Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We tried in committee to at least fix some of this bill by preventing it just being a Labor-Liberal stitch-up and you are having none of that. So we're now left with a situation where, as this government has decided to join an illegal war, this parliament is looking to set up a secret closed-shop committee for two of the war parties—you might invite the third war party in due course—the Labor and the Liberal parties, to work out how we should back in the next illegal war from Donald Trump, the next illegal war from Benjamin Netanyahu. As Greens, we're going to have none of that.

We are the only party in this place that is committed to peace, not war. We seem to be the only party in this place that can see the obscene dangers, the bluster, the violence, the threats of Donald Trump. We see him not as a dependable ally, which is how Labor and the coalition see him, but as a dangerous threat to world peace. In fact, when the Australian public are asked about who the greatest threat to world peace on the planet is, they don't point where Labor and the coalition want them to point to, or One Nation; they point to Donald Trump. And they demand of this place to at least have the imagination to think about an Australian defence and foreign policy that isn't tied at the hip to a dangerous, increasingly despotic, random, violent man who seems to be want to visit war, assassinations and arbitrary power on whoever he chooses in the world regardless of international law and constraints.

Increasingly, we see the US's partner of choice in their wars being Israel. We saw the US Secretary of State in just the last few hours come out and criticise the United States' allies, the UK in particular, because they haven't shown the same commitment that Israel has shown to support illegal wars, to ignore the constraints on international conflict, and to not want to openly target hospitals, schools and civilian infrastructure. The United States is clearly saying that it wants more of that, more of those illegal, unrestrained wars wherever they choose against whoever they choose.

While the Albanese government has been hiding, while Foreign Minister Wong has been refusing to make any statement about the legality of the current appalling conflict—the bombings and the missiles coming from the United States and Israel against Iran. Instead, she says, 'Well, that is a matter for the United States to work out—if it is lawful or not.' Last time I checked, international law was only supported when the international community stood up and supported it. To simply contract out our morality and our thinking to the United States on whether this is legal or not is a gross breach of duty from the Foreign minister and from the Prime Minister.

This is an illegal war based on lies. The current lies are that this was required to deal with an imminent threat from Iran's nuclear capacity. I mean, Donald Trump just barely, not even a week ago, in the State of the Union address told his own congress that the United States had 'obliterated' Iran's nuclear capacity. He said that repeatedly. So which current lie from Donald Trump should we believe—that he has obliterated the Iranian nuclear capacity or that it is an imminent threat to world peace? Which lie is Anthony Albanese, the Prime Minister, relying on? Is it the most recent lie from Donald Trump that it's an imminent threat, or is it the earlier lie about the obliteration? What is the basis for the Prime Minister and the Foreign minister to come out and tell the Australian public repeatedly that this war is somehow justified to deal with an imminent threat from Iran's nuclear capacity? How do they square that with Donald Trump's statement from barely a week ago that he had obliterated that? We can see these lies in plain sight. You can see them in plain sight. And then we have the Australian government here, the Labor government, and the coalition and One Nation—the war parties—giving false hope to the Iranian diaspora that this is about regime change and democracy.

In the last 24 hours, we've seen the United States, Donald Trump and the Secretary of War clearly say they're not interested in regime change and they're not interested in democracy. It's about the raw exercise of US power. They have said it clearly. How many times are we going to watch the United States betray people? They betrayed the people of Afghanistan. They betrayed the people of Iraq. They betrayed the Kurds and others in Syria, and they're in the process of betraying the people of Iran. It's as sure as night follows day that, as soon as Donald Trump loses interest in this campaign or he starts seeing the 24-hour news cycle spinning the wrong way while he's eating his burgers late at night, he'll just dump the Iranian people. He'll drop them like a gun. That's what he'll do. Then we'll have our prime minister and our Foreign minister and our deputy prime minister spinning wildly to try and come up and agree with the latest fantasy coming out of Donald Trump and the United States and desperately say that that was the plan all along—it was never about democracy and it was never about regime change; it was about destroying the already destroyed nuclear capability and destroying the Iranian defence forces. They will desperately spin it that that's what it was all the time—just watch! Watch how the lies morph and change as this conflict rolls out and as the violence spreads across the Middle East.

