George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Hansard source

The criticism that appears to come from Senator Ludlam is that this bill has not had sufficient scrutiny. That criticism could not be more misconceived. The bill was first introduced by me on 16 July. It has been in the public domain and the subject of much public discussion since that time. It has been back to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security since then which has reviewed it and, as I said in my second closing speech, it has been the subject of 17 recommendations by that committee, all of which have been accepted by the government.

The process and genesis of this bill, as I explained in my second reading speech, is a process that has been in train for more than two years. These recommendations, along with many others which will be the subject of other legislation brought forward by the government, were the subject of the most exhaustive review by the PJCIS during the life of the 43rd Parliament. So it could not be possibly maintained that these provisions, the provisions that command the support of the entirety of the political mainstream in this country, have not had exhaustive deliberation and extensive opportunities for public scrutiny. Indeed, the report of the inquiry on the basis of which these bills have been drafted was tabled by Mr Byrne as long ago as June 2013, so the recommendations have been in the public domain for much longer than a year. So the suggestion that these proposals have not had the benefit of exhaustive public discussion is a piece of arrant nonsense.

Senator Ludlam asked about the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor. Might I inform the senator, because he seems to be unaware of the fact, that the proposal for an Independent National Security Legislation Monitor came from the Liberal Party. Specifically, it came from the former member for Kooyong, Mr Petro Georgiou, during the life of the 42nd Parliament. It was proposed in this place by my friend and former colleague Senator Judith Troeth, and was seconded by me. So I do not need to be informed by you, Senator Ludlam, about the wisdom of having an Independent National Security Legislation Monitor.

That was opposed by the Labor government at the time, the first Rudd government. However, with the passage of time, that unhappy government saw the wisdom of what Mr Georgiou and former Senator Troeth and I were proposing. They changed their position from one of opposition to one of support and the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor was created with the Liberal Party and the National Party's support.

Earlier this year, the government considered whether an efficiency could be made by abolishing that office. But, in view of the fact that we knew that extensive new legislation governing national security was going to be introduced during the course of 2014, we decided not to proceed with that idea. So the office was retained. Senator Ludlam asked when the office will be reinstated. The office exists. Mr Walker, who had been appointed by the previous government to occupy that office, served his term. His term expired and the government is currently considering the replacement of Mr Walker as the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor.

Lastly, might I point out to you, Senator Ludlam, that the role of the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor is to oversee the operation of legislation and to advise government on the suitability of that legislation in the light of the manner in which it operates. This legislation, obviously, is legislation yet to be enacted; therefore, the need for the particular contribution of the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor has not arisen. But I can assure Senator Ludlam that when Mr Walker's replacement is named, that man or woman will be a person who will be in a good position to advise future governments on the efficacy of this legislation.