Coalition pressures Labor to urgently pass spy laws to avert 'general chaos' at byelections
The attorney general, Christian Porter, has again insisted on the urgent need for parliament to pass new foreign interference and espionage laws before the July byelections, saying foreign agents are increasingly trying to cause chaos in democratic electoral processes and they must be stopped.
When asked how the July byelections were being targeted, Porter said foreign interference may “take a number of forms”.
“It might look like hacking into an AEC website to change voter registration information,” he told the ABC’s Insiders program on Sunday. “It might look like covertly posing as a constituent when you’re actually acting for a foreign nation to meet
with a political representative to get them to change their mind, view or decision on a particular matter. And these types of events and occurrences have been evidenced overseas, particularly in the context of the last American presidential election.
“You weaken a democracy by creating a sense of division or dysfunction and you can very easily do that by placing opinions and trying to affect opinions and just causing general chaos in the context of elections.”
A bipartisan deal was reached last week to pass amended legislation to target secret attempts by foreign spies to influence Australia’s politicians and media, and on a second bill forcing individuals and companies acting on behalf of foreign powers to be listed on a public register.
The government now expects the legislation to be passed into law later this month, in what would be the biggest and most significant overhaul of Australia’s security and foreign interference laws in decades.
A parliamentary committee has recommended 60 amendments be made to the legislation, which was first announced by the then attorney general, George Brandis, in December, the most recommendations the committee has suggested since the Coalition came to power in 2013.
Key among the changes is the clarification of definitions including what constitutes a classified document, what is considered “prejudicing national security” to ensure it includes an element of harm, not just embarrassment, and tightening the definitions of “sabotage”, “political violence” and “foreign interference”.
The original bill risked sweeping whistleblowers, aid workers, journalists and other not-for-profit workers into its net through its wide-sweeping definitions, while the changes include ensuring there is an element of intent, as well as harm, and introduces a public interest defence for publication of secret documents.
On Sunday Porter said advice from the director-general of Asio suggested efforts by foreign countries and foreign agencies to sway Australian opinion in a covert way to influence democratic outcomes was on the rise.
“So it makes complete sense to have these laws in place before the next large democratic event,” he said.However, he conceded the government’s proposed foreign influence transparency scheme – which will force individuals acting on behalf of foreign powers to be listed on a public register – would not be in place before the July byelections even if the legislation passed parliament in coming weeks.
“It’s not merely all about the register,” he said. “The espionage bill, at about section 92, establishes the first ever offence of foreign interference in our government, political and democratic processes.
“The bills are meant to work in tandem, so having both laws in place before the byelection is not only important in terms of signalling the seriousness with which we take any efforts to interfere but it also establishes, for the first time, a law, a criminal offence, against that interference.”
He said the register was still important, however.
“The registration system doesn’t make it an offence to undertake work for a foreign government, or put an opinion on behalf of a foreign government in Australia, it just asks that if you are doing that that you enter that fact on a registry,” he said.
“Ultimately the ill that we’re trying to cure here is worth as least some regulatory burden, because having a situation exist where enormous efforts are gone to in a covert way to shape Australian opinion on behalf of foreign interests is not in the interests of Australia’s national security or our democracy.”