The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Stephen Parry) took the chair at 09:30, read prayers and made an acknowledgement of country.
… deceit of this kind brings suspicion on all non-government aid workers, irrespective of who they are and what they do. It runs the risk of endangering all legitimate aid workers who seek to help the disadvantaged.
Aid agencies operate in extreme and difficult conditions, often on the front line of danger and often in countries where they are constantly at risk from brutal regimes. They dare to help when no one else will. To deploy intelligence agents under the cover of aid workers is to exploit the fragile trust that aid agencies must forge with their host country. It weakens their security because it discredits their altruism.
Security services handpick recruits who are intelligent, tricky, quick-thinking and determined: the sort of people who will pull out all the stops to protect the public.
This is exactly what our spies should do. However … it is inevitable that any big bureaucracy–government departments or agencies–will at some point misuse the powers it has and the data it holds.
If we can't trust government departments, the Met or even our health service to respect our privacy and personal information, we should not trust the security services either.
The Senate divided. [10:53]
(The Acting Deputy President—Senator Back)
…which could include a change in the premises subject to a search warrant (noting that a change in premises from a person’s home to a large workplace could have broad privacy implications), the identity of a person subject to a listening device or tracking device, or the range of activities needed to be authorised to execute a warrant.
A prosecution for an offence against this section shall be instituted only by or with the consent of the Attorney-General.
The Director-General may, either generally or as otherwise provided by the instrument of delegation, by writing signed by the Director-General, delegate to an officer of the Organisation all or any of the powers of the Director-General that relate to the management of the staff of the Organisation or the financial management of the Organisation.
The committee’s consideration of the new provision—
would likely be assisted examples of the sorts of delegations that would be appropriately authorised by the proposed new power of delegation, but are not possible under the terms of the existing provision.
This provision has the effect of extending to ‘ASIO affiliates’ an exception from the prohibition on the interception of a communication passing over a telecommunications system.
ASIO affiliates may thus include a broad range of persons and it is unclear whether the exception should appropriately apply to them given their qualifications … and the nature of their ‘appointment’. The explanatory memorandum merely repeats the effect of the proposed amendment.
A key question for each of these instances is why is it appropriate to extend a range of powers, authorisations and exemptions to ASIO affiliates. This does not appear to be addressed in the explanatory memorandum other than to say it is 'consistent with operational requirements'. It seems to the committee that there is a real issue about what powers etc. might be appropriately be held by different classes of decision-makers, how appropriate qualifications will be determined and assessed and what safeguards will apply given that ASIO affiliates are not employees of the organisation.
• item 62 enlarges the category of person who may be authorised to exercise powers conferred by Part 2-2 warrants;
• item 63 extends authorisation to intercept communications on behalf of ASIO;
• item 67 allows ASIO affiliates to communicate foreign intelligence information to another person.
• item 69 extends to affiliates an exception to an offence relating to accessing stored communications;
• items 70, 71 and 72 will extend authorisation to ASIO affiliates relating to receiving, communicating, using or recording foreign intelligence; and
• items 73 and 74 will extend provisions to ASIO affiliates which permit the disclosure of information or documents to ASIO.
Proposed subsection 24(2) would enable the Director-General (or her or his delegate) to approve a class of persons as people authorised to exercise the authority conferred by relevant warrants or relevant device recovery provisions.
… the committee seeks the Attorney-General's advice as to whether consideration has been given to these matters and whether there are ways in which to address them. The committee is also interested in whether it would be appropriate to provide legislative guidance as to any parameters on the class/es of persons to whom authorisation can be granted and whether the option to authorise classes of persons could be limited to emergency situations (those involving 'very short notice').
1. Other documents may be presented pursuant to statute, by the President, or by a minister.
to the President, or, if the President is unable to act, to the Deputy President, or, if the Deputy President is unavailable, to any one of the Temporary Chairmen of Committees, a document which is to be laid before the Senate …
The committee draws Senators’ attention to the provisions, as they may be considered to trespass unduly on personal rights and liberties, in breach of … the committee’s terms of reference.
These subsections in the current ASIO Act—
make it unlawful for an ASIO officer, employee or agent to use a listening device, certain optical surveillance devices … and a tracking device, where it would otherwise have been permissible in some States and Territories.
It is possible that the—
repeal of subsections 26(1) and 26A(1) may have the result of making the use of surveillance devices by ASIO lawful in circumstances beyond those authorised by Subdivision D. The explanatory memorandum states that uses not so authorised will generally be regulated by State and Territory law.
The committee seeks advice from the Attorney-General as to whether there may be circumstances where use of surveillance devices by ASIO not authorised under Subdivision D may be lawful under State and Territory law and whether, therefore, the repeal of subsections 26(1) and 26A(1) will operate to enlarge the circumstances in which the use of surveillance devices is lawful.
Further, if that is so, the committee seeks the Attorney-General’s advice as to the rationale for not dealing comprehensively with the legality of the use of surveillance devices by ASIO in the ASIO Act.
