Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Social Services) Share this | Hansard source

I must say I was a little surprised when Senator Di Natale rose to his feet to seek to move a motion before this place to facilitate a discussion on the government's decision today. In fact, I think his objective was to move a motion that it might require parliamentary approval for governments take a decision to commit forces. But I was a little surprised and perplexed because it seemed that Senator Di Natale had given so little thought to the procedure that would be required that his effort consisted of waving his arms and saying, 'Blah, blah, blah.' Senator Di Natale seeks to have a parliamentary debate on process related to government decisions, but he had not even given any thought to the process and procedure required in this place. Senator Di Natale belied a sense of seriousness in this place and demonstrated that what he was seeking to do was essentially a stunt, but it was a stunt which he was not even well prepared for.

In the Australian context, it has been the practice and the convention observed by governments of both persuasions that the decision to commit Australian Defence Force personnel is taken by the government of the day. It is a decision that is determined by the National Security Committee of the cabinet and is then ratified by the cabinet. That is the process that has been observed. We do not follow the American system. We have a different constitution. It has always been seen to be a decision for the government of the day. If the Australian public have a contrary view, the method in this system is that they can express their view at the ballot box.

That is not to say, however, that it is not appropriate to debate decisions of government in the parliament. In fact, that is what we spend much of each day doing—debating the decisions of the government of the day—whether in the form of proposed legislation or of questions to ministers of the day. Obviously, there are other forums and formats within the parliament where such debates can happen and they do, on occasion, happen by agreement and consensus across the chamber. So the government is not suggesting for a moment that decisions of the government of the day should not be debated—of course they should; that is part of the purpose of the parliament—but there are appropriate forms and procedures for that to happen. What the government does definitely not agree with is that parliamentary approval should be required before the government of the day commits Australian Defence Force personnel. I think we would also disagree with the Greens in relation to what the threshold should be for engagement of military forces with those that we oppose.

I think Senator Abetz is quite right to describe ISIS as evil and to suggest that it is appropriate that we do what we can to help stop its evil. There are times, regrettably, when the deployment of force is required to be determined by the government of the day, but I must completely reject Senator Di Natale's suggestion that the decision of the Prime Minister and the government is in any way, shape or form framed by political considerations. The decision of the government is framed entirely by considerations both of our own national interest and also of the broader international interest. It is not in the interest of Australia, and it is certainly not in the interest of Syria or Iraq or the neighbouring nations, that ISIS be allowed to flourish. ISIS should be contained. ISIS should be destroyed. The government has taken the right decision that we should be a part of that effort, and the Greens have not made a case for the suspension of standing orders.