Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus No. 1) Bill 2026

Senator COLLINS (New South Wales—Deputy Opposition Whip in the Senate) (18:58): I also rise to speak to the Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus No.1) Bill 2026. We heard from my colleague Senator Blyth before that, yes, much of this bill is technical or procedural and the coalition does support the modernisation, clarification and improvement of the Commonwealth criminal justice system policing and prosecution laws.

This bill does have some practical amendments dealing with AFP powers at the Western Sydney airport, ACT policing, drug offence thresholds, arrest powers and other legislation. The coalition's position is always that we want to keep Australians safer. That has never, ever been more important.

The threat environment is increasing here in Australia. This is the natural home of the coalition—the Liberals and the Nationals—who have a proud record of keeping this country safe. So when Labor steps up to the plate with an omnibus bill with national security measures we must scrutinise them absolutely and completely.

We must be alert and alive to the fact that they might not all be technical or procedural measures. They might not all be non-controversial matters. Labor are very, very good at sneaking in measures that they've wanted for a long time but have never had the guts to make their intentions very clear on at all.

So it deserves proper scrutiny, not guillotining. We must always understand the intention of every single part of bills, especially omnibus bills, and the unintended consequences. Because of this, the opposition will move amendments to ensure significant changes to the operational capabilities of the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission get the scrutiny they deserve and need and that the expanded extradition arrest powers remain subject to appropriate parliamentary review.

We must be able to continually examine the changes to ensure that there are no unintended consequences and that the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission is placed under the correct legislative instrument. The coalition will also ask questions in the committee stage relating to schedule 3 and the changes to the Director of Public Prosecutions Act 1983 in relation to conflicts of interests.

That's because changes of this significance should not be bundled into an omnibus bill containing largely technical and procedural amendments. Whenever parliament expands powers of ministers, those extra new powers must be properly rationalised and safeguarded. We don't just trust them; we scrutinise them.

Omnibus legislation is fine for amendments that are technical, administrative or consequential, but omnibus bills should not become a way to reduce scrutiny of significant policy changes involving important matters like intelligence agencies, law enforcement powers, ministerial powers or fundamental rights and liberties and they shouldn't make significant changes like these go unnoticed.

The coalition has consistently supported strong national security laws and backed Australia's intelligence, policing and prosecution agencies with the powers needed to confront terrorism, serious organised crime, cybercrime, child exploitation, drug trafficking and other serious offending—in other words, the scum of Australian society—and we will never apologise for that.

Stronger powers keep Australians safe, but stronger powers need strong safeguards, proper accountability and rigorous parliamentary scrutiny. They must work together. They can consistently work together.

Proper scrutiny is good. It makes for better legislation. We can identify the unintended consequences and we can build public confidence in the integrity and effectiveness of Australia's national security framework.

Good legislation should be assessed against operational experience rather than enacted and forgotten, particularly where it expands coercive powers. Let's remember that this government had over four years to do this. It failed to deliver on reform that it promised years ago, and here we are at the eleventh hour again rushing a massive bill through that hasn't had the proper scrutiny that it deserves.

The threat environment has rapidly changed, and serious and organised crime continues to evolve. Terrorism continues to evolve, child exploitation—the list goes on. Our government should be keeping pace well before the deadlines arise, but here we are.

Again, the coalition is cleaning up their mess, having to tell them how to get their national security legislation right. The government has said that there is a need for a modern, coherent electronic surveillance framework, yet almost four years after taking office there is still no comprehensive legislation package and no clear timetable for reform. The extension of the sunset clause keeps the powers alive, but it does not substitute for comprehensive reform.

We can't just sit here with the national security legislation going from sunset clause to sunset clause while the government postpones the hard work and the hard decisions of keeping laws modern and responsive to the threats—ahead of the threats—that we are facing. The opposition will move an amendment in the Committee of the Whole requiring a parliamentary review of schedule 4 amendments.

This is the scrutiny that it needs, and it means that the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee, or another committee appointed by resolution of the Senate, will begin an inquiry into the operation of the amendments within two years of their commencement. We need to understand if there are any unintended consequences of the legislation that this government is putting through, particularly in relation to the expanded extradition arrest powers.

The coalition's amendment would require the inquiry to examine the operational effect of this particular schedule. This is an important and sensible accountability measure. Going through the inquiry doesn't delay the opportunity for the police and agencies to do the work but just makes sure that the parliament can examine the bill and how it's operating in practice.

The coalition supports extending the cyber disruption powers because they are needed and they are effective. We support Australia's police, intelligence and law enforcement agencies to have the capabilities that they need to keep Australians safe and protected from the scum that I referred to before, but we also require significant changes to the operational capabilities of ASIC to receive special scrutiny on the arrest powers that have been identified in this bill.

The government has to deliver on the comprehensive reform of Australia's national security legislation environment. Extending sunset clauses is not real reform. As Australia's national security challenges continue to evolve, our laws must evolve with them but also be ahead of the game.

For those reasons and for the reasons of proper scrutiny of entire elements of this bill, the coalition urges the government to support the opposition's amendments. We will seek answers to questions on schedule 3 related to changes with the Director of Public Prosecutions in relation to conflicts of interest.