Senate Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee [Part 2], , 2:43:16 to 2:51:51
The Department of Finance discusses the review of physical security standards for electorate offices and the process for upgrading security in response to threat assessments.
Topics: Public safety, Infrastructure
Speakers: Simon Newnham, Senator The Hon James McGrath, Matt Yannopoulos, Unknown Speaker
>> Just in relation to you sort of touched upon it, when were the minimum physical security standards for elected officers last reviewed?
>> Uh, Senator, thank you for the question. Simon Nunham, Deputy Secretary, uh, Department of Finance. Um, Senator, I'll take a step back. I know you asking about the most recent iteration. That was April of this year. Um, but these are standards that have been in place since 2015. So, over the course of that 11 years, um, there has been a number of iterations and updates to those guidelines. And you'd appreciate they have um, multiple components. They can have disability access updates, WHS updates, and of course, um, in the evolving security landscape, there's been a series of updates to the, uh, physical security requirements from a security from a security point of view.
the um secretary, you you mentioned I think nine officers out of discussions, you know, last week um have I think requested additional security if if I heard it correctly. But how many requests for additional elected offer security measures has finance received over the past 12
>> I think we would need to take that on notice. Senator,
>> and h how many of those requests may remain outstanding and and what is the average time between well actually how many requests remain outstand outstanding and what is the time between each request being received and the approved security measures being installed? um that's on on notice is is fine. And this is a bit of a a Dorothy Dixer in a way. What what is the division of responsibility between finance, home affairs and the AFP for assessing security risks, approving additional protections and then funding them in relation to MPs and elected officers. and I suppose residences where that has been required.
>> So I'll I'll I'll try and articulate uh uh as best I'm able. So the Department of Home Affairs uh provides residential security supports for high office holders and parliamentarians deemed at risk by the They provide physical security advice to my department as it relates to electorate offices and comm uh parliamentary offices and home affairs is responsible for the protective security coordination center. So I feel like that is the organizing coordination construct across home affairs finance AIO and the Australian federal police. The AFP uh they have a security protection diplomatic liaison which is the primary point of contact for parliamentarians for security advice or incident reporting. The AFP conducts investigations, undertakes and maintains threat assessments where required. So the AFP is the authority for a threat assessment and they allocate resources according to eventbased security assessment methodology. for example, close personal protection, uniform police patrolling and static guarding. And as I kind of alluded to in my first answer, we provide secure office accommodation for federal parliamentarians, manage the car and driver services or comar, and we do security clearance administration for member of parliament's staff.
>> So in terms of and and I appreciate there is part of the review that's been undertaken, security is part of it. But how do how do the three different agencies coordinate in when I say intelligence but in terms is there a committee that that that meets of of relevant classified officers from the three areas to go. Parliamentarian X has had a threat against them. Therefore, AFP you need to do X, home affairs you need to do Y and finance you need to does such and how does that happen is what I'm asking. How's the sausage made?
>> Yeah, I'll ask Simon to but there is there is a established governance process.
>> Yeah, Senator, thank you for the question. Um, let me start with with two sort of um overarching points. The first is that there is a protective security framework that applies for all parliamentarians. And I know at times the commentary can uh differentiate between uh various levels of parliamentarians and so forth, but