The Abbott government looks likely to secure bipartisan support for new powers targeting Australians travelling to conflict regions, even as a parliamentary report highlighted that no other comparable country had enacted “no-go zones”.
The opposition has signalled it is prepared to support the government’s foreign fighters bill, so long as the Coalition follows through on the recommendations of a joint committee – including scheduling a review of the powers after the next federal election.
The legislation would create a new offence of advocating terrorism, toughen penalties for Australians who fight with extremist groups overseas, create new international no-go zones for travel without a legitimate reason, extend preventative detention and control order arrangements, and allow police to secretly search properties and notify the person about the warrant later.
It would also allow the collection of photos of millions of Australians at airports, but the bipartisan intelligence and security committee’s report called for an amendment to specifically exclude the storage of fingerprints and iris scans.
The shadow attorney general, Mark Dreyfus, said the committee had recommended “substantial changes” to the counter-terrorism bill before parliamentary debate in the final week of October.
“Provided the government agrees to the recommendations, and provided the government brings forward satisfactory amendments, and provided the government gives the explanations that the committee recommended, I think we could get to a position where Labor will be able to support the bill,” he said on Friday.
Dreyfus said the decision to supporting extending preventative detention and control orders – which were due to expire and be reviewed next year – until two years after the next election, was based on evidence received “both in public and in private” from the Australian federal police and intelligence agencies.
“The committee has concluded based on evidence that it’s received, based on the present circumstances, and the threat that Australia presently faces, that these powers should be retained for the time being,” he said.
Dreyfus said the extension was an improvement on the government’s original proposal to keep the measures in place for another decade.
“The committee has recognised the exceptional nature of these powers and said to the government, these powers should not last longer than two years after the next election, and there should be a review both by the independent monitor and the intelligence committee so that the Australian community can have a further think about whether these powers are still needed,” he said.
The committee’s report did not call for the scrapping of the no-go zone proposal, which carries a 10-year jail term, but suggested the foreign affairs minister should not be able to declare an entire country as off-limits. It also called for a committee review process after each declaration and for the parliament to reconsider the novel law after the next election.
“The committee notes that ‘declared area’ offences of the kind proposed in the bill do not exist in any comparable jurisdictions overseas,” the report said.
The committee, which comprises Labor and Coalition members, accepted the government’s argument that existing foreign incursion laws had “not been strong enough to deal with the current threat posed by Australians travelling overseas to fight in foreign conflicts on behalf of listed terrorist organisations”.
Legal groups and Islamic community representatives have raised concern about the potential for innocent people to be prosecuted and to face difficulty proving they were “solely” in a declared area for one of the listed legitimate reasons.
The committee report said many inquiry participants had “raised concerns about the wide range of legitimate activities not included in the list of exceptions that might require persons to travel to, or remain in, a declared area”.
“Committee members had different views about whether the declared area offence as currently drafted would be an effective and workable provision,” the report said.
“Some members of the committee questioned whether the legitimate concerns presented in evidence had been adequately addressed, particularly in relation to the evidential burden and the limited range of legitimate purposes for travel to declared areas.”
These concerns could be considered in the post-election reviews, the committee decided.
While the opposition described the suggested changes as “substantial”, the government argued the recommendations largely related to “definitional and process issues”.
The attorney general, George Brandis, who will formally respond next week, said the committee did not oppose any of the substantive provisions of the bill.
“Most of the recommendations do not suggest amendment to the legislation itself,” Brandis said. “The report makes 37 recommendations of which the most important is recommendation 37, which is that the parliament pass the bill.”
Brandis praised the opposition for treating the bill with a “bipartisan spirit” and “putting the national interest ahead of party politics”.
He said the government still intended to ensure debate and passage of the bill through parliament in the final week of October.
“This is urgent legislation which deals with a clear and immediate threat for the safety the Australian public,” Brandis said.
Dreyfus said it would be an “unusual step” for the government to reject any of the joint committee’s recommendations, but signalled Labor could still back the bill: “We’ll cross that bridge when we come to it.”
The Greens argued the time frame was “completely inadequate” for proper scrutiny, describing the process as “irresponsible and anti-democratic”. The Greens leader, Christine Milne, called on Labor to “lift its game” and provide proper scrutiny of security legislation.
Labor last month supported the first tranche of reforms expanding the powers of intelligence agencies and criminalising publication of information about special intelligence operations, after minor changes proposed by the same parliamentary committee.
The government does not need to negotiate with Senate crossbenchers to secure passage of any legislation supported by Labor.
Labor renewed its calls for the government to immediately appoint a new Independent national security legislation monitor, a watchdog position which has been vacant since April. The Coalition initially intended to scrap the role but reversed the decision in the face of political pressure at a time of major changes to the nation’s security laws.