(1) Schedule 2, item 12, page 28 (after line 17), after subsection 25(6), insert:
(6A) Subsection (5) authorises the use of a device to obtain access to data only if the total number of:
(a) devices used to obtain access to data; and
(b) devices from which data has been obtained;
(other than devices owned by the Commonwealth and brought on to premises specified in the warrant for the purpose of executing the warrant) in accordance with the warrant is no more than 20.
(2) Schedule 2, item 25, page 30 (after line 23), after subsection 25A(5), insert:
(5AA) Subsection (4) authorises the use of a device to obtain access to data only if the total number of:
(a) devices used to obtain access to data; and
(b) devices from which data has been obtained;
(other than devices owned by the Commonwealth and brought on to premises specified in the warrant for the purpose of executing the warrant) in accordance with the warrant is no more than 20.
To be able to fund the staff during the special times we need, the supplement was great. To have that ripped out was very difficult but we weren't about to turn around and say we've got to get rid of the staff, because we need them to assist with behaviours that are getting worse with clients.
We're not going to change our rosters, but at the same time it's costing us money. It's difficult, but we are in the position where we are making losses and we can't keep doing that.
This is a community facility, built by the community, so it's not a profit-making exercise and we still need to be able to survive. At the moment, we are finding it difficult and the change in the supplement has made it much harder.
We're going on for four months and there's still no vision, plan or policy coming from the government.
Competition brings out the best in products and the worst in people.
... as currently drafted and interpreted, the provision is of limited utility in prohibiting conduct by firms with substantial market power which has a detrimental impact on competition.
It is doubtful that the amendments assisted.
… not by protecting the losers, but by preventing conduct by firms in a position of substantial market power that excludes efficient and innovative competition which would otherwise benefit consumers.
In recent cases, intent is rarely, if ever, the focus of the analysis … A subjective intent test risks attributing too much weight to hyperbole or unrealistic speculation or too little weight to the harm from objectively anticompetitive acts.
Over the past century, US courts have moved from using intent to an expressly objective effects test.
… to be condemned as exclusionary, a monopolist's act must have an "anticompetitive effect"—
That is, it must harm the competitive process and thereby harm consumers.
The counterfactual test substitutes a hypothetical inquiry into the conduct’s possible efficiencies for the more important question of its actual effects, both pro- and anti-competitive, when practised by a specific, dominant firm in a market with specific characteristics.
It never asks whether the anticompetitive effects are far more substantial than any realized efficiencies.
Pelago West, rising eight stories, is the first stage of the $225 million project, which will eventually comprise 292 residential apartments and 22 commercial lots with mining projects in close proximity and offering some residents sweeping views of red desert, the nearby Karratha Hills and Nickol Bay.
While Mr Whyte is finding the exact number, the percentage for growth has taken a while to settle down. We have been in a process of negotiating with departments as to who has a need in Karratha and what their need is. Some agencies have had a preference not to be in an apartment complex but rather as freestanding houses, and that has taken a while to negotiate out. So it has taken some while to finally determine the GROH position.
Whilst we provide housing for most government agencies, WA Country Health we do not. And at the time there were some negotiations with WA Country Health as to whether they were interested in some of the apartments. There are probably 300—
GROH dwellings in Karratha; it is not insignificant. One of the options that was debated at the time was whether we could—
encourage people to move into these apartments and thereby free up houses in the town. Again there has been some reluctance for that to happen, which we did not anticipate given the quality and finish of the apartments and the facilities that are available. But people make choices for all sorts of reasons.
SHADOW MINISTRY
24 September
… more focus in general on the job market reforms and on more opportunities delivered by the job markets will actually help us reach the double objective of both growth and jobs.
The Fair Work Act must be revised, especially in regard to major resource project construction.
… it is time that some [union leaders] recognised that their members’ real interests are aligned with their long-term job security.
Even if you are looking to see if they are doing anything sneaky, it is a pretty straightforward implementation—
I don't think that the proposal of the Coalition in relation to IFAs means—
an automatic go back to Work Choices.
… the Commonwealth taxpayer will continue to cover 50 per cent of people's university education.
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Employment (Senator Abetz) to a question without notice asked by Senator Cameron today relating to the Fair Entitlements Guarantee.
It should be seen for what it was: a mechanism that holds both sides to account and which can help deliver projects on time and on budget.
… a conversation went too long, I certainly fed hope. I shouldn't have done that.
It is time that some in today's union leadership recognised that their members' long-term interests are aligned with their long-term job security …
The details of the Coalition’s Policy to Improve the Fair Work Laws are spelled out clearly in this document. Based on the laws as they stand now, the Coalition has no plans to make any other changes to the Fair Work laws.
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Attorney-General (Senator Brandis) to a question without notice asked by Senator Wright today relating to anti-terrorism laws.
The problem is that people think that passing laws makes us safer. Well not unless the laws are necessary because we lacked powers to keep us safe. The existing laws should be properly implemented.
That this bill may proceed without formalities and be now read a first time.
That this bill be now read a second time.
