Andrew Bartlett (Queensland, Australian Democrats) Share this | Hansard source

For the record, the Democrats support these amendments. As has been stated, they reflect the committee recommendations and I put on the record again that the benefit of Senate committee inquiries is precisely this purpose, particularly when they are able to come up with unanimous reports. It is worth noting and praising the contribution of government senators and the government chair of this committee, Senator Crossin. It is the way it should be but it does not always happen, so it is worth noting when government chairs and government members of a committee are happy to support and propose recommendations to amend legislation. I also point out the Democrats’ role in referring it to inquiry in the first place, rather than flicking it through on a non-controversial basis. It does highlight that the initial suggestion, which may have been made unknowingly, that these were just minor technical amendments that did not introduce new powers and that they just reflected the parliament’s original intent from 2006, were simply wrong. It may have been an innocent mistake, but they were wrong. It is a reminder that we should not take those sorts of statements at face value.

On indulgence, it may be my final opportunity and I have noted Senator Ludwig’s comments a couple of times about my ongoing interest in this area. I thought it worth putting on the record, given the broader political context of the next month or two, the longstanding interest of a number of people from the Democrats over many years in privacy and related issues, going back at least to Senator Janine Haines in the 1980s through to Senator Stott Despoja and a number of others in between. Given the wider context, I thought I would note the contribution of many people from the Democrats in giving a particular priority and focus to this issue over a number of years. I am sure others will continue to do so and I wish them well in their task because it is a complex area. It is one of those areas where you do have competing principles, each of which has a lot of validity to them. Striking the right balance is important. The more people can drain away some of the political rhetoric which can impose itself in this area and obscure some of the complexities that actually lie underneath, the better. That is where Senate committees, at their best, can do a really good job. I think these amendments, which have come out of that process, are a reflection of that.