Jess Walsh (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

This really is quite a simple matter that the chamber is dealing with today. It's a matter that has arisen as part of the Senate economics references committee, of which I am deputy chair, inquiry into ASIC investigation and enforcement.

The Senate approved this inquiry last year, and the committee have started working their way through the evidence that we've been presented. The inquiry covers a number of matters. Some of the key terms of reference are:

… whether ASIC is meeting the expectations of government, business and the community with respect to regulatory action and enforcement;

… the range and use of various regulatory tools and their effectiveness …

  … … …

… the resourcing allocated to ensure investigations and enforcement action progresses in a timely manner …

The committee has held one public hearing with ASIC, on Friday 23 June 2023, as part of this inquiry, and more public hearings with submitters and other interested parties are scheduled for later this year. In the public hearing the commission's chair, Mr Longo, deputy chair, Ms Court, and officials from ASIC answered a number of questions on their submission to the inquiry, which is available on the references committee website.

In his opening remarks to that particular hearing, Mr Longo recognised that this inquiry is an important part of ASIC's oversight. And in his public evidence, ASIC's General Counsel, Mr Savundra, outlined that ASIC's practice in parliamentary inquiries has been to provide public submissions as well as private briefings and in camera hearings. Mr Savundra stated that ASIC was 'happy to meet or discuss with the committee about the claims we're making'.

Subsequent to this hearing, as has been canvassed today, Mr Longo wrote to the committee. This letter has been referenced by the committee chair and by the minister in her response today. Given that this matter is now being discussed in the chamber, it is appropriate to confirm that Mr Longo wrote to the committee reiterating ASIC's understanding of its responsibilities to the committee and to the parliament and offering to provide to the committee a private and in camera briefing to provide more details on the matters pursued by the committee as well as providing documents on a confidential basis, where appropriate.

My views on this matter reflect two values that I hold in relation to the important work that our Senate committees do. The first value is that witnesses to Senate inquiries should provide answers to the Senate. They should be transparent. And where they believe transparency will cause a harm, they should articulate that harm and allow committees and the Senate to determine whether the information requested should be provided.

The second value is that, when a witness like ASIC does offer a private briefing to provide information to a committee, it is usually good practice to take those private briefings. Private briefings can assist a committee to understand evidence, better understand what harms may result from provision of information where public interest immunity is claimed and consider whether further steps are needed to insist on information being provided. It is therefore my view that it would be appropriate for the committee to accept the offer of a private briefing from ASIC on the matters before the Senate today. Private in camera briefings to provide the opportunity for committees to gain important information on and understanding of the matters before them, and that includes whether the publication of particular information may harm the public interest.

Again, and in conclusion, it is appropriate for ASIC to be afforded the opportunity of a private briefing so that the committee has all available information to progress this important inquiry.