The Government is pleased to introduce the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (Foreign Fighters) Bill 2014. The Bill amends several Acts and provides a number of important measures that will enhance the capability of Australia's law enforcement, intelligence and border protection agencies to protect Australian communities from the threat posed by returning foreign fighters and those individuals within Australia supporting foreign conflicts.
As the Prime Minister remarked in his national security statement on 22 September 2014, "protecting our people is the first duty of government". The rapid resurgence in violent extremism and the participation in overseas conflicts by some Australians present new and complex security challenges for our nation. The ongoing conflicts in Syria and Iraq are adding to this challenge and the number of Australians who have sought to take part, either by directly participating in these conflicts or providing support for extremists fighting there, is unprecedented.
Australia is well served by its law enforcement, intelligence and border security agencies. However, we must not become complacent. The recent increase in the terrorism threat level from Medium to High by the Director-General of ASIO, the first time the threat level has ever been increased to this level, only serves to remind us that the threat of a domestic terrorist attack remains real.
The risk posed by returning foreign fighters is one of the most significant threats to Australia's national security in recent years. Our security agencies have assessed that around 160 Australians have become involved with extremist groups in Syria and Iraq by travelling to the region, attempting to travel or supporting groups operating there from Australia. While this is not the first time Australians have been involved in overseas conflicts, the scale and scope of the conflicts in Syria and Iraq, and the number of Australians presently involved, is unparalleled and demands specific and targeted measures to mitigate this threat.
Recent operational activity in NSW and Queensland has demonstrated the professionalism of our Federal and State security and law enforcement agencies. However, such operational activity and the Government's comprehensive examination of Australia's counter-terrorism legislation have identified a number of measures necessary to provide security and law enforcement agencies with the powers they need to respond to the emerging security threats, both globally and domestically. This package of reforms contains several amendments to Part 5.3 of the Criminal Code. The Government appreciates the support of state and territory First Ministers, which has enabled the introduction of these amendments.
The Government would also like to acknowledge senior Muslim leaders and their representatives from around Australia for their cooperation and advice during the development of this Bill. The Government has undertaken extensive consultation with the community, including in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Canberra on the current security environment, ways to counter violent extremism and some of the key measures in this Bill. This consultation, which is in addition to the normal parliamentary processes, has had a direct influence on the Bill. In particular, the new offence of designated zones was enhanced by taking into account legitimate purposes for traveling, while a clear message was provided that sunsetting of key measures should be extended rather than repealed.
The Government is undertaking comprehensive reform of national security to fulfil our commitment to respond to the recommendations of several recent reviews of national security and counter-terrorism legislation. The measures in the Bill are a large part of that response.
Against this background, the Bill enhances the capability of our security agencies and strengthens Australia's already robust counter terrorism laws in several key areas.
Outline of measures in the Bill
(1) Broaden the criteria and streamline the process for the listing of terrorist organisations and clarify associated offences
As part of an effective counter-terrorism regime, it is vital that our laws target not only terrorist acts, but also the organisations that plan, finance and carry out such acts. Nineteen organisations are currently listed as terrorist organisations under the regime enacted in the Criminal Code. Measures in the Bill will improve this regime by clarifying what is meant by 'advocating a terrorist act'. This updated definition will cover circumstances where an organisation directly or indirectly promotes or encourages the doing of a terrorist act. The amendments will also clarify that whether the terrorist act referred to is a single terrorist act or multiple terrorist acts, or whether a terrorist act does or does not occur is not necessarily relevant to the listing process.
Amending the terrorist organisation training offences will also enable prosecutions in circumstances where there are no formally defined teaching and learning roles in a training session.
(2) Preserve and enhance key counter-terrorism measures due to expire
In the current heightened threat environment, it is vital our law enforcement and security agencies have effective mechanisms to manage emerging threats. The Bill will provide for the continuation and enhancement of a number of key counter terrorism measures including control orders, preventative detention orders, police stop, search and seizure powers and ASIO questioning and detention powers so that these powers will continue to be available to relevant authorities. This Bill will see them extended for a further ten years.
Further enhancements included in the Bill will see the control order regime tailored to address the issue of returning foreign fighters and address the recommendation of the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor to extend the regime to those convicted of terrorism offences where it would substantially assist in preventing a terrorist attack. This will better enable the AFP to mitigate the threat posed by individuals who have engaged in hostile activities overseas or otherwise demonstrated their commitment to a terrorist cause.
(3) Provide certain law enforcement agencies with the tools needed to investigate, arrest and prosecute those supporting foreign conflicts
Delayed notification search warrants
Enhancing the capacity of law enforcement and security agencies to monitor and investigate individuals of security concern is essential to combat the foreign fighter threat. Currently, if the AFP wishes to search a premise they are required to notify the occupant at the time the warrant is executed and must allow the occupant to observe the search. This immediately notifies suspects of police interest in their activities, allowing a person to change their plans to avoid further detection, relocate their operations, or conceal or destroy evidence. It also provides a suspect with the opportunity to notify their associates, who may not yet be known to police, allowing the associates to cease their involvement with the known suspect, destroy evidence, expedite their plans or avoid detection in other ways.
