Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise today to make a few brief comments about the Inspector of Transport Security Bill 2006 and to support Senator O’Brien’s comments. It is a pleasant surprise to actually see this bill in the Senate after all these years, so I will try not to delay it further than necessary. Under the provisions of this bill, the Minister for Transport and Regional Services will be able to direct the Inspector of Transport Security to inquire into major transport security incidents or series of incidents that point to a systemic failure or possible weaknesses or vulnerabilities in aviation and maritime transport and security regulated offshore facilities. The Inspector of Transport Security will not be responsible for regulating transport security in this country as this role will remain with the Office of Transport Security in the Department of Transport and Regional Services. Labor supports this bill as far as it goes, but we are disappointed that the government did not agree to our amendments in the other place, which would have improved this bill greatly. It is clear by its actions in delaying this bill and then refusing to accommodate our amendments that the Howard government is not serious about improving Australia’s transport security.

On 4 December 2003 the Howard government announced its intention to create the position of the Inspector of Transport Security. It is a sign of the Howard government’s mismanagement and incompetence that it took more than two years after the September 11 terrorist attacks in the United States in 2001 to even accept the need for a senior inspector of our transport systems. In spite of repeated statements from various Howard government ministers seeking to score political points out of the current security situation, they did precious little about filling this important role. It was not until 23 November 2004 that former AFP Commissioner Mr Mick Palmer was appointed as the Inspector of Transport Security. That was nearly a full year after the announcement that the position would be created.

To make matters even worse, the position has existed for three years now without enabling legislation. On 23 May 2005 the then transport minister, Mr John Anderson, promised that Mr Palmer’s position, Inspector of Transport Security, would have legislation to underpin it and define its powers. It is now the last sitting fortnight in 2006 and we are only now debating this legislation in the Senate. This is disgraceful and unacceptable, a delay in the face of a dangerous list of terror attacks overseas and flaws in our own system. Unfortunately, what a joke this government is. Not only has Mr Palmer’s time as the officially unofficial acting Inspector of Transport Security been without enabling legislation, the then Minister for Transport and Regional Services, John Anderson, said on 23 May 2005:

Mr Palmer has temporarily stood aside to conduct an inquiry into the Cornelia Rau case, and it is expected he will resume his duties in the near future.

It took seven months for Mr Palmer to sort out the mess of the Howard government’s disgraceful treatment of mentally disturbed people in our correctional facilities.

The minister claims this bill will provide a framework for independent inquiry and recommendations in relation to transport security and offshore security matters. In fact the minister went so far as to say:

The strengths of the legislative framework to support the role of the Inspector of Transport Security include:

the independence of the inspector …

But, if you look at this bill, the truth is that the inspector has no power whatsoever to independently initiate an inquiry of his or her own. He or she can only investigate what the minister wants investigated, not what needs to be investigated. Under this bill, the inspector is not allowed to look at anything until the minister authorises it. And even after that the minister can withdraw that authorisation before a report is produced. You might as well make the inspector a ministerial staffer and put him in the minister’s office for all the independence he will have.

Let us imagine, for example, that the Inspector for Transport Security was concerned about the lax way foreign flag of convenience vessels were being issued single voyage permits to carry ammonium nitrate around the Australian coast and through Australian ports. And why wouldn’t he be? After all, the Howard government has a record of breaching the navigation regulations and its own ministerial guidelines regulating coastal shipping by failing to establish whether a licensed Australian vessel is available before issuing a single voyage permit to a foreign ship. The Howard government has been quite happy to allow flag of convenience ships with foreign crews we know nothing about to carry dangerous materials around Australian waters. The Labor Party have made it clear that we think this is wrong, and it is reasonable to assume that someone who was tasked with investigating ways to improve Australia’s maritime and transport security might be similarly concerned. Labor have made it clear that ships that come to Australian ports should be obliged to provide the details of their crew and their cargo at least 48 hours before arrival. If they do not, then we should do exactly what the United States does: prevent their entry into our ports.

The Inspector of Transport Security might be just as concerned as the Labor Party that an independent review of this government’s administration of coastal shipping licences and permits for foreign vessels undertaken by KPMG found that: one in six permits for foreign vessels were granted without a signed application; data relating to one in five permits was incorrect or absent altogether; and the government was in breach of the navigation regulations and ministerial guidelines on the regulation of coastal shipping by failing to establish if a licensed Australian vessel was available before issuing a permit to a foreign ship.

Knowing this, the Inspector of Transport Security might link his concern with the recent example of the Pancaldo chugging around Australia’s coast loaded with ammonium nitrate. The Pancaldo was, after all, carrying over 3,000 tonnes of the stuff in and out of Australian ports and, as the Pancaldo sails under the Antiguan flag, the Howard government had no background knowledge of the crew whatsoever and there were no security checks done on any of the crew.

Knowing all this, it is not too hard to imagine that the Inspector of Transport Security might want to investigate this, but before he could, he would have to be directed to do so by the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, the honourable member for Lyne. To be frank, I do not have much confidence in the honourable member for Lyne’s ability to be aware of issues in his portfolio that require further investigation. This is the minister who apparently did not notice one of the greatest scandals in Australian parliamentary history, despite all of the cables his office got, which, of course, he never read—or we are led to believe he never read. This is the minister who, despite multiple warnings, had no idea that $290 million was paid by an Australian company run by National Party mate Trevor Flugge to a bogus Jordanian trucking company, which handed it over to Saddam Hussein’s bloodstained regime.

Given Minister Vaile’s ducking and weaving over the wheat for weapons scandal, I seriously doubt that he is going to say to the Inspector for Transport Security: ‘Please investigate and report on what an incompetent dill I am.’ And I am fairly sure that no National Party minister is ever going to say: ‘Please investigate how my abuse of the single voyage permit system in order to reduce the export costs of my farmer mates is exposing Australian ports to unnecessary security risks.’ Even if the minister directed the Inspector of Transport Security to inquire into that abuse of single voyage permits by the Howard government and the Inspector of Transport Security wrote a report recommending that the carriage of highly dangerous goods, like ammonium nitrate, by foreign ships around our coastline must stop now and the transport of high-consequence dangerous goods around Australian coasts must be done by Australian ships crewed by Australian men and women who are subject to appropriate security screening, the minister would have the power under this bill to bury the report.

The National Party has been responsible for the transport portfolio ever since this government came to power. Ten long years of National Party mismanagement of the portfolio has left Australia’s maritime and transport security in a parlous state. The current Minister for Transport and Regional Services, the honourable member for Lyne, has been too busy of late trying to save his political neck from the wheat for weapons scandal. As a result, it seems that the Minister for Transport and Regional Services has given less than his full attention to maritime and transport security. But the truth of the matter is that this is not a transport issue; it is a national security issue, and it belongs with a full-time minister for national security, a minister for homeland security. All we have at present is the Office of Transport Security in the Department of Transport and Regional Services. It is Labor’s view that maritime security matters should be the responsibility of a minister for homeland security. But the Prime Minister in his wisdom has chosen to leave the maritime and transport security of this nation to a succession of National Party transport ministers who clearly have other things to worry about.

The bill before the Senate today is a small step forward, but a lot more needs to be done. As a nation, we deserve better when it comes to our national security and the protection of our transport systems. Labor supports this bill, but that should not be taken as an endorsement of this lazy government’s failure to act to protect the security of Australians. Under a Labor government, Australia will have a full-time minister for homeland security, a full-time inspector of transport security and a full-time professional coastguard.