Scott Ludlam (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

Senator Brandis, in your closing remarks you mentioned quite correctly that this bill originated from the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security report, of which committee you were a member, and you were a signatory to the recommendations that were put forward. One of the recommendations, I believe recommendation 41, was that the bill should firstly be put into the public domain as an exposure draft, which obviously was not done, but also that the views of the national security legislation monitor should be sought.

Australia's oversight of these intrusive and, in some instances, quite coercive powers has effectively three limbs: the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security and, I would argue, the national security legislation monitor—not so much concerned with operational oversight as with the policy architecture that governs how these agencies operate. As to the national security legislation monitor, the government sought to abolish that office as part of some kind of red-tape initiative. Later there was an agreement, I understand, to restore the operations of that office. Why does it currently not exist? And why has the government not sought the views of a reinstated national security legislation monitor—as, Senator Brandis, you signed to? It was a recommendation that I thought had merit. Why does that office not exist? When will you instate such an office?

Do you believe in its importance? Why was this bill not subjected to having his or her views sought, as you recommended last year?