A delayed notification search warrant scheme will overcome these risks by allowing the AFP to covertly enter and search premises without the knowledge of the occupier of the premises, and then provide notification at a later date. By delaying notification of the execution of the warrant, the AFP will have the significant tactical advantage of allowing an investigation to remain confidential. An application for a delayed notification search warrant will be subject to multiple levels of scrutiny and authorisation. Extensive safeguards will ensure that the Bill balances the legitimate interests of the Commonwealth in preventing serious terrorism offences with the need to protect important human rights.
Lowering the threshold for arrest without warrant for terrorism offences
The Bill is amending the arrest threshold for foreign incursion and terrorism offences to allow the police to arrest individuals on reasonable suspicion, rather than reasonable belief. This amendment will bring the Criminal Code into line with a majority of state and territory laws. Amending the threshold in this way will enable police to take rapid action to prevent individuals boarding a plane to travel overseas in circumstances where there may not be sufficient time to gather evidence to achieve the current threshold of reasonable belief. This will enable law enforcement agencies to disrupt terrorist activity at an earlier stage.
Improving the collection and admissibility of evidence collected overseas
The successful prosecution of terrorism-related offences often relies on evidence obtained from outside Australia, where the majority of the alleged offending often occurs. The Independent National Security Legislation Monitor's fourth annual report in March 2014 highlighted obstacles in relation to the collection and admissibility of foreign evidence in terrorism proceedings. The proposed amendments to the Foreign Evidence Act 1994 seek to provide Australian judicial officers with greater discretion in deciding whether to admit foreign material in terrorism-related proceedings, while still providing the appropriate judicial protection of the rights of the defendant. That is, judicial officers will consider the evidentiary value of the foreign material and whether the admission of the material would have a significant adverse impact on the right of the defendant to a fair trial.
(4) Update the available criminal offences so they are relevant and address the modern foreign fighter threat
New advocating terrorism offence
The Bill will introduce a new offence of 'advocating terrorism'. Currently an organisation can be listed as a terrorist organisation if it directly or indirectly counsels or urges the doing of a terrorist act, directly or indirectly provides instruction on the doing of a terrorist act, or directly praises the doing of a terrorist act. However, there is a current gap in the law around individuals promoting terrorism. To address this issue, a person will commit an offence if they intentionally counsel, promote, encourage or urge the doing of a terrorist act or the commission of a terrorism offence. The offence carries a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment. Significantly, there does not have to be a direct link to an actual act of terrorism or violence being carried out. That is, this offence will apply to those who advocate terrorism regardless of whether terrorism or a terrorist act occurs.
New 'declared area' offence
The Bill will create a new offence of entering a declared area overseas where terrorist organisations are active. This will enable law enforcement agencies to bring to justice those Australians who have committed serious offences, including associating with, and fighting for, terrorist organisations overseas.
It would not prevent a person from travelling overseas, including to a declared area, for a legitimate purpose. However, an individual suspected of entering a declared area to fight would have to point to evidence of their legitimate reason for travelling to the area. It is my expectation that this offence will only be enlivened in exceptional circumstances, where terrorist organisations are active and effectively exercising control over a particular region. In those circumstances, a declaration by government would have the dual benefit of warning people about the dangers associated with travelling to that area and creating an offence for those who, regardless of those warnings, choose to travel to the area without legitimate reason. Importantly, a 10 year sunset clause will be attached to this offence.
(5) Strengthen protections at Australia's borders
Expand existing Customs' detention powers
The Bill will expand on existing Customs detention powers to further ensure that Australia's borders remain safe and secure. These amendments will allow Customs officers to detain a person where the officer has reasonable grounds to suspect that the person is intending to commit a Commonwealth offence, or is a threat to national security or the security of a foreign country. Once detained by a Customs officer, the individual will be made available to the appropriate law enforcement agency as soon as practicable. These amendments play a crucial role in Australia's defence against foreign fighters, as they prevent individuals from travelling outside of Australia where their intention is to commit acts of violence. This not only assists in the prevention of terrorist acts offshore, but also prevents these individuals from returning to Australia with greater capacity to carry out terrorist attacks on Australian soil.
Expand the collection and use of personal identifiers of citizens and non-citizens both arriving and departing from Australia
Currently, the Department of Immigration and Border Protection and the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service are only aware that a person is intending to depart Australia when the traveller presents for check-in and boarding. This provides a short timeframe to assess any potential alerts or threats. Amendments in the Bill will expand the existing Advance Passenger Processing system, requiring airlines and maritime vessels to report on persons who are expected to be on a departing flight or voyage. This will enhance border protection agencies to conduct meaningful cross-checking with relevant databases and respond any potential alerts or threats.
The Bill also includes measures which will allow the Department of Immigration and Border Protection to collect, access, use and disclose personal identifiers for purposes of identification of persons who may be a security concern to Australia or foreign country. These amendments will allow for an authorised system, such as eGate, to perform accurate biometric identification almost instantaneously, and will contribute to strengthening Australia's borders.
Enable ASIO to recommend visa cancellation of a person who is offshore, who ASIO suspects might be a risk to security.
The Bill will enable the Minister for Immigration to cancel the visa of a person who is offshore where ASIO suspects that the person might be a risk to security. This amendment will provide ASIO with 28 days to conduct further investigation and issue an assessment that the former visa holder is a direct or indirect risk to security, and recommend their visa should remain cancelled. If ASIO do not furnish such an assessment within 28 days, the Minister for Immigration must revoke the visa cancellation, and the person's visa will be re-instated. This emergency visa cancellation provision will better enable the Australian Government to ensure that non-citizens who might be a threat to security are not able to return to Australia whilst further ASIO investigations remain ongoing.
(6) Limiting the means of travel for foreign fighting or support for foreign fighters
Enable ASIO to request suspension of Australian passports and seize foreign passports
An Australian passport is a privilege of Australian citizenship. The Bill will enable the Minister for Foreign Affairs to temporarily suspend a passport to prevent a person who is onshore in Australia from travelling overseas where ASIO has unresolved security concerns about them. This amendment will provide ASIO with the capacity to prevent and disrupt individuals of security concern, at short notice, from going overseas to participate unlawfully in foreign conflicts.
Welfare cancellation
Finally, the Bill will amend a number of laws to provide for the cancellation of welfare payments for individuals of security concern. This important measure will ensure that the Government does not inadvertently support individuals engaged in conduct that is considered prejudicial to Australia's national security. Like the new declared area offence, my expectation is that this new power will only be used in exceptional circumstances where welfare payments are assisting or supporting criminal activity.
Concluding remarks
The Australian Government is committed to fulfilling its most important responsibility—to protect Australia, its people and its interests—and will do so while instilling confidence that our national security and counter-terrorism laws will be exercised in a just and accountable way. This Bill is an important step in the Government's continuing efforts to strengthen Australia's robust national security laws to proactively and effectively address the threat posed by returning foreign fighters.
The Government thanks the Opposition for its continued bipartisanship on the issue of national security and urge all members to support this Bill and implement this necessary reform.
That—
(a) so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the succeeding provisions of this resolution having effect;
(b) on Wednesday, 24 September 2014, the business of the Senate notice of motion proposing the disallowance of the Fair Work Amendment (Protected Industrial Action) Regulation, standing in the name of Senator Rice, for that day be called on no later than 6.15 pm; and
(c) if consideration of the motion listed in paragraph (b) is not concluded at 6.30 pm, the questions on the unresolved motion shall then be put.
That the proposed amendments of standing orders contained in Appendix 1 of the Procedure Committee's Third report of 2014 in relation to the following matters:
(a) consolidation of opportunities for tabling and considering documents;
(b) consolidation of opportunities for tabling and considering committee reports;
(c) streamlined procedures for routine extensions of time for committees to report;
(d) streamlined procedures for authorising committees to meet during the sitting of the Senate;
(e) proposals under standing order 75 on Thursdays;
(f) changes to the adjournment debate; and
(g) Senators' statements on Wednesdays at 12.45 pm;
operate as temporary orders until 30 June 2015, with effect from 30 September 2014:
Proposed amendments of standing orders contained in Appendix 1 of the Procedure Committee's Third report of 2014
(1) Consolidation of opportunities for tabling and considering documents – standing order 61
Omit paragraph (1), substitute:
(1) (a) On Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, documents presented by the President or by a minister shall be considered pursuant to this standing order at the time provided.
(b) Immediately after prayers on any day when consideration of documents occurs, the President or a minister may present documents by handing them to the Clerk without any announcement to the Senate, and the presentation of such documents shall be reported to the Senate by the President when the consideration of documents is called on under this standing order.
(c) Documents presented on Monday and not called on on Monday may be considered on Tuesday after the documents presented on that day, and documents presented on Monday and Tuesday and not called on on either day may be considered on Wednesday after documents presented on that day.
(2) Consolidation of opportunities for tabling and considering committee reports – standing order 62 and 38
Standing order 62, omit paragraph (4), substitute:
(4) (a) If a committee report or government response to a report is presented at the time provided on Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday, a motion may be moved relating to the report or response.
(b) A senator speaking to such a motion shall not speak for more than 10 minutes, and debate on all such motions shall not exceed 60 minutes.
(c) If a debate is not concluded at the expiration of that time the debate shall be made an order of the day for Thursday at the time for consideration of committee reports and government responses.
Standing order 38, omit paragraph (7), substitute:
(7) If the Senate is not sitting when a committee has prepared a report for presentation, the committee may provide the report to the President or, if the President is unable to act, to the Deputy President, or, if the Deputy President is unavailable, to any one of the Temporary Chairs of Committees, and, on the provision of the report:
(a) the report shall be deemed to have been presented to the Senate;
(b) the publication of the report is authorised by this standing order;
(c) the President, the Deputy President, or the Temporary Chair of Committees, as the case may be, may give directions for the printing and circulation of the report; and
(d) the presentation of the report shall be recorded in the Journals of the Senate for the next sitting; and
(e) the report may be considered under standing order 62(4) at the next available opportunity after any reports presented that day.
(3) Consequential amendments in relation to documents and committee reports
(a) Standing order 57(1), in relation to documents
On Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, after Any proposal to debate a matter of public importance or urgency, insert:
Consideration of documents under standing order 61 for up to 30 minutes
On Tuesday and Wednesday, omit:
At 6.50 pm, consideration of government documents for up to 30 minutes under standing order 61.
(b) Standing order 57(1), in relation to committee reports
On Tuesday, after Consideration of documents under standing order 61 for up to 30 minutes, insert:
Consideration of committee reports under standing order 62(4) for up to 60 minutes
On Thursday, after Discovery of formal business, omit:
Consideration of committee reports under standing order 62(4)
On Thursday, after Motions to take note of answers, insert:
Consideration of committee reports under standing order 62(4) for up to 60 minutes
(c) Standing order 169, in relation to motions after tabling
Omit paragraph (2), substitute:
(2) Where a motion is moved by leave in relation to a document or committee report presented to the Senate, including a document or committee report presented to the President when the Senate is not sitting, a senator speaking to such a motion shall not speak for more than the time provided for a document or committee report under standing order 61 or 62, as the case requires, and debate on the motion shall not exceed a multiple of three times the applicable speaking time limit; where 2 or more such motions are moved in succession, debate on all motions shall not exceed a multiple of six times the applicable speaking time limit.
(4) Streamlined procedure for routine extension of time for a committee to report – standing order 67
Omit the standing order, substitute:
A senator, including a committee chair, who wishes to postpone a notice or order of the day of which the senator (or the committee) is in charge shall, before the time for postponement of business, deliver to the Clerk written notification of the postponement. At that time the Clerk shall read a list of such items, and they shall then be taken to be postponed accordingly, but, at the request of any senator, the question for the postponement of an item shall be put to the Senate for determination without amendment or debate.
This standing order does not apply to an order of the day for the presentation of a report of a select committee.
(5) Streamlined procedure for authorising committees to meet during the sitting of the Senate – standing order 33
At the end of standing order 33, add:
(5) For the purpose of paragraph (3), a committee that seeks to meet contrary to this standing order may deliver a notice in writing to the Clerk, signed by the chair of the committee, setting out the particulars of the meeting proposed to be held. Immediately after prayers on any day, the Clerk shall read a list of such proposals and they shall be taken to be approved accordingly but, at the request of any senator, the question for authorisation of a particular meeting contrary to this standing order shall be put to the Senate for determination without amendment or debate.
(6) MPI on Thursday – standing order 57
Standing order 57(1), Thursday, omit "Any proposal to debate a matter of public importance or urgency".
(7) Adjournment – standing order 54
Omit paragraphs (5) and (6), substitute:
(5) On Monday and Wednesday debate on the question for the adjournment shall not exceed 40 minutes, and a senator shall not speak to that question for more than 10 minutes. On Tuesday at the expiration of 2 hours and 10 minutes, on Thursday at the conclusion of debate, and on other days at the expiration of 40 minutes, at the conclusion of debate, or at the time specified for adjournment, whichever is the earlier, or if there is no debate, the President shall adjourn the Senate without putting the question.
(5A) On the question for the adjournment of the Senate on Tuesday, a senator shall speak to that question for not more than 5 minutes, but if no other senator wishes to speak for up to 5 minutes, a senator who has not already spoken may speak for up to 10 minutes.
(6) On the question for the adjournment of the Senate on Thursday, a senator shall speak to that question for not more than 5 minutes, except in accordance with the following paragraphs:
(a) if no other senator wishes to speak for up to 5 minutes, a senator who has not already spoken may speak for up to 10 minutes; and
(b) if no other senator wishes to speak under paragraph (a), a senator who has not already spoken may speak for up to 20 minutes.
(8) Consequential amendments in relation to the adjournment
(a) Standing order 55
Omit paragraph (1), substitute:
(1) The days and times of meeting of the Senate in each sitting week shall be:
Monday 12.30 pm* – 6.30 pm, 7.30 pm – 10.30 pm
Tuesday 12.30 pm – 9.30 pm
Wednesday 9.30 am – 8 pm
Thursday 9.30 am – adjournment.
(*note that under another temporary order, this time has been changed to 10 am)
(b) Standing order 57(1)
On Tuesday, insert "At 9.30 pm," before "adjournment".
On Thursday, omit "At 8.40 pm, adjournment", substitute "Adjournment".
(9) Senators' statements – standing order 57
Omit paragraph (2), substitute:
(2) On Wednesday, at 12.45 pm till 2 pm senators may make statements without any question before the chair, provided that a senator shall not speak for more than 10 minutes, and if a division is called for, the division shall be taken at a later hour of the day, not being earlier than 2 pm.
That the order of the Senate of 21 March 2002 relating to photographs in the Senate chamber cease to have effect on and from 30 September 2014.
That general business notice of motion No. 434 be postponed to Wednesday, 1 October 2014.
That paragraph (1) of the order of the Senate of 18 May 1993 relating to the provision of seating on the floor of the Senate for members of the House of Representatives be amended by omitting, "in front of the broadcasting booth".
Question agreed to.
That the Senate—
(a) notes:
(i) the recent International Whaling Commission (IWC) meeting passed a resolution instructing members to have their future scientific whaling programs assessed by the Commission, and
(ii) the Japanese Government has indicated it will ignore this resolution and recommence a lethal 'scientific' whaling program in the Southern Ocean in 2015; and
(b) calls on the Japanese Government to:
(i) respect the IWC motion and not to recommence a lethal 'scientific' whaling program in the Southern Ocean in 2015, and
(ii) join the Southern Ocean Research Partnership, a ten nation Southern Ocean non-lethal whale research program.
Question agreed to.
That the Senate—
(a) notes recent analysis by Mr Chris Bonnor and Mr Bernie Shepherd, which demonstrated that inequality between the most advantaged and disadvantaged schools has grown since the Gonski Review was completed in 2011;
(b) recognises the Commonwealth Government's decision to proceed with only the first 4 years of the Gonski school funding arrangements falls far short of the investment needed to reverse systemic disadvantage and deepening inequality; and
(c) calls on the Government to prioritise the reduction of inequality in Australian schools.
Question agreed to.
That the Senate—
(a) notes:
(i) the recent release of the G20 finance ministers report on leading practices to promote and prioritise quality investment, particularly in infrastructure,
(ii) the emphasis this report places on rigorous, transparent and consistent infrastructure project preparation,
(iii) that this reflects priorities set out in the 2013 National Infrastructure Plan, which promotes public investment in public transport, and
(iv) that this raises concern that the $3 billion in federal funding committed toward the proposed East West Link project does not uphold the principles set out in these reports; and
(b) calls on the Government to redirect the $3 billion of Commonwealth funds allocated for the proposed East West Link to public transport in Victoria.
The Senate divided. [16:03]
(The President—Senator Parry)
That the Senate calls on the Government to heed the request of the United Nations and provide increased humanitarian assistance in the Middle East by offering and preserving asylum space for Syrians and Iraqis and supporting the neighbouring countries hosting them.
Pursuant to standing order 75, I propose that the following matter of public importance be submitted to the Senate for discussion:
The need for the Abbott Government to: keep its election promise to build Australia's future submarines in Adelaide; support Australia's strategically-vital submarine and ship building industry; ensure that Australia's future submarines are designed to meet Australia's unique needs for range, endurance and capability and; undertake an open and transparent tender process or a funded design study for Australia's future submarines.
… I want to confirm that the 12 submarines as set out in the 2009 Defence White Paper and then again in last Friday’s Defence White Paper are what the Coalition accepts and will deliver.
We will deliver those submarines from right here at ASC in South Australia.
Submarines are not cars—you cannot simply switch to another like disposing of a Holden to buy a Mitsubishi …
They are designed for a specific purpose and unfortunately big compromises would have to be accepted if Australia is to buy Japanese without serious design modifications, incurring further time delays, high cost and risk.
It beggars belief that any federal government would seriously consider spending up to $250 billion of Australian tax payers' money on buying naval ships from overseas to create jobs and enterprise in someone else's land ahead of ours.
A Labor government would … ensure the submarines were built by ASC at its Port Adelaide site, with construction to begin in about 2017.
Starting the process this year will guarantee continuity of work for South Australia's defence industry and those employed in the sector.
This Government is committed to carefully planning for Australia’s next generation of submarines.
Starting the process this year will guarantee continuity of work for South Australia's defence industry and those employed in the sector ...
I rise to speak to the tabling of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights' Twelfth Report of the 44th Parliament.
The committee considered 12 bills, all of which were introduced with a statement of compatibility. Of these 12 bills, nine do not require further scrutiny as they do not appear to give rise to human rights concerns. The committee has decided to defer its consideration of one bill.
The committee has identified two bills that it considers require further examination and for which it will seek further information.
Of the bills considered, those which are scheduled for debate during the sitting week commencing 22 September 2014 include:
Customs Amendment (Korea-Australia Free Trade Agreement Implementation) Bill 2014
Customs Tariff Amendment (Korea-Australia Free Trade Agreement Implementation) Bill 2014
Infrastructure Australia Amendment (Cost Benefit Analysis and Other Measures Bill 2014
Migration Amendment (Protection and Other Measures) Bill 2014
2 Tax and Superannuation Laws Amendment (2014 Measures No. 5) Bill 2014
The report outlines the committee's assessment of the compatibility of these bills with human rights, and I encourage my fellow Senators to look to the committee's report to inform your deliberations on the merits of this proposed legislation.
I would like to draw Senators' attention to one bill in this report which is of particular interest and relevance to the committee's task of assessing legislation for compatibility with human rights.
The Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (2014 Budget Measures No. 2) Bill 2014 seeks to amend various Acts relating to social security, family assistance, veterans' entitlements and farm household support to make a number of changes to certain Australian Government payments. These include measures to:
pause indexation for three years of the income free areas and assets value limits for student payments;
pause indexation for three years of the income and assets test free areas for all pensioners (other than parenting payment single recipients) and the deeming thresholds for all income support payments;
provide that all pensions are indexed to the Consumer Price Index only by removing both benchmarking to Male Total
3 Average Weekly Earnings and indexation to the Pensioner and Beneficiary Living Cost Index.
The committee previously sought the advice of the minister as to whether the measures are compatible with these rights, noting that the statement of compatibility did not adequately identify and assess how potential limitations on the right to social security, the right to an adequate standard of living and the rights to quality and nondiscrimination would be reasonable, necessary and proportionate in each case.
The further information provided by the minister in this case is an excellent model for the kind of detailed information and analysis required to assist the committee in its assessment of the human rights compatibility of legislation. This further information has allowed the committee to conclude that the measures are largely compatible with the right to social security and the right to an adequate standard of living, with identified limitations of rights being generally assessed as reasonable, necessary and proportionate in pursuit of a legitimate objective. Significantly, out of the twelve matters raised by the committee in relation to measures in the bill, the committee has concluded that ten of these are compatible with human rights.
I would urge ministers and officers of departments and agencies with responsibility for the preparation of statements of compatibility to look at the committee's examination of this bill as a guide to
4 understanding the processes and analytical framework within which the committee works.
With these comments, I commend the committee's Twelfth Report of the 44th Parliament to the Senate.
The proposed changes affect all recipients, regardless of their gender and are aimed at ensuring that social security is targeted, sustainable and consistent over the long term.
The measures will help ensure ongoing assistance is targeted to those who need it most, and the impacts are sufficiently small as to be proportionate to the objective of preserving access to payments system over the long term.
Furthermore a per child single parent supplement will become available for single parent families …
… that non-discrimination and equality are fundamental components of international human rights law and essential to the exercise and enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights. In particular, article 2(2) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) requires each State party:
…to guarantee that the rights enunciated in the present Covenant will be exercised without discrimination of any kind as to race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.
Non-discrimination is an immediate and cross-cutting obligation in the Covenant. Article 2(2) requires States parties to guarantee nondiscrimination in the exercise of each of the economic, social and cultural rights enshrined in the Covenant and can only be applied in conjunction with these rights. It is to be noted that discrimination constitutes any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference or other differential treatment that is directly or indirectly based on the prohibited grounds of discrimination and which has the intention or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of Covenant rights.
1.186 Discrimination may be either direct or indirect. Indirect discrimination may occur when a requirement or condition is neutral on its face but has—
a disproportionate or unintended negative impact on particular groups.
1.187 The committee notes the minister's advice that the measures affect all recipients, regardless of their gender. While the measures therefore appear neutral on their face, the committee remains concerned that they may have a greater impact on women than men, as women are more likely to be recipients of social security and, particularly payments provided to the primary caregiver of children.
1.188 Accordingly, the committee seeks the further advice of the minister as to whether the measures in the bill are compatible with the rights to equality and non-discrimination on the basis of gender and family responsibilities.
That the Senate take note of the report.
That the Senate take note of the report.
Given Australia Post’s dominant position—
any allegation of conduct by it which deliberately damages the competitive process would be investigated by the ACCC.
Attorney-General (Senator Brandis)—Marrakesh Treaty (agreed to 23 June 2014)
Minister for Education (Mr Pyne)—Schools funding (agreed to 14 July 2014)
Minister for Industry (Mr Macfarlane)—Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (agreed to 1 September 2014)
That the Senate take note of the document.
You can vote Liberal or Labor and you will get exactly the same amount of funding for your school.
Schools in regional areas, as well as disadvantaged and Aboriginal students, will be the hardest hit.
That the Fair Work Amendment (Protected Industrial Action) Regulation 2014, as contained in Select Legislative Instrument 2014 No. 95 and made under the Fair Work Act 2009 , be disallowed.
(a) if the industrial action is being engaged in, or is threatened, impending or probable, in a State that is not a referring State … [then] the Minister of the State who has responsibility for workplace relations matters in the State;
(b) an organisation or other person directly affected, or who would be directly affected, by the industrial action other than an employee who will be covered by the agreement.
The Senate divided. [18:34]
(The President—Senator Parry)
That the Senate take note of the document.
…the importance of scientific research…
That senators be discharged from and appointed to committees as follows:
Community Affairs Legislation and References Committees—
Appointed—Participating member: Senator Lambie
Health—Select Committee—
Appointed—
Substitute members:
Senator Wright to replace Senator Di Natale on 9 October 2014
Senator Siewert to replace Senator Di Natale on 10 October 2014
Senator Waters to replace Senator Di Natale on 31 October 2014
Participating member: Senator Di Natale.