Coalition warns against requiring parliamentary vote to commit Australia to war
The federal Coalition has warned against curbing the Australian government’s power to deploy troops to overseas conflicts, with an inquiry considering if such action should require a parliamentary vote.
Reform advocates will use the parliamentary inquiry to argue Australia should follow other democracies in requiring parliamentarians to authorise wars so elected representatives are accountable for the consequences.
“It’ll be too late when suddenly we’re told we’re going to war with China,” said Dr Alison Broinowski, a former Australian diplomat and author who is president of Australians for War Powers Reform.
At present the prime minister and senior ministers can commit Australia to war without parliamentary approval, although parliament may have nonbinding debates. The Howard government sent troops to Iraq in 2003 despite opposition from the Labor party.
The joint standing committee on foreign affairs, defence and trade will conduct the inquiry looking at how Australia compares with similar democracies around the world.
The defence minister, Richard Marles, has asked the defence subcommittee to consider reforming parliamentary processes and practices to include “opportunities for debate to provide greater transparency and accountability” on the deployment of the Australian defence force.
But in a sign the eventual changes may be limited, the terms of reference set by Marles also include “security implications of pre-notification of ADF deployment that may compromise the safety of ADF personnel, operational security, intelligence and/or have unintended consequences”.
Sign up to receive an email with the top stories from Guardian Australia every morning
Andrew Wallace, the Liberal MP who is deputy chair of the defence subcommittee, said he was “surprised that the Labor party is even contemplating” a change to a system that had “stood us in good stead for many many years”.
“If we had a situation where the Greens are holding the balance of power in the Senate, or maybe even independents are holding the balance of power in the House of Representatives, someone who could be ideologically opposed to any conflict could act in a way which is significantly contrary to our national interests,” Wallace said.
“The executive has got to be given the power to govern the country and particularly in relation to national security issues. I don’t care whether it’s Labor or Liberal – they can’t be hamstrung by the parliament.”
Asked about the view of reform advocates that there would be exceptions for emergency situations, Wallace said: “But what war isn’t an emergency? I mean, it’s ridiculous.”
Wallace, who served as speaker of the House of Representatives before the last election, said he would be comfortable with a greater degree of reporting to parliament and further debates about “the wisdom, or lack thereof, of the decision and how the operation might be going at any one point in time”.
“But that’s very, very different to taking away, usurping the executive’s power to commit,” Wallace said.
Julian Hill, a Labor MP and the chair of the defence subcommittee, said his party was honouring an election commitment to hold such an inquiry.
Hill said it was “an entirely reasonable thing to periodically examine how these exceptionally grave powers and responsibilities are exercised”.
“It’s one of the most significant decisions vested in executive government under the constitution and it’s appropriate that we examine whether the current processes are sufficient, while making sure that there are no inadvertent security implications of any possible policy changes,” he said.
Government agencies are among those likely to give evidence. “The minister has asked the Department of Defence to cooperate with the inquiry, and that’s what I expect will occur,” Hill said.
The Greens have long pushed for reform to the war powers. Senator Jordon Steele-John said the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan showed “the dire consequences of what happens when that decision is made too quickly with too little scrutiny”.
Steele-John, the party’s spokesperson for foreign affairs and peace, said the inquiry was “a great chance for the major parties to be on record about their position”.
“Sadly, I think we have already seen some disingenuous arguments from both the Coalition and Labor either trying to protect executive power or delegitimise the parliament on this matter even after Australia has elected its largest crossbench ever,” he said.
Steele-John has previously proposed a bill to the Senate that would require a majority of both Houses of Parliament to vote in favour of the deployment of ADF personnel overseas except in very exceptional circumstances.
Broinowski said: “All we’re saying is that the democratic process should be used and, if it results in a war that some of us might not want, that’s not for us to say. These are our elected representatives and we want them to be responsible to us, the people.”
The inquiry’s deadline for public submissions is 18 November.