Andrew Gee (Calare, Independent) | Hansard source

I rise to support the Defence Amendment (Parliamentary Joint Committee on Defence) Bill 2024. I do so because I believe that the new committee can make an important contribution towards oversight, accountability and transparency on decisions and policies relating to defence and also security matters.

Proposed section 110ABB sets out the functions of the committee, and I note they include:

(a) to review the administration and expenditure of Australian defence agencies, including their annual reports;

(b) to consider white papers, reviews and other policy documents dealing with the strategies, planning and contingencies of Australian defence agencies;

(c) to scrutinise Australia's defence capability development, acquisitions and sustainment;

(d) to consider matters relating to defence personnel and veterans' affairs—

very important—

(e) to examine and be appraised of war or warlike operations, including ongoing conflicts;

(f) to monitor the involvement of Australian defence agencies in significant non-conflict operations domestically and internationally;

(g) to monitor and review the implementation of the Australian Government's response to the findings of any Royal Commission … that inquires into a matter relating to the defence of Australia, the Department, the ADF or another Australian defence agency;

(h) to consider the operations, resources, independence and performance of the Inspector-General ADF;

(i) to inquire into matters referred to the Committee by:

(i) a Minister; or

(ii) a resolution of either House of the Parliament;

(j) on the Committee's own initiative—

it may—

… inquire into other matters relating to one or more Australian defence agencies;

When you go through and review the functions of the committee, it is very obvious that they really do ensure that oversight, accountability and transparency on decisions and policies relating to defence matters are improved. This is a really positive thing for our country and a very positive thing for decision-making. Hopefully, it will lead to better outcomes for the men and women who serve our nation in uniform and also for veterans and their families.

Proposed subsection 110ABA(2) sets out the proposed membership of the committee, and it provides that the committee can have up to 13 committee members and must be composed of at least eight members: two senators who are government members, two members of the House of Representatives who are government members, two senators who are non-government members and two members of the House of Representatives who are non-government members. Members from the House of Representatives are nominated by the Prime Minister and members who are senators are nominated by the Leader of the Government in the Senate.

I should note that crossbench members are not excluded from membership of the committee under the proposed legislation, so I was very surprised to hear that the member for Canning is proposing to move an amendment effectively banning crossbench members from sitting on the committee. As I heard those words, I was taken aback by the sheer undemocratic arrogance of that move. It smacks of the old 'the sun will never set on the empire' view of Australian politics that some in the major parties still adhere to. Politics is changing. Poll after poll, election after election, demonstrates that support for the major parties is slipping away. Every day, every week, every month, every year, every election, support for the major parties ebbs. The crossbench continues to grow. The sun is setting on the old political empires of the major parties, and that's the cold, hard truth. Representation on committees such as this can't be denied. It's undemocratic and just plain wrong.

The foreshadowed amendment suggests that coalition MPs are somehow more trustworthy than crossbench members on matters pertaining to defence and national security. Well, let me talk about some of the coalition trustworthiness that I can speak to. I have been in coalition partyroom meetings where I have been able to read, almost in real time, in the digital media what was happening in those meetings and who was saying what.

See this speech in context