Maria Kovacic (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Women) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2025. This bill deals with very important matters: the security of our nation, the powers available to our intelligence agencies and the safeguards that must accompany those powers. At the heart of this debate is the compulsory questioning warrant framework under the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979. These are significant powers. They allow ASIO, with the approval of the Attorney-General and a prescribed authority, to compel a person to appear for questioning and provide information relevant to serious national and security threats. In practical terms, they allow ASIO to require a person to answer questions or produce documents where voluntary cooperation is insufficient. These powers are not ordinary. They are not routine and should never be treated as such. We are very mindful that there need to be very serious safeguards and checks around them.

We should also not pretend that the security environment facing Australia is ordinary or routine either. The world has changed dramatically even since these powers were first legislated in 2003 in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The purpose of the compulsory questioning framework was to address a specific operational gap: ASIO's inability to obtain critical intelligence from individuals who refuse to cooperate voluntarily. The gap mattered then and the gap still matters now. Australia continues to face a complex and volatile national security environment. The threats before us are not confined to terrorism alone. They include espionage, foreign interference, politically and religiously motivated violence, sabotage, attacks on our defence systems, threats to territorial and border integrity and the promotion of communal violence. These are not abstract risks. They are real challenges faced by our intelligence and security agencies every single day.

The bill before us was introduced in the House of Representatives on 23 July 2025. It follows the earlier Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment (No. 1) Bill 2025, which temporarily extended the compulsory questioning warrant framework through to 7 March 2027. This second bill encompasses three broad sets of changes. Firstly, in its original form, it would make ASIO's compulsory questioning powers permanent. These powers have existed since 2003 but have been subject to ongoing extensions by parliament. Secondly, the bill would expand the scope of adult questioning warrants. At present, the definition of an adult questioning matter includes espionage, politically motivated violence and acts of foreign interference. This bill would add further heads of security, including sabotage, the promotion of communal violence, attacks on Australia's defence system and serious threats to Australia's territorial and border integrity.

Thirdly, the bill would strengthen a number of oversight, reporting and administrative safeguards. In particular, it would amend eligibility and termination provisions for prescribed authorities, who are responsible for conducting questioning, to ensure their independence and impartiality. It would also provide for additional reporting to the Attorney-General and require postcharge questioning to occur before a retired judge.

These are important matters, and the opposition has considered them carefully. In a general sense, the coalition recognises the ongoing importance of ASIO's compulsory questioning powers. They remain a core part of Australia's national security framework. In certain circumstances they may be essential to ensuring that ASIO can obtain information necessary to protect Australians. But our support for strong national security laws has always been accompanied by a commitment to strong oversight. That is particularly important where laws involve extraordinary powers.

That is why these issues were rightly examined through the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security. During that inquiry, the committee heard evidence from a range of witnesses, including ASIO, and considered the concerns raised by individuals and organisations. Some argued that compulsory questioning powers are excessive powers for an intelligence agency to possess. Others argued that they should not be broadened. Some pointed to the fact that the powers had been used only infrequently over the past two decades and suggested that this demonstrates they are not necessary.

But there is another view, and it is one that the coalition considers to be persuasive. The fact that these powers have been used only around 20 times over 22 years does not in itself prove that they are unnecessary. In fact, it can point to the opposite conclusion. It suggests, including because of the existence of a sunsetting arrangement, that the powers have not been used recklessly. It suggests that they have been used sparingly, carefully and in a targeted way. That is exactly how powers of this kind should be used. They should be available, but only where they are genuinely necessary. They should serve as a last-resort capability, not as a routine investigative mechanism.

There are also important safeguards that remain in place. The Attorney-General must be satisfied that the issuing of a compulsory questioning warrant is necessary. The Office of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security retains a central oversight role. IGIS may be present at questioning sessions and provide real-time oversight. Prescribed authorities will continue to have an important independent function, and the bill proposes to strengthen arrangements governing their appointment and activities. It also remains the case that ASIO is an intelligence agency, not a law enforcement agency. ASIO cannot arrest, charge or prosecute. It also cannot gather evidence for the purpose of criminal persecution. Its operations remain subject to oversight by bodies, including IGIS, the Administrative Review Tribunal, the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security and the Attorney-General.

These safeguards are very important, but they also require ongoing checks and scrutiny in our parliament. That is why the coalition's position on this bill is clear. We support the substance of it and accept that ASIO must be equipped to respond to the increasingly complex and dangerous threat environment facing Australia. We also accept that the expansion of questioning matters is, in principle, a reasonable response to the changing nature of national security threats.

The proposed amendments to oversight and administrative arrangements are also broadly sensible. However, we do not accept that these powers should operate indefinitely without further parliamentary review. The coalition's position is that a sunset clause must remain in the bill. We therefore call for the amendment to retain a sunset clause for three years, and we are thankful the government has agreed to this call. Subject to the passage of that amendment, the opposition will support the remaining measures in the bill.

This is a balanced position. It recognises that Australia's intelligence laws must keep pace with the threat environment and that ASIO must have the legal tools necessary to protect the Australian people. But it also recognises that strong powers must be matched by strong oversight. The continuation of the sunset clause ensures that parliament must revisit the operation of these powers. It means current and future parliamentarians must assess whether the powers remain necessary, effective and appropriately limited. A three-year sunset clause strikes the right balance. It allows the powers to continue operating and acknowledges the seriousness of the threat environment, but it also guarantees that parliament will have a continuing opportunity to review the regime. That is consistent with the way these powers have been treated since they were first introduced by the Howard government. They have been subject to periodic review and renewal, and that model has served Australia well.

The coalition believes it is the most fundamental responsibility of any government to keep Australians safe. We also believe in ensuring ASIO possesses the capabilities it needs to identify and respond to serious threats before they materialise. However, national security—