Senate debates

Tuesday, 25 November 2014

Bills

Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2014; In Committee

6:12 pm

Photo of Penny WrightPenny Wright (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

Yes. I am going to ask a further question. With respect, I think this is an outrageous abuse of process. Some of my questions later will go to the fact that we have a Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights, established in this parliament, which has sought clarification on some of the same questions that I am asking. Some of that information that was sought was in relation to the previous national security law, which has now passed—the foreign fighters bill—and that committee is still waiting for clarification and answers, for justification on the basis of necessity, reasonableness and proportionality, which are an acknowledged human rights frame of reference in matters such as this. The committee is still waiting for responses from the Attorney-General in relation to that significant law affecting the rights of people living in Australia in 2014.

This is, in my understanding, an opportunity to clarify the way this legislation will play out if it is passed. I am not abusing the process. I am asking reasonable questions, many of which have been asked by other organisations, and I can only assume that the Attorney-General does not have answers for these questions, or presumably he would be putting those answers on the record. So I am going to go now to Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security recommendation No. 7, another of the recommendations which—although I understand the government has accepted them—have not been put into the form of an amendment to this bill. This concerns schedule 2 of the bill. This is from the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security. This is the coalition and Labor committee. The recommendation relates to the need for clarity around what constitutes a class of Australian persons for the purposes of the expanded powers given to ASIS to conduct activities in respect of Australians overseas. My question is: given that this recommendation is accepted, how is 'class of persons' defined in the redrafted explanatory memorandum?

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: Before I put the question—

I have some questions to ask. I will ask them. They will remain on the record. The Attorney-General's silence will speak for itself. I know there are many people in Australia who will be watching this with great interest. So my next question is: Attorney-General, can you give us an example of what the phrase 'class of persons' for the purposes of expanded powers given to ASIS to conduct activities in respect of Australians overseas means in context?

Comments

No comments