Jo Briskey (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

It's a privilege to make my contribution to the debate on these two bills, the Secrecy Provisions Amendment (Repealing Offences) Bill 2026 and the Secrecy Provisions Amendment (Sunsetting Provision) Bill 2026. Together, these bills represent a landmark moment in the reform of Australia's Commonwealth secrecy framework—one that has been needed for a long time and one that this Albanese Labor government is proud to deliver.

Let me begin by acknowledging what these bills are fundamentally about. They are about the enduring tension at the heart of any democracy, the tension between a government's legitimate need to protect sensitive information and the public's fundamental right to know what is being done in their name. These are not competing values that can simply be traded off against each other. They are twin pillars of democratic governance, and both demand our serious attention.

For too long, the Commonwealth's secrecy framework has been a sprawling, inconsistent patchwork; a statute book cluttered with hundreds of secrecy provisions, many of which were never designed to carry the weight of criminal liability. The result has been a framework that is neither fair nor fit for purpose. It has created legal uncertainty, chilled legitimate public interest journalism and imposed disproportionate consequences on individuals who may have done nothing more than perform their job. This government was elected with a commitment to fix that, and that's exactly what these bills do.

The Secrecy Provisions Amendment (Repealing Offences) Bill is the centrepiece of this reform. It delivers comprehensively on our commitment to implement the recommendations of the 2023 review of secrecy provisions conducted by the Attorney-General's Department, as well as the government's response to the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor's 2024 review of secrecy offences under part 5.6 of the Criminal Code.

The scale of change is significant. The bill will remove criminal liability from more than 300 provisions, representing more than one-third of all Commonwealth secrecy provisions. The 2023 review identified 168 provisions that no longer required criminal liability. This bill goes further, almost doubling that number. No more tinkering around the edges; this is serious evidence based law reform.

What does this mean in practice? It means that the vast majority of non-disclosure duties across the Commonwealth statute book will no longer attract criminal sanctions. Instead, they will be subject to more proportionate civil and administrative consequences, consequences that are proportionate to the nature of the breach and appropriate to the context. It means that hundreds of Australians who work for or provide services to the Commonwealth will no longer face the spectre of criminal prosecution for conduct that does not genuinely threaten our national security or public safety.

Let me be clear about what this bill does not do. It does not leave Australia's most sensitive information unprotected. Where criminal liability is genuinely necessary—where the potential harm from unauthorised disclosure is serious and real—it remains. The bill preserves and strengthens the provisions that matter most. And it introduces a new targeted secrecy offence in the Criminal Code to address a specific gap identified when a former consulting firm partner allegedly shared confidential Commonwealth information for private gain. This new offence will capture improper use or communication of information by Commonwealth officers, persons engaged to perform work for a Commonwealth entity and persons providing paid or unpaid services to Commonwealth entities—capturing the full range of people who are entrusted with privileged access to sensitive government information. This is a proportionate and targeted response to a real problem, and it ensures our framework is comprehensive without being oppressive.

I want to turn now to what I believe is one of the most important elements of this bill—the protections it introduces for press freedom. The Albanese Labor government has been unequivocal in its commitment to a free press. A free press should never be considered an inconvenience to good government as it is a fundamental mechanism of our democratic accountability. Journalists who expose wrongdoing, who bring hidden information into the public domain, who hold power to account perform an essential public service, and our laws should reflect that.

Under this bill, the Attorney-General will be required to consent before a journalist or an administrative staff member of a news reporting organisation can be prosecuted for a secrecy offence. This is an important additional safeguard. It does not prevent legitimate prosecutions. It does not allow the Attorney-General to initiate prosecutions. What it does is ensure that, before any prosecution of a journalist proceeds, there is proper scrutiny at the highest level, scrutiny that complements the existing requirement that any prosecution must be in the public interest. This is exactly the kind of check that a mature democracy should have in place.

The bill also implements important recommendations of the INSLM's Secrecy Review. These amendments will repeal the proper-place-of-custody offences that are no longer required; ensure that the classification of information under the Protective Security Policy Framework does not form an element of any secrecy offences, a matter of significant legal clarity; ensure the harm threshold for certain offences is unambiguous and material; and strengthen protections for nonofficials by increasing the threshold for criminal liability, reducing penalties and repealing the offence for merely 'dealing' with information. These adjustments go to the heart of ensuring our secrecy laws are proportionate, consistent with the rule of law and respectful of individual rights.

I also want to acknowledge the Secrecy Provisions Amendment (Sunsetting Provision) Bill, the companion piece before us today. Section 122.4 of the Criminal Code currently makes it an offence for a Commonwealth officer, or a person engaged to perform work for a Commonwealth entity, to communicate information in breach of a duty arising elsewhere in Commonwealth law. Without the sunsetting provision bill, that section will lapse before parliament has had the chance to fully consider the broader reforms in the repealing offences bill. This is sensible, responsible legislative management. The limited extension to 29 December 2026 ensures there is no gap in protections for sensitive Commonwealth information while parliament does its job properly. It would be neither prudent nor responsible to allow section 122.4 to sunset prematurely. This bill ensures that does not happen while making clear that the extension is interim. Parliament's task is to pass the repealing offences bill and complete the reform. I am confident we will be able to do exactly that.

I want to close by reflecting briefly on what these reforms say about how we think about law in this country. Laws should not simply exist because they have always existed; they should be justified by the harm they prevent, the rights they protect and the values they uphold. For too long, too many of our secrecy provisions have failed that test. They are relics of a different era, carrying criminal consequences that are disproportionate, inconsistent and, in many cases, simply unnecessary. This government has done the hard work of reviewing those provisions carefully, consulting broadly and bringing forward legislation that reflects both the seriousness of protecting genuinely sensitive information and the importance of transparency and accountability in a democracy. That is what good government looks like, that is what Australians deserve, and I commend both bills to the House.

See this speech in context