Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2025

Senator GREEN (Queensland—Assistant Minister for Tourism, Assistant Minister for Pacific Island Affairs and Assistant Minister for Northern Australia) (13:10): In the 4½ minutes left for this debate, I was hoping to address the content of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2025 in depth. I was hoping to also talk to the government amendments that have been moved with regard to the sunsetting clause and the PJCIS.

I'm going to address the nature of the debate first, though, because we have allowed Greens members to be added to the list to speak today and we haven't closed off debate, but the commentary from that end of the chamber has been not just misleading of the Senate but wilfully misleading of the Senate. To say that there are no government speakers on the list is wrong and untrue and wilfully misleading.

To say that this is the only opportunity to debate is wrong. The bill was debated in May. It's been on the list since 2025.

To say there's no committee process while also taking up time to avoid a committee process is not just wrong; it is disrespectful to the Senate. And it was said that we have quietly introduced amendments. I wouldn't call providing something with notice in the Hansard, with detailed information about why we're introducing those amendments, 'quietly'.

The truth is the Greens political party seek to talk about the lack of transparency, the lack of accountability and the erosion of democracy while at the same time disrespecting this institution and disrespecting democratic institutions, the Public Service and our intelligence agencies in a way that erodes democracy. You cannot, on one hand, talk about the fact that democracy is being eroded while you are actually actively seeking to do that.

That is what the Greens political party do every single time they come into this chamber, and they should be held accountable for that behaviour. That's why I wanted to address that debate now before moving on to the substantial notion of the bill. There is one other political comment that I need to make before I move on, and that is the voting intention of One Nation.

We have heard so much commentary from One Nation, particularly the leader, Pauline Hanson, but also other members of One Nation, about how they are so black and white when it comes to supporting national security and protecting Australians from terrorism. But today what they will do is seek to water down this bill and, if they don't get their amendments up, they will vote against a piece of legislation designed to protect our national security.

That's exactly what One Nation does. They say one thing outside of this chamber, and then they come in here and do the exact opposite, every single time. And now we have them here again doing exactly the same thing.

The government will be seeking to move amendments that ensure that a sunset clause exists for these powers and to ensure that the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security statutory review of operational effectiveness and the implications of the compulsory questioning powers occurs two years after the commencement of this bill. On the nature of the rest of the amendments, I won't go into them, but I will remind my colleagues that the Director-General of Security stated in his annual threat assessment in 2025: Australia is facing multifaceted, merging, intersecting, concurrent and cascading threats.

ASIO need the powers to ensure that they can protect Australians from the threats to security. We heard comments about the Prime Minister from these people at the end of the chamber, and I want to put on the record that the Prime Minister is a man of integrity. He is the person who has spoken and met with people who have been harmed by extremist violence in our country.

He has met those victims and he has talked to them personally. The Prime Minister is committed, above all else, to protecting Australians and keeping them safe and ensuring that our national security agencies have the powers that they require to do that exact thing—keep Australians safe. Debate interrupted.