How Andrew McLachlan voted compared to someone who believes that there should be more scrutiny or oversight of the actions and powers of Australian intelligence and law enforcement agencies, including the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO), the Australian Secret Intelligence Service (ASIS) and the Australian Federal Police (AFP)

Division Andrew McLachlan Supporters vote Division outcome

10th Dec 2020, 1:09 PM – Senate Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill 2020 - Third Reading - Pass the bill

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of passing the bill in the Senate. Because the bill has already passed in the House of Representatives, it can now become law.

What does this bill do?

According to the bills digest:

The purpose of the Bill is to amend the Act to replace the existing framework for questioning warrants and questioning and detention warrants with a revised questioning warrant framework, make related changes to the Act and other legislation, and amend provisions in the Act relating to the use of surveillance devices.

Changes include:

  • expanding the purposes of questioning from terrorism offences to politically motivated violence, espionage and foreign interference
  • lowering the minimum age for the subject of a warrant from 16 to 14 years of age
  • having the Attorney-General issue warrants directly in place of an issuing authority
  • allowing for requests for warrants to be made, and warrants to be issued, orally in some circumstances
  • creating a new framework to allow the use of certain tracking devices by ASIO with internal authorisation from higher level officers (currently the use of such devices requires a warrant)
Yes No Passed by a modest majority

10th Dec 2020, 1:04 PM – Senate Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill 2020 - in Committee - Oversight

Show detail

The majority voted against amendments introduced by SA Senator Rex Patrick (Independent), which means they failed.

What did these amendment do?

According to Senator Patrick, the amendments:

propose that the parliament expand the mandate of the PJCIS to include review of intelligence agency operations and not be limited to scrutiny of just administrative and financial matters.

What does this bill do?

According to the bills digest:

The purpose of the Bill is to amend the Act to replace the existing framework for questioning warrants and questioning and detention warrants with a revised questioning warrant framework, make related changes to the Act and other legislation, and amend provisions in the Act relating to the use of surveillance devices.

Changes include:

  • expanding the purposes of questioning from terrorism offences to politically motivated violence, espionage and foreign interference
  • lowering the minimum age for the subject of a warrant from 16 to 14 years of age
  • having the Attorney-General issue warrants directly in place of an issuing authority
  • allowing for requests for warrants to be made, and warrants to be issued, orally in some circumstances
  • creating a new framework to allow the use of certain tracking devices by ASIO with internal authorisation from higher level officers (currently the use of such devices requires a warrant)
No Yes Not passed by a modest majority

10th Dec 2020, 12:48 PM – Senate Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill 2020 - Second Reading - Agree with bill's main idea

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion to read the bill for a second time. In other words, they voted to agree with the main idea of the bill. The Senate can now consider the bill in more detail.

What does this bill do?

According to the bills digest:

The purpose of the Bill is to amend the Act to replace the existing framework for questioning warrants and questioning and detention warrants with a revised questioning warrant framework, make related changes to the Act and other legislation, and amend provisions in the Act relating to the use of surveillance devices.

Changes include:

  • expanding the purposes of questioning from terrorism offences to politically motivated violence, espionage and foreign interference
  • lowering the minimum age for the subject of a warrant from 16 to 14 years of age
  • having the Attorney-General issue warrants directly in place of an issuing authority
  • allowing for requests for warrants to be made, and warrants to be issued, orally in some circumstances
  • creating a new framework to allow the use of certain tracking devices by ASIO with internal authorisation from higher level officers (currently the use of such devices requires a warrant)
Yes No Passed by a modest majority

3rd Sep 2020, 4:35 PM – Senate Australian Citizenship Amendment (Citizenship Cessation) Bill 2020 - in Committee - PJCIS oversight

Show detail

The majority voted against amendments introduced by South Australian Senator Rex Patrick (Independent), which means they failed. According to Senator Patrick:

this is an amendment that seeks to enable the PJCIS [Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security] to have operational oversight of our intelligence services.

Amendment text

(1) Schedule 1, page 19 (after line 25) , after the heading specifying Intelligence Services Act 2001 , insert:

14A Paragraph 29(1) (a)

After "to review the", insert "activities,".

(2) Schedule 1, Part 1, page 20 (after line 2), at the end of the Part, add:

15A Subsections 29(3) and (4)

Repeal the subsections, substitute:

(3) The functions of the Committee do not include:

(a) reviewing information provided by, or by an agency of, a foreign government where that government does not consent to the disclosure of the information; or

(b) conducting inquiries into individual complaints about the activities of ASIO, ASIS, AGO, DIO, ASD, ONI, AFP or the Immigration and Border Protection Department.

15B After section 29

Insert:

29A Ceasing or suspending review of agency activities

(1) If:

(a) the Committee undertakes a review under section 29 of an activity by ASIO, ASIS, AGO, DIO, ASD or ONI; and

(b) the relevant responsible Minister is of the opinion that:

(i) the activity is an ongoing operation; and

(ii) the review would interfere with the proper performance by the relevant body of its functions or otherwise prejudice Australia's national security or the conduct of Australia's foreign relations;

the Minister may give to the Committee a certificate in relation to the matter stating the Minister's opinion and the reasons for it.

(2) A decision of the Minister under subsection (1) must not be questioned in any court or tribunal.

(3) Where the Minister gives a certificate under subsection (1) in relation to a review, the Committee must cease or suspend the review.

(4) If the Minister:

(a) becomes aware that the activity is no longer ongoing; or

(b) is no longer of the opinion that the review would interfere with the proper performance by the relevant body of its functions or otherwise prejudice Australia's national security or the conduct of Australia's foreign relations;

the Minister must, within 28 days after becoming aware of the fact or forming the view:

(c) revoke the certificate; and

(d) inform the Committee in writing.

(5) If the Minister revokes a certificate in accordance with subsection (4), the Committee may proceed with the review, or commence a new review into the activity.

No Yes Not passed by a modest majority

How "voted very strongly against" is worked out

The MP's votes count towards a weighted average where the most important votes get 50 points, less important votes get 10 points, and less important votes for which the MP was absent get 2 points. In important votes the MP gets awarded the full 50 points for voting the same as the policy, 0 points for voting against the policy, and 25 points for not voting. In less important votes, the MP gets 10 points for voting with the policy, 0 points for voting against, and 1 (out of 2) if absent.

Then, the number gets converted to a simple english language phrase based on the range of values it's within.

No of votes Points Out of
Most important votes (50 points)      
MP voted with policy 0 0 0
MP voted against policy 0 0 0
MP absent 0 0 0
Less important votes (10 points)      
MP voted with policy 0 0 0
MP voted against policy 4 0 40
Less important absentees (2 points)      
MP absent* 0 0 0
Total: 0 40

*Pressure of other work means MPs or Senators are not always available to vote – it does not always indicate they have abstained. Therefore, being absent on a less important vote makes a disproportionatly small difference.

Agreement score = MP's points / total points = 0 / 40 = 0.0%.

And then