Will the Australian Labor government and its supporters in the coalition and in One Nation share any responsibility for the lives lost in the countries surrounding Iran as the conflict spreads? No. Will they say a single word today about the Lebanese lives lost in Israeli attacks on Beirut and Southern Lebanon? No. We can pretty much guarantee they won't, because the three war parties are all fine with Israel continuing repeatedly to bomb and kill in Lebanon. That's what you do—you back in these illegal wars.

We see you. We see you for your warmongering and your moral cowardice and your hypocrisy, and, perhaps, at the centre of this hypocrisy is that you are backing in Israel to attack Iran for Iran's potential, at some point, to have an illegal nuclear weapons program when Israel, right now, has hundreds of nuclear weapons in breach of the non-proliferation treaty and illegal under international law. And what? It's just 'nobody mention it'? It's really the emperor has no clothes and nobody mention that we're backing one nation with illegal nuclear weapons to attack another nation so it doesn't get illegal nuclear weapons, and somehow we're just not meant to mention that the first one has nuclear weapons?

If you want the ultimate irony in all of this, which country gave Iran its first nuclear reactor? Let's try and think—which country gave Iran the first nuclear reactor? The United States, when they had their own little despot in place and they wanted them to have a nuclear reactor in the 1950s. The layers of deceit and betrayal and hypocrisy—they just stink. I'll finish with this. If the war weren't illegal in the first place—and it so clearly was; its purpose is might and power, disconnected with any even vague excuse of legality—the war is now being conducted by the United States in gross breach of international law.

Foreign Minister Wong, Prime Minister Albanese and Defence Minister Marles are saying nothing. Well, while they're saying nothing, this is what the US secretary of War said just a few hours ago:

America, regardless of what so-called international institutions say, is unleashing the most lethal and precise air power campaign in history. B-2s, fighters, drones, missiles, and of course classified effects. All on our terms with maximum authorities. No stupid rules of engagement, no nation-building quagmire, no democracy building exercise, no politically correct wars. We fight to win, and we don't waste time or lives.

They have said it with utter clarity. They don't think they're bound by international law. They don't think they're bound by the rules of engagement such as proportionality. They don't think they have to protect civilians. They have no time for those rules of restraint in wars. They are fighting a brutal, illegal war, and who will be at the front line of that brutal, illegal war? It will be civilians in Iran, people trying to keep their families are safe, dads worried about their kids, kids worried about their parents, uncles and aunties worried about who will be coming together to share a collective family meal, people desperately anxious about their kids at school and their relatives in hospital as the bombs and the missiles rained down with no rules to constrain them, because the United States have said they are not bound by these rules and, to their utter, contemptible shame, the Albanese government is backing this in.

You are making the world less safe. You are making Australia less safe. You are backing in two violent, aggressive regimes who show no restraint, and you pretend that you have the best interests of Australia at heart. We see you. We see the war parties and we despise what you're doing.

Steph Hodgins-May (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Over the weekend, we have been reminded why decisions about war, intelligence and military power must never be made in the shadows. We watched the United States and Israel launch coordinated military strikes on Iran in an unrestrained and unprecedented violent escalation in a region already at breaking point. This was another decision made in closed rooms by powerful men, with consequences that will be now paid for in civilian bloodshed.

This is what the modern war machine looks like: two global military forces converging with overwhelming power and acting with remarkable confidence that there will be no meaningful democratic resistance or scrutiny. If anyone believed that the era—

Dave Sharma (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Hodgins-May, please resume your seat. Minister, on a point of order?

Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The point of order is relevance. Senator Shoebridge made an entire contribution without making any reference that I heard to the bill for the chamber. The senator on her feet now appears to be going down the same path. I wonder if we could ask senators to make contributions about the bill before us.

Dave Sharma (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will seek advice from—Senator Scarr on the point of order?

Paul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order, I note that the senator has only had 53 seconds so far to give her contribution.

Dave Sharma (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm going to seek the advice of the Clerk. Senator Hodgins-May, you can resume the call. This is just a reminder that we are debating the third reading of the bill before the chamber currently.

Steph Hodgins-May (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you. At the heart of what I'm saying is the need for military oversight at this time more than ever, and so I think it is entirely relevant to the discussion that is being had.

If anyone believed that the era of imperial interventions was behind us, that illusion has well and truly evaporated. We cannot be clearer—the Iranian people have endured decades of repression under a brutal and totalitarian regime. Women have been beaten and imprisoned for demanding basic rights. Protesters have been silenced, journalists jailed, minorities persecuted—the struggle for Iranian liberation is real and it deserves solidarity. But you do not bomb your way to peace. You do not drop explosives on a country and claim to speak on behalf of its people. Regime change imposed from the sky is not liberation; it's chaos.

The United States does not have the interests of the Iranian people at heart, and that is becoming increasingly clear. An administration that cannot uphold human rights within its own borders cannot credibly claim to be the guardian of rights overseas. In the US, we have seen migrants brutalised, families separated and state violence excused when politically convenient. Human rights observers have been executed by ICE. This is not a government that gives any thought to, let alone acts upon, humanitarian principles. It is a government that acts solely for its own interests and those of its powerful allies and corporations.

Israel's government, which is still committing an active genocide, is hardly a credible force for democracy.

Dave Sharma (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have a point of order from the minister.

Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise again for a point of order on relevance. The senator has now been speaking for some minutes. She has made no reference to the legislation before the chamber, as did the Greens political party speaker before her. I conclude that this is a desperate attempt to try and stop the progress of this bill. I ask you to draw the senator back to the question.

Dave Sharma (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Minister. Senator Shoebridge, on a point of order?

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

At the core of this bill is setting up a committee to consider ongoing defence issues. We heard that clearly from the minister when she read the terms of reference for the committee. Surely, it's consistent with a third reading to discuss current, ongoing defence issues in light of this committee. I hear my colleague making reference to the secrecy of the committee. It's entirely within the scope of the third reading to discuss current defence issues.

Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

She didn't even read the bill.

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I know it's awkward for the government. I know they want to shut down my colleague, who's doing a great job, but it's entirely within the scope of the third reading.

Dave Sharma (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Scarr, on the point of order before the chamber?

Paul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Just quickly, I did rise initially to give indulgence to the speaker. They'd only been speaking for 53 seconds; it has now been 2½ minutes. I think there is merit in terms of the minister's point of order.

Dave Sharma (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I sought some advice from the Clerk, and you may resume, Senator Hodgins-May. I will remind you that we are debating whether the chamber passes this bill for the third time, so please make sure your comments are tied towards the bill before the chamber.

Steph Hodgins-May (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

These circumstances are exactly why we need more oversight of our military interventions, not less. Once again, we are seeing Australia lining up as the well-behaved lapdog, and I know this is hard for the war party on my left, the Labor Party, to hear, but it is the truth. Instead of condemning this unprecedented and illegal act of war, the Prime Minister rushes to back the United States. The Foreign minister fails to condemn the strikes while invoking the so-called rules based international order. International law cannot be conditional. It cannot apply only to our adversaries. A rules based system that excuses powerful allies while punishing others is not a system of law; it is a system of hierarchy, which is why Australians deserve oversight of the decisions that are being made in their names and by the representatives that they elected to represent them.

