All changes made to the description and title of this
division.
View division
|
Edit description
| Change |
Division |
|
senate vote 2022-11-22#4
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2023-01-06 11:19:33
|
Title
Committees — Procedure Committee; Reference- Committees - Procedure Committee - Reference
Description
<p class="speaker">Malcolm Roberts</p><p>I seek leave to amend business of the Senate notice of motion No. 2 relating to a reference to the Senate Standing Committee on Procedure. The amendment changes the return date from 1 February 2023 to 31 March 2023.</p>-
- The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?id=2022-11-22.115.2) introduced by Queensland Senator [Malcolm Roberts](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/queensland/malcolm_roberts), which means it passed and the matters below will be examined by the [Procedure Committee](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Procedure).
- ### Motion text
- > *That the following matter be referred to the Procedure Committee for inquiry and report by 31 March 2023:*
- >
- > *(1) The appropriate terms to establish a procedure in the standing orders through which:*
- >
- >> *(a) senators can confidentially and privately review documents subject to an order for production that a Minister believes would be against the public interest to table; and*
- >>
- >> *(b) after the documents have been made available for review, the Senate can reject a Minister's public interest claim against disclosure and order the tabling of the documents.*
- >
- > *(2) Whether the procedure in paragraph (1) is appropriate having regard to the balance between the Senate's constitutional power as the house of review, the necessity of senators to be properly informed of sensitive issues to make informed decisions and the protection of the public interest from public disclosure of sensitive information.*
<p>Leave granted.</p><p>I move the motion as amended:</p><p class="italic">That the following matter be referred to the Procedure Committee for inquiry and report by 31 March 2023:</p><p class="italic">(1) The appropriate terms to establish a procedure in the standing orders through which:</p><p class="italic">(a) senators can confidentially and privately review documents subject to an order for production that a Minister believes would be against the public interest to table; and</p><p class="italic">(b) after the documents have been made available for review, the Senate can reject a Minister's public interest claim against disclosure and order the tabling of the documents.</p><p class="italic">(2) Whether the procedure in paragraph (1) is appropriate having regard to the balance between the Senate's constitutional power as the house of review, the necessity of senators to be properly informed of sensitive issues to make informed decisions and the protection of the public interest from public disclosure of sensitive information.</p> <p class="speaker">Anthony Chisholm</p><p>CHISHOLM (—Assistant Minister for Education, Assistant Minister for Regional Development and Deputy Manager of Government Business in the Senate) (): I seek leave to make a short statement.</p> <p class="speaker">Sue Lines</p><p>Leave is granted for one minute.</p> <p class="speaker">Anthony Chisholm</p><p>Claims of public interest immunity made by ministers in response to orders for the production of documents balance transparency with a recognised position that there is information held by government that it would not be in the public interest to disclose. This includes documents that would put our national security or defence at risk, prejudice an investigation by a law enforcement agency or an ongoing judicial process or put public safety at risk. Senator Roberts proposes upending this process.</p><p>The Procedure Committee and other committees have already extensively inquired into the making of public interest immunity claims and the procedures for dealing them. I strongly encourage the opposition as a party of government to reconsider its support for these changes. In just the last parliament alone, those opposite issued claims of public interest immunity in response to 40 per cent of Senate orders for the production of documents. Now they are proposing to support Senator Roberts to erode these protections. The opposition should put responsibility ahead of political opportunity. <i>(Time expired)</i></p> <p class="speaker">Sue Lines</p><p>The question is that Business of the Senate No. 2, as amended by Senator Roberts, be agreed to.</p><p></p><p></p> -
-
|