Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download PDFDownload PDF 

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment

4       Australian Border Force Amendment (Protected Information) Bill 2017

Order of the day read for the adjourned debate on the motion of the Assistant Minister for Social Services and Multicultural Affairs (Senator Seselja)—That this bill be now read a second time.

Debate resumed.

Senator McKim moved the following amendment:

At the end of the motion, add “but the Senate notes the chilling effect that section 42 of the Australian Border Force Act 2015 has had on the immigration debate in Australia and condemns the Government and the Opposition for introducing and supporting the existing section”.

Debate ensued.

Question—That the amendment be agreed to—put.

The Senate divided—

AYES, 7

Senators—

Di Natale

McKim

Rice

Whish-Wilson

Hanson-Young

Rhiannon

Siewert*

 

 

 

NOES, 44

Senators—

Abetz

Farrell

Leyonhjelm

Roberts

Bernardi

Gallacher

McAllister

Ruston

Birmingham

Gallagher

McCarthy

Ryan

Brockman

Georgiou

McGrath

Scullion

Brown

Gichuhi

McKenzie

Singh

Burston

Griff

Moore

Smith

Bushby

Hanson

O’Sullivan

Sterle

Carr

Hinch

Paterson

Urquhart*

Cash

Hume

Payne

Williams

Dodson

Kakoschke-Moore

Pratt

Wong

Duniam

Kitching

Reynolds

Xenophon

* Tellers

Question negatived.

Main question put and passed.

Bill read a second time.

The Senate resolved itself into committee for the consideration of the bill.

 

 

 

In the committee

Bill taken as a whole by leave.

Senator McKim moved the following amendments together by leave:

Schedule 1, item 1, page 3 (lines 9 to 31), omit the definition of Immigration and Border Protection information , substitute:

Immigration and Border Protection information means information of any of the following kinds that was obtained by a person in the person’s capacity as an entrusted person:

                              (a)  information the disclosure of which would or is reasonably likely to damage the security (within the meaning of section 4 of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Act 1979 ) , defence or international relations (within the meaning of section 10 of the National Security Information (Criminal and Civil Proceedings) Act 2004 ) of Australia;

                              (b)  information the disclosure of which would or is reasonably likely to prejudice the prevention, detection or investigation of, or conduct of proceedings relating to, an offence or contravention of a civil penalty provision;

                               (c)  information the disclosure of which would or is reasonably likely to prejudice the protection of public health, or endanger the life or safety of an individual or group of individuals;

                              (d)  information the disclosure of which would or is reasonably likely to found an action by a person (other than the Commonwealth) for breach of a duty of confidence and is damaging to the regulatory function of the Department;

                               (e)  information the disclosure of which would or is reasonably likely to cause competitive detriment to a person;

                               (f)  information of a kind prescribed in an instrument under subsection (7).

Note:         See also subsections (4) to (7).

Schedule 1, item 5, page 4 (line 16) to page 5 (line 7), omit the item, substitute:

5  At the end of section 4

Add:

     (5)   Without limiting the definition of Immigration and Border Protection information in subsection (1), information that has originated with, or been received from an intelligence agency is taken to be information the disclosure of which would or is reasonably likely to prejudice the security, defence or international relations of Australia.

     (6)   Without limiting the definition of Immigration and Border Protection information in subsection (1), information that was provided to the Commonwealth pursuant to a statutory obligation or otherwise by compulsion in law is taken to be information the disclosure of which would or is reasonably likely to found an action by a person (other than the Commonwealth) for breach of duty of confidence.

Debate ensued.

Question—That the amendments be agreed to—put.

The committee divided—

AYES, 8

Senators—

Di Natale

Leyonhjelm

Rhiannon

Siewert*

Hanson-Young

McKim

Rice

Whish-Wilson

 

 

NOES, 31

Senators—

Birmingham

Dodson

Hinch

Pratt

Brockman

Duniam

Hume

Reynolds

Brown

Farrell

Kakoschke-Moore

Roberts

Burston

Fawcett

Lambie

Ryan

Bushby

Gallacher

McAllister

Smith*

Carr

Georgiou

McCarthy

Sterle

Cash

Griff

Moore

Xenophon

Dastyari

Hanson

Paterson

 

* Tellers

Question negatived.

Bill agreed to and reported without amendment.

 

 

 

The Acting Deputy President (Senator Leyonhjelm) resumed the chair and the Temporary Chair of Committees reported accordingly.

On the motion of the Minister for Employment (Senator Cash) the report from the committee was adopted and the bill read a third time.