express my support for the ADF personnel currently serving overseas. Right now, we have service men and women who are undertaking humanitarian operations in Iraq. They are doing great work to help prevent genocide and to support the Kurdish fighters who are on the front line of the battle against IS. As always, ADF personnel are acting with the professionalism and skill which has earned them the admiration of our friends and allies around the world. I had the privilege of meeting a number of the air men and women from RAAF's No 37 Squadron on a recent visit to RAAF Base Richmond. They are incredibly skilful and hardworking men and women, and I was impressed by how proud they were of the work they do. The 37 Squadron are currently delivering humanitarian supplies to besieged communities in the north of Iraq. Given the expert work that we have seen, I think everyone here would agree that their pride is not misplaced and their professionalism is beyond question. The danger of the work that they are currently doing cannot be understated. I know that we will be watching closely and wishing the men and women of 37 Squadron and all other ADF personnel a safe return.

Turning to the substance of the bill, Labor have a number of concerns. The role of the parliament in approving military action is fraught with danger. The bill before the House is virtually identical to a bill moved back in 2008. That bill was referred to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Committee. The committee's report is a serious and detailed evaluation of the proposition put by the Greens. The committee found in 2010 that the 2008 bill 'leaves too many critical questions unanswered' and 'may have unforseen and unfortunate consequences'.

I would like to quickly go through what those concerns were, as they are just as relevant today. The first is the issue of access to classified information. The government of the day has access to classified information which the parliament does not. It is simply not safe, appropriate or practical to provide classified, national security information to a wider audience. Australia's defence and national security agencies provide information and advice to the government which must remain secret for a whole range of reasons, including—and especially—the safety and security of our ADF personnel. It is impossible for the parliament to make informed decisions to deploy ADF personnel without access to this information and it should not be asked to do so. As I have said, Labor fully supports the role of the parliament as a place of debate, but that should not be confused with requiring parliamentary approval for the deployment of ADF personnel.

The second issue is the flexibility that the government must retain in order to respond to threats quickly and effectively. Requiring a statement from the government prior to deploying ADF personnel and assets could unnecessarily increase the risk of our deployments. The government, on occasions, may be required to quickly pre-deploy combat or humanitarian forces to assist our friends in a time of crisis or to pave the way for a larger deployment. The government may also need to predeploy combat forces in a quiet manner to facilitate the success of an imminent mission. To require a debate and approval in parliament prior to this action would unreasonably increase the risk to these operations and the personnel involved in them.

A third concern is the potential for unintended consequences flowing from the way the bill is structured. The procedures for the deployment of ADF personnel in emergency situations set out in this bill require the parliament to sit within 7 days. According to the explanatory memorandum, this is in order to 'seek parliamentary approval for the deployment.' This could see ADF personnel deployed into a war zone only to have their legal authority revoked a week later. This obviously creates a completely untenable situation. It would place ADF personnel, not to mention any coalition partners who may be relying upon ADF personnel, in a compromised position. It could lead to ADF personnel being deployed to a warlike environment without legal authority or legal protection. This is simply unacceptable. I am sure that no-one in Australia would want to see our ADF personnel placed in such a position. The bill, as currently drafted, creates a situation where this cannot be ruled out.

The last issue of concern that I will focus on today is the interaction of the bill with Australia's Constitution. I will not reinvent the wheel here, as Senator Faulkner addressed this issue when an identical bill was moved in 2008. I would recommend his speech to anyone who is interested in this issue, as Senator Faulkner does a fine job outlining Labor's concerns. In arguing against the 2008 bill, Senator Faulkner said:

While it is true that the forms of parliamentary approval or parliamentary consultation are required in some other systems of government, it is very important to realise that such comparisons or analogies are, if not invalidated, then certainly complicated by the major differences in the constitutional frameworks of these countries.

There are many problems with this bill and I have highlighted a few of them here today. Labor has a long-held position that the executive government is the most appropriate body to exercise civilian control of the ADF.

Australia is one of the greatest democracies in the world. Every three years we vote to choose who represents us in the national parliament. The government elected may not be of everyone's choosing, but they carry with them responsibilities for the entire country. One of those responsibilities, perhaps its most important responsibility, is deciding if and when to send Australian forces into harm's way. It is right that this responsibility stays with the executive government, not the parliament. The bill presented today will not be supported by Labor.