Rex Patrick (SA, Nick Xenophon Team) Share this | Hansard source

I move the motion as amended:

That—

  (1) The Senate notes that:

  (a) on 12 February 2018, the Senate agreed to an order for the production of documents directed at the Minister representing the Minister for Defence Industry, for the Australian Industry Capability Plan submitted by DCNS (now Naval Group) to the Department of Defence in its response to the Future Submarine Competitive Evaluation Process (CEP);

  (b) the order followed a lack of clarity as to the minimum level of Australian industry involvement expectations of Government for the Future Submarine Project;

  (c) on 15 February 2018, the duty minister tabled a letter in response to both orders for production claiming public interest immunity and stated that release of the document would:

     (i) affect the commercial interests of Naval Group, and

     (ii) adversely affect Australia's international relations, and advised the Senate that the Government was awaiting the outcome of an Information Commissioner Review into freedom of information (FOI) exemptions claimed over the same document;

  (d) it was conceded by government in 1992, that the fact that a freedom of information request for information has been or could be refused under the FOI Act is not a legitimate basis for a claim of public interest immunity in a parliamentary forum;

  (e) on 25 June 2014, the Senate passed a resolution declaring that declining to provide documents or answer questions on the basis that an FOI request has been made for the same information is an unacceptable response, is not supported by the FOI Act and shows a profound lack of respect for the Senate and its committees;

  (f) a Senate claim of commercial confidentiality must be carefully advanced and claimed narrowly so as to recognise the public interest that lies in openness and transparency on this very important project;

  (g) the claim that the release of the documents will affect international relations is not properly made out and is flawed (and has not even been advanced by the Department of Defence as a concern in the Information Commissioner Review) because the document which is the subject of the order is a document of a French-law Public Limited Company, not a document of the French State; and

  (h) orders for the production of documents are a key Senate tool used to ensure effective oversight of Government, and must be responded to by Ministers with utmost consideration, care and accuracy.

  (2) The Minister for Defence be required to attend the Senate at the conclusion of question time on 10 May 2018 to make a statement, of not more than 20 minutes, addressing why the Minister:

  (a) has advanced a claim showing a profound lack of respect for the Senate;

  (b) offered a broad confidentiality claim that does not correctly balance the public interest in knowing what DCNS promised, in respect of Australian industry involvement in our largest ever Defence project; and

  (c) has advanced a claim that releasing the document to the Senate would affect Australia's international relations knowing that this claim is inconsistent with the position of her own Department.

  (3) Any senator may move a motion to take note of the Minister's statement, and any such motion may be debated for no longer than 1 hour, and have precedence over all other government business until determined.