Matt O'Sullivan (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I seek leave to amend business of the Senate notice of motion No. 3 relating to a referral to the Finance and Public Administration References Committee.

Leave granted.

I move the motion as amended:

That the following matter be referred to the Finance and Public Administration References Committee for inquiry and report by 9 June 2023:

The administration of the referendum to recognise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in the Constitution through an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, with particular reference to:

(a) protections against the potential for foreign actors to seek to influence the outcome or public debate on the referendum question;

(b) the detection, mitigation, and obstruction of potential dissemination of misinformation and disinformation, including via social media or technology platforms;

(c) the potential application of the Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme to the referendum and its participants;

(d) the potential application and administration of foreign donation laws to the referendum and its participants;

(e) the application of authorisation requirements to the referendum and its participants;

(f) the ongoing integrity and assurance processes of the Australian Electoral Commission; and

(g) any other related matters.

The origin of this reference came up during the debate we were having on the Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Amendment Bill 2022 last week. In the committee stage of that debate we were going backwards and forwards with Minister Farrell in relation to many questions about how this upcoming referendum will be conducted and the role of the AEC in that. The minister was answering questions, but there were a lot of questions that he was not able to sufficiently answer. That was surprising because he is not just a minister representing someone from the other place; he is the Special Minister of State. Often, it's understandable for a minister to get advice from someone sitting in the adviser's box, but we saw it a lot last week. I don't want to reflect on Minister Farrell, but it was difficult to get some detailed answers on the conduct of the upcoming referendum. So I asked Minister Farrell to put in motion a mechanism to be able to make the Electoral Commissioner of the Australian Electoral Commission available to take some very detailed questions about the upcoming referendum. He agreed in the chamber that he would do that. I very much appreciated him agreeing to do that. I then put together the terms of reference that we have in front of us today. I understand the Labor Party will be supporting this reference, and I thank them very much for that.

There are some serious questions that need to be asked. I appreciate that there will be a further inquiry into the substantive legislation on the actual question, but this reference goes to the mechanism and, in particular, the role that foreign interference could potentially play in the outcome of the referendum. Senator Paterson was asking some very pertinent questions about the role the AEC will be able to play in the absence of a 'yes' and 'no' campaign. There's no font of wisdom, if you like, to reference on either the 'yes' or 'no' points. Social media platforms won't have those reference points, so it's going to be difficult for them to be able to make a call on whether a position being put out on social media is truth, or untruth, on either the 'yes' or 'no' points. These are very serious points. Senator Farrell said with confidence that the AEC will be able to do that, that the AEC is in a position to be able to make those calls and can be relied on, and that the social media platforms are able to rely on them to be able to make an adjudicated call on what's in or out in this debate. We want to test that. We want to test, with the commissioner, their capacity to be able to do that.

It's very important that we get this right. It's very important that this is right, because the government's decision to push ahead on this referendum is—obviously the substantive question is very, very important, but we've got to make sure that the referendum is conducted in a way that is transparent and fair. It's absolutely critical that the processes that we have surrounding this upcoming referendum are very sound indeed. I thank the government for agreeing to—well, we'll see. I'm sure they're going to follow through on the negotiations we've had and that they'll support this reference. A short, sharp and quick inquiry into this point is all that's really required. We very much appreciate that.

The risks associated with poorly regulating donation disclosures, in particular, with foreign interference, were the key reasons that the coalition had strongly advocated for the designation of the official 'yes/no' campaign. Having an official 'yes/no' campaign will make things simpler for the regulatory environment and for the proper conduct of a referendum. There's no special law relating to foreign donations. The AEC's given evidence to parliamentary committees that the donation and disclosure regime remains the most complex part of the Electoral Act. Again, without that official 'yes/no' campaign organisation, there are some very serious and detailed questions that we want to put to the commission as to how they will go about ensuring the integrity of this referendum, particularly in relation to donations and expenditure, so that we can be absolutely confident as a nation that there isn't any foreign interference in Australia's decision.

This is Australia's document—the Constitution—and Australians should be the only ones that are influencing the debate in this country on this referendum. It's absolutely critical that we get it right. We want to see the regime in this referendum. For participants who are not regularly involved in elections, we want to ensure that there is a proper regime put in place. An official campaign structure is going to be the best way for regulators to ensure appropriate education and enforcement of the electoral laws for the referendum. Having a single point of coordination to provide education and to commence any audit process for donations or foreign interference is the best way to ensure the integrity of the referendum. This inquiry will go to that. It will look at the detail as to how that could be assured. It's very, very important.

The risk of foreign interference is not just something that's thought up in a flurry in the course of a debate on legislation. The Director-General of ASIO, only three weeks ago, told Australians that we're seeing the greatest level of foreign interference in Australia's history right now. This is happening in our country right now. So surely we should look at simple, practical measures that put structure around this process and that help our regulators and agencies manage this referendum. We know that there's been foreign interference in other countries around the world in their elections, in different forums. In Canada, their intelligence agencies have uncovered plots to interfere in their 2021 election in order to create a minority government.

Foreign actors may not particularly care about the outcome of the referendum, in terms of whether Australians vote yes or no, but they might be quite interested in sowing discord within the debate to create a little bit of mayhem. That in itself is enough for us to be concerned. There are some serious issues that other colleagues will go into as well, but dealing with this is absolutely critical.

A good friend of mine, who happened to be following the debate last week and heard Senator Farrell make the commitment that they would allow this inquiry, contacted me. Jacqueline Martin, I have come to trust as someone to be relied upon with passing on good information. She pointed out to me that this is absolutely critical.

I urge the Senate to unanimously get behind this inquiry. Let's get it done in a civil way, as we do in these sorts of inquiries, and let's work it through and get it through as quickly as we can.