Fatima Payman (WA, Australia's Voice) Share this | Hansard source

I want to start with something very simple. Imagine some Australian, someone from your suburbs, someone your kids went to school with, someone you work with, signing up to serve in the ADF. They're proud, their family's proud, and then one day they're told they're being deployed overseas into a conflict situation that could turn deadly very quickly. Their family is left wondering who made that decision. Was it debated? Did anybody actually vote for it? Right now, the answer is no. At the current moment, the Prime Minister of the day can send Australian troops into warlike situations without a single vote in this parliament. There is no requirement for both houses to approve it and no obligation to lay out the case in full view for the Australian people. I don't think that passes the pub test, and, to those watching at home, I know you don't think that this passes the pub test either. This isn't just another policy decision; this is about sending people into harm's way. It's about lives, families and the consequences that can last generations.

What the Defence Amendment (Parliamentary Approval of Overseas Service) Bill 2020 does is actually pretty straightforward, and I would argue it's basic common sense. This bill by the Greens says that, if we're going to deploy Australian Defence Force personnel overseas into warlike action, both houses of parliament should approve this decision—not one person, not a small group of people behind closed doors but the entire parliament. From the outset, let me highlight that this bill does not ignore the reality that sometimes decisions need to be made quickly. There is a clear emergency provision: if there is a genuine crisis, something very urgent, where waiting for parliament isn't practical, the government can act—the Prime Minister can make that decision—but it must then explain itself. Within 24 hours, the decision and the reasons for it must be made public. Within two days, detailed information has to be provided to parliament. And, if parliament isn't sitting, it has to be called back. We've done it time and time again, so it's not unheard of or controversial.

The bill also makes it crystal clear what information must be provided—like the legal basis for the deployment, where our troops are being sent, how many are involved, how long it's expected to last and why it is necessary—because Australians deserve to know what is being done in their name. It also doesn't just lump everything together with the vagueness that we see from the government at times. Routine, non-warlike deployments, training exercises, diplomatic roles, attachments to Allied forces—those aren't caught up in this. This is specifically about situations that could lead to hostilities, situations where lives are on the line. It doesn't stop at the initial decision either. Every two months, the government has to report back to parliament to give an update of what's changed, if the mission is still justified, what we are trying to achieve and for how long it will continue. That's what ongoing scrutiny looks like, and that's what the Australian people deserve.

As I've said, none of this is radical. In fact, most Australians out there probably assume that that's already how it works. In any other part of life, if you were making a decision with consequences this serious, where people's lives are on the line, you'd expect it to be tested, debated and justified. During the 2025 election, I heard this constantly, people saying, 'Why don't we get a say in this?' That's why we pushed the petition 'War should be debated, not dictated', because Australians instinctively understand that this kind of power shouldn't just sit with one person. We've seen what happens when decisions to go to war aren't properly scrutinised: long, drawn-out conflicts, unclear objectives, lives lost and, afterwards, a lot of questions that come far too late—and maybe a half-arsed apology.

This bill is about asking those questions upfront, right from the beginning. If the case for deployment is strong, then it should be able to stand up here in parliament. If it can't, then we need to seriously question why we're going down this path at all. Is it blind loyalty to our so-called allies, like the United States or Israel? Are we fighting someone else's war? Are we repeating the same mistakes of the past and selling off our sovereignty?

We need to focus on strengthening the legitimacy of the decisions we make in this place and on ensuring that they are always in the best interest of the Australian people. When parliament is involved, when the case is made publicly, when there is transparency and accountability, Australians are more likely to have confidence in the outcome.

At its core, this bill is about trust: trust in our democratic institutions; trust in the representatives elected by the people in both houses; and trust that, when we send Australians in harm's way, it's being done with seriousness, proper scrutiny and the collective responsibility it deserves. War should be debated, not dictated. I commend the Greens for putting up this bill, which is a practical, measured and commonsense step towards making this a reality—because Australians deserve better. Every single person out there who believes in democracy, who believes in our right to protect our people, especially those we're sending into warlike situations, deserves better.