Anne Urquhart (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I present the 6th report of 2023 of the Selection of Bills Committee and I seek leave to have the report incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The report read as follows—

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

REPORT NO. 6 OF 2023

15 June 2023

MEMBERS OF THE COMMI TTEE

Senator Anne Urquhart (Government Whip, Chair)

Senator Wendy Askew (Opposition Whip)

Senator Ross Cadell (The Nationals Whip)

Senator Pauline Hanson (Pauline Hanson's One Nation Whip)

Senator Nick McKim (Australian Greens Whip)

Senator Ralph Babet

Senator the Hon. Anthony Chisholm

Senator the Hon. Katy Gallagher

Senator Matt O'Sullivan

Senator David Pocock

Senator Paul Scarr

Senator Lidia Thorpe

Senator Tammy Tyrrell

A/g Secretary: Ivan Powell

02 6277 3020

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

REPORT NO. 6 OF 2023

1. The committee met in private session on Wednesday, 14 June 2023 at 7.12 pm.

2. The committee recommends that—

(a) the Australian Organ and Tissue Donation and Transplantation Authority Amendment (Disclosure of Information) Bill 2023 be referred immediately to the Community Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 26 July 2023 (see appendix 1 for a statement of reasons for referral); and

(b) the Health Insurance Amendment (Professional Services Review Scheme) Bill 2023 be referred immediately to the Community Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 23 August 2023 (see appendix 1 for a statement of reasons for referral).

3. The committee recommends that the following bills not be referred to committees:

Creative Australia (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2023

Student Loans (Overseas Debtors Repayment Levy) Amendment Bill 2023

4. The committee deferred consideration of the following bills to its next meeting:

5. The committee considered the following bill but was unable to reach agreement:

(Anne Urquhart)

Chair

15 June 2023

Appendix 1

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bi ll to a committee

Name of bill:

Australian Organ and Tissue Donation and Transplantation Authority Amendment (Disclosure of Information) Bill 2023

Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:

Complicated issue

Possible submissions or evidence from:

Sector, Groups Individuals that are affected.

Committee to which bill is to be referred.

Community Affairs Legislation Committee

Possible hearing date(s): Up to Committee

Possible reporting date:

26 July 2023

(signed)

Wendy Askew

Appendix 2

SELECTION OF BILLS COMMITTEE

Proposal to refer a bill to a committee

Name of bill:

Health Insurance Amendment (Professional Services Review Scheme) Bill 2023

Reasons for referral/principal issues for consideration:

Complicated issue

Possible sub missions or evidence from:

Sector, Groups Individuals that are affected.

Committee to which bill is to be referred.

Community Affairs Legislation Committee

Possible hearing date(s):

June -August

Possible reporting date:

23 August 2023

(signed)

Wendy Askew

I move:

That the report be adopted.

Anthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move the following amendment:

At the end of the motion, add "and the following bills not be referred to committees:

(a) Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (Prohibited Hate Symbols and Other Measures) Bill 2023; and

(b) Migration Amendment (Giving Documents and Other Measures) Bill 2023".

Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I wish to amend the amendment proposed by Senator Chisholm. I move:

At the end of the motion, add:

"and, in respect of the Migration Amendment (Giving Documents and Other Measures) Bill 2023, the bill be referred immediately to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 31 July 2023".

Ramming complex and highly technical legislation through the Senate without proper scrutiny is becoming all too much of a hallmark of this government. We were promised a new way of doing business. The Prime Minister said he would change the way that politics operates in this country, but we're not seeing that in reality. The giving documents and other measures bill introduces new and highly ambiguous concepts like 'substantial compliance' and 'substantial prejudice' into the Migration Act. The interpretation of these terms will ultimately be subjective and legally complex, and there are no review rights for decisions made by the department under these new provisions.

This legislation has the power to significantly impact on things like families being able to stay together or be torn apart and has the capacity to impact meaningfully on a range of elements in the lives of significant numbers of people. It really should be referred to an inquiry so that we can hear expert submissions and so that the Senate can come to grips with the complexity of this legislation.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the amendment as moved by Senator McKim to the opposition's amendment to the Selection of Bills Committee report be agreed to.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question now is that the amendment as moved by Senator Chisholm to the Selection of Bills Committee Report be agreed to. Senator Shoebridge.

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Greens oppose this amendment for reasons that have been articulated by my colleague Senator McKim. This is the amendment to not refer the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (Prohibited Hate Symbols and Other Measures) Bill 2023 to an inquiry. As we understand it, the rationale for not referring it is that the PJCIS—the secret spooks and harm committee, the organised spooks and injury committee of this parliament, that only the coalition and Labor get to sit on—is going to have a nice, secret inquiry amongst the club. The club are going to go and hear from the national security apparatus. They are going to say why they desperately need yet more coercive powers to monster people in the country. It'll be secret. It'll be in the usual club. There'll be the cigars and the heavy carpet in the smoke-filled room.

Out of that secret inquiry, which you can only go to if you have membership of the Labor Party or the coalition, despite the law saying that's not how the committee should operate, will come a recommendation that this set of most recent antiterrorism laws are absolutely necessary for the protection of the country. We could write the report now, because the club always writes the same report. Because those guys like extra secret powers, they are giving more and more ways of spooking on Australian citizens. They like all of that stuff. And if anyone comes into that committee and they have a little bit of gold braid on their shoulders or a little bit of gold piping on their sleeves, they all just bow down. They lie down and say: 'Please, sir. Please, madam. How can we give you more power? How can we give you more money? We promise not to check how you use it? You can flush the money down the toilet. You can abuse the powers. We promise not to ask any hard questions, because we love you.' That's what they say—'Come here with braids and we'll lie down and you can have whatever you like, however much public money you like, whatever new powers you like, because that's what the club does.'

It may surprise them that as a party on the crossbench and the third-biggest party in this place we think that's cooked. It may also surprise them to know, if they ever lifted their noses away from the sort of gold-braided, smoke-filled rooms that they love making these decisions in, the rest of Australia thinks it's cooked too. They don't trust them making these kinds of decisions in smoke-filled rooms where no-one gets to see what's happening. They see what happens when they do it. They've seen how they have these little secret meetings. They hear from the military brass and then we wake up one morning and they have committed $368 billion to a bunch of nuclear submarines that are likely to never turn up. We have seen that. We all went to bed one night thinking we had a $200 billion problem with nuclear submarines and we woke up and found out that those guys, in secret, had cooked up a $368 billion problem with nuclear submarines.

We have all seen how they have mismanaged public funds on the Hunter frigate disaster. They started by saying they wanted a $30 billion program, and then they let the same Defence officials pull the wool over their eyes, not even doing a costed tender, and we woke up with a $45 billion problem and we still don't even have a boat in the water. That's what happens when they do it in secret. That's what happens when Labor and the coalition just give Defence and the security apparatus whatever they like without asking any tough questions.

What is there to be scared of in having a public inquiry into this? I will tell you what they are worried about. They are worried that business as usual is going to get some scrutiny. They are worried that the obvious, apparent failings of the club are going to be exposed. We believe that, if there's merit in this legislation, we should take it to a proper inquiry and test it in the public light, and then we will see about passing it.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before I put the question on this amendment, I remind senators that calling out is disorderly, and even more so when most of the senators who were calling out are not even in their correct seats. The question is that the amendment as moved by Senator Chisholm to the Selection of Bills Committee Report be agreed to.