Andrew Wilkie (Clark, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I move amendments (1) to (5) as circulated in my name together:

(1) Schedule 1, page 34 (after line 1), after item 80, insert:

80A After section 63

Insert:

63A Requirement to publish reasons for exemption certificates

(1) If the Treasurer gives an exemption certificate under section 57, 58 or 59, the Treasurer must, as soon as practicable after giving the certificate, ensure that the following are published on a website maintained by the Department:

(a) the exemption certificate;

(b) the reasons for deciding to give the certificate, including the reasons for any conditions specified in the certificate.

(2) If the Treasurer varies or revokes an exemption certificate under section 62, the Treasurer must, as soon as practicable after giving the variation or revocation, ensure that the following are published on a website maintained by the Department:

(a) the exemption certificate as varied, or a statement that the exemption certificate has been revoked (as the case requires); and

(b) the reasons for deciding to vary or revoke the certificate, including the reasons for any conditions specified on the varied certificate.

(3) The Treasurer may redact from an exemption certificate or reasons required to be published under subsection (1) or (2), any information that would be contrary to the national interest to publicly disclose.

(2) Schedule 1, page 48 (after line 3), at the end of Subdivision B of Division 2 of Part 3, add:

76B Requirement to publish reasons for no objection notifications

(1) If the Treasurer gives a no objection notification under this Subdivision, the Treasurer must, as soon as practicable after giving the notification, ensure the following are published on a website maintained by the Department:

(a) the no objection notification;

(b) the reasons for deciding to give the no objection notification, including the reasons for any conditions specified in the notification.

(2) If the Treasurer varies a no objection notification under subsection 74(4), the Treasurer must, as soon as practicable after giving the variation, ensure that the following are published on website maintained by the Department:

(a) the no objection notification as varied;

(b) the reasons for deciding to vary the no objection notification, including the reasons for revoking or varying an existing condition specified in the no objection notification, or for imposing a new condition.

(3) The Treasurer may redact from a no objection notification or reasons required to be published under subsection (1) or (2), any information that would be contrary to the national interest to publicly disclose.

(3) Schedule 1, item 132, page 67 (after line 9), after subsection 79M(1), insert:

Requirement to include reasons for orders

(1A) The Treasurer must ensure that an order registered under subsection (1) includes the Treasurer's reasons for making the order.

(1B) The Treasurer may redact from the reasons required to be included in the order under subsection (1A), any information that would be contrary to the national interest to publicly disclose.

(4) Schedule 1, item 132, page 71 (after line 6), after subsection 79S(1), insert:

Requirement to include reasons for directions

(1A) The Treasurer must ensure that a direction that is published under subsection (1) includes the Treasurer's reasons for making the direction.

(1B) The Treasurer may redact from the reasons required to be included in the direction under subsection (1), any information that would be contrary to the national interest to publicly disclose.

(5) Schedule 1, item 132, page 72 (after line 6), after subsection 79U(3), insert:

(3A) The Treasurer must ensure that a variation or revocation hat is published under subsection (3) includes the Treasurer's reasons for making the variation or revocation.

(3B) The Treasurer may redact from the reasons required to be included in the variation or revocation under subsection (3A), any information that would be contrary to the national interest to publicly disclose.

The bill before the House obviously provides the Treasurer with enormous power and discretion. It allows the Treasurer to impose conditions, to vary existing conditions and, as a last resort, to force the divestment of any realised investment where national security concerns are identified. It also provides the Treasurer with greater enforcement, monitoring and investigative powers to respond to actual or likely noncompliance by investors, including call-in powers to review certain actions not otherwise captured under the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975. If the public is to have confidence that these powers are being wielded responsibly, we must know when and why the Treasurer uses this power and discretion. To that end, my amendments will ensure that the decisions and reasons for the decisions made by the Treasurer under this act will be on the public record.

Moreover, these amendments are particularly important because of the loose definitions of 'national security' or 'decisions not contrary to national security' that are used to initiate the new national security test. There have been many occasions over the past 10 years on which I voted against legislation that erodes civil rights and the freedom of the press in the name of national security. I've also voted against the barbaric treatment of asylum seekers and refugees that has been actioned in the name of national security. And I've voted against the unfettered and unprecedented levels of power given to ministers and our security agencies in the name of national security but without accountability or independent review.

I want to know, and I think the community wants to know, what the government considers to be contrary to the national interest and what actions by foreign investors give rise to national security concerns. Too often the government has used the term 'national security' to protect its own interests. The public disclosure of this information that I propose this afternoon would provide some surety for foreign investors intending to invest in Australia and also build public trust that the decisions made under the foreign investment framework are warranted. Indeed, without these amendments, how do we know that decision-makers will not use these legislative powers to help out their mates or perhaps the large political donors at the next election? The half-baked ICAC proposal by the government is certainly not going to provide any comfort to the community. In fact, without a federal ICAC we really need all the decisions made at the discretion of ministers to be on the public record.

By the end of 2019, the total current foreign investment in Australia had reached $3.8 trillion. There is no doubt that foreign investment is increasingly complex, particularly in this climate of rapidly changing technology and shifts in our international security settings. Foreign ownership or control of strategic assets, prime agricultural land and residential property has been especially problematic in recent years. The 99-year lease of the Darwin Port, which is a significant defence asset, and the sale of Van Diemen's Land Company, Australia's biggest dairy asset, are obvious examples. I believe that the sale of these assets to foreign interests are clearly inconsistent with Australia's national interest and public expectation. This is one of the reasons I agree the Treasurer should have increased powers and discretion, outlined in this bill.

I support the bill, but I want to know, and the community wants to know, what decisions are made and for what reason these extensive powers are enacted under this legislation. I believe the community, business and industry, as well as foreign investors, would want to know. These amendments provide for that clarity and transparency. I hope they get the support of both major parties, because surely the government and the opposition would realise by now how important transparency is to the Australian community. In essence, I just want the Treasurer's decisions and the reasons for those decisions to be on the public record, available through a publicly accessible website so we just know what's going on and why it's going on.

Lucy Wicks (Robertson, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the amendments be disagreed to.

Bill agreed to.