Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Mr Chairman, on the point of order: if Senator Leyonhjelm is that concerned, perhaps he should have taken the same point of order on Senator Wright when she was giving what was clearly a second reading debate speech.

The CHAIRMAN: Senator Leyonhjelm, I understand the point you are making, but it is not a point of order that I can rule on. I think the debate is still within the realms of the question before the Chair.

I will be brief. I am conscious of the need to deal with a lot of amendments from all sides and I do want the minister to explain to me how the term 'reckless' is defined and how it operates in this context. Senator Leyonhjelm is quite right: I did not take part in the second reading debate because I did not want to take 20 minutes as most contributing speakers did, therefore restricting others from the debate. I think it is appropriate in dealing with Senator Wright's amendment to indicate my view generally on her amendment, on the amendments being proposed by the government and, indeed, the whole bill, which I hope will be passed as amended. I repeat that most Australians are prepared to forgo some of the rights we have had throughout our existence if it means that people who might otherwise be harmed or killed are protected in this country.

Over the years I have had bits to do with ASIO, the Crimes Commission and the Australian Federal Police through the different committees I have been involved in. They do a magnificent job but they always abide by the rules—the rules that are passed by parliament. The people whom they are competing against—the organised crime, the terrorist cells, those who would harm Australians—never follow one rule. They do not worry about human rights or getting warrants or unlawful killings—all that just happens as a matter of course. We have to give our agencies the maximum powers that a democracy can possibly give them to enable them to fight—not for anything they might get out of it—to protect me, my family and all other Australians. I think it is essential that, within the constrained limits that the Attorney-General has spoken about and that do understand the way Australian democracy and freedoms work, we do have to give them maximum amount of powers. If that means giving up a little of what we always thought we had in the way of freedoms, then most Australians—I think I can speak for them—are prepared to forgo them in return for keeping themselves, their families and their loved ones safe.

Minister, in answering Senator Wright's question, I wonder if you could address the issue of how 'reckless' is interpreted.

The CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Senator Macdonald. Senator Brandis? Senator Collins.