Australians deserve to know whether our country has been implicated in these attacks. We deserve to know whether Australian territory and infrastructure at Pine Gap played a role in coordinating the strike. A secret committee will not give us and give Australians the confidence they need about these decisions. If Australian facilities were used, then we are not observers; we are participants. The government should immediately rule out Pine Gap's involvement in acts of war and commit to ensuring Australian soil is never used to facilitate unlawful military action.

Who benefits from this escalation and ongoing secrecy? It's not the Iranian people, who now face the risk of internal instability in a power vacuum, nor the thousands more across the region who will bear the brunt of retaliatory violence. It's not the Iranian schoolgirls—over 100 of whom were killed yesterday when a bomb hit a primary school, not a military target. Fatima al-Zahra Mohammad Ali, a nine-year-old student, was among those killed. A nine-year-old girl was killed by the US and Israel, and her only crime was attending school. As a father of a six-year-old girl killed at the school waited for her body to be removed from the rubble, he said:

I cannot understand how a place where innocent children learn can be bombed like this. We are talking about small children who knew nothing of politics or wars. And yet they are the ones paying the highest price.

We've seen this before in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya—intervention after intervention justified by the language of liberation and ending in protracted violence and civilian casualties, with children and families paying the price.

We need more oversight, not less. Why will we not learn from history? When bombs fall, it's ordinary people who suffer; it is women and children. It is not the architects of war strategy in Washington, Tel Aviv or right here in Australia, in the Australian parliament. It is not the executives in corporate war rooms masquerading as boardrooms, but there is always someone who profits. Global defence corporations, surging oil markets—there is so much money to be made in war by the right people, with the ultimate cost being human lives.

Australia's defence and foreign policy has become entangled with the objectives of the US with no public, transparent debate, and, here we are, listening to one of the war parties trying to reduce transparency even more. AUKUS is another example of absolute self-delusion and self-denial. Hundreds of billions of dollars are being committed to submarines that will never materialise, while people struggle to afford rent, health care and energy bills. You want them to have less oversight and understanding of how their taxpayer dollars are being spent.

We must do everything we can to help the struggle of the Iranian people to promote peace in the region and support their pathway to a safe and fair democracy, but we cannot and we must not become complicit in another bloody American war. We are not at the beck and call of Donald Trump. The answer to an escalating war machine isn't more decisions made in dark war rooms by the global elite. It is not Australia's automatic alignment with everything that the United States does. It is transparency and accountability. It is listening to voices from Iran and across the diaspora, but, above all, it is the bravery to put our own interests and the interests of civilians around the globe ahead of the interests of powerful warmongers. This is the bravery that the Labor government so clearly and utterly lacks at this crucial moment in time.

At precisely the moment when Australians are witnessing how quickly military escalation can occur, this parliament is being asked to endorse another structure in relation to this bill that conducts defence oversight largely out of public view. Accountability cannot simply mean a small group of insiders making decisions behind closed doors. At a time when the world is crying out for de-escalation, diplomacy and independence from powerful interests, this bill risks entrenching quite the opposite—greater secrecy, less visibility and more consolidation of power. The Greens do not support this bill. The Greens do not support an illegal war led by Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu. As a party of peace, we do not support outsourcing international law or the illegal violence and civilian bloodshed that is apparently supported by the war parties in this place: the Labor Party, the Liberal and National parties and One Nation. Shame on them.

Dave Sharma (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the bill be read a third time. Those of that opinion say aye—I'm putting the putting the question, Senator Shoebridge.

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My colleague has a contribution.

Dave Sharma (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I didn't see your colleague standing, Senator Shoebridge. I've put the question before the chamber.

A government senator: Are you desperate to keep it going?

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm not desperate to keep it going. My colleague has a contribution. We thought it was coming to the 1.30 hard time, and we were showing courtesy to the chamber.

Dave Sharma (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, a point of order?

Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senators do have an obligation to pay attention to the business at hand. The question is in the process of being voted upon.

Dave Sharma (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Competition, Charities and Treasury) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It being 1.30 pm, the debate is interrupted. We will be in continuation on this bill.