Katy Gallagher (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

At the end of the motion, add "and the Defence Amendment (Safeguarding Australia's Military Secrets) Bill 2023 not be referred to a committee.

I just want to explain our position on that. The government recognises the complexity of this proposed legislation and is committed to a thorough, collaborative process of genuine consultation. We want to get this right, so we welcome a close interrogation of this bill to see if sensible amendments can be made to ensure the legislation is fit for purpose. In line with the usual practice involving legislation of this sensitive nature, the government has referred the bill to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security. The PJCIS is the appropriate committee to scrutinise this bill. The nature of the committee is that it can hold classified hearings and receive classified briefings from the security agencies. This will ensure that scrutiny of the bill is informed by the full picture of the security assessments underpinning the need for the legislation.

As we would expect, the government has also asked the PJCIS to hold public hearings and invite public submissions, again to ensure that the bill is scrutinised with the appropriate rigour by the parliament. The Greens Party—and I'm pre-empting some contributions from Senator McKim—does like to make some colourful arguments about these matters, but it's the job of the government and responsible parties of government to act in the national interest and ensure that Australians are safe, and that's what we're doing here. I understand that Senator Shoebridge has a different view, including casting a negative view on some of the good people in Defence, our intelligence agencies and the PJCIS. Ultimately, despite being the Greens' defence spokesperson, he and his party don't think that these bodies should exist.

Question agreed to.