Senate debates

Tuesday, 25 November 2014

Bills

Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2014; In Committee

6:52 pm

Photo of Penny WrightPenny Wright (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

There is quite a lot there, Chair. Firstly, I am a big girl—I am a very big girl—and I am big enough and ugly enough to determine my own questions. I do not need to be patronised in any way by anyone. Secondly, yes, I am halfway through my first term in this parliament, but I have sat through enough committee stages of debate to be very, very clear that the purpose of this process in the Senate is to enable questioning, debating and understanding about the implications of any legislation that is being proposed either by the government or whoever has introduced the bill. It is by no means unusual to ask broad-ranging questions. I am also a lawyer, and I know that to some extent even comments that are made in the course of parliamentary debates can provide information and assistance in limited circumstances when interpretation of the legislation is ambiguous and needs to be clarified. It is very useful to have an opportunity to ask questions where there are provisions that are begging explanation and which are not clear. As I have said consistently throughout this debate: this is not something I thought up in the shower this morning; these are questions that have been legitimately put by a range of organisations, and to parliamentary committees in some cases, and I am seeking clarification. This is the national Parliament of Australia, these are significant laws and people in Australia have a right to understand how they may work once they are passed. That is the basis on which I am asking these questions.

I am reassured to think that if you give answers to the questions I have asked, Attorney-General, then there will not be some game played whereby it will be the last speech and then we will have to go to a vote, but that I will have an opportunity to clarify, in good faith, those aspects that I am not clear about. That being the case, I am happy to hear now the responses to my questions. They were all the general questions that I had, and in relation to the amendments. As I said when I was asking my first question: while these amendments go to some of the recommendations of the PJCIS, they do not go to all of them. They certainly do not allay all of the concerns that the Australian Greens have, but given that they do improve the bill we will be supporting them. I am happy to hear answers to those questions now, if the Attorney-General is minded to provide those.

Comments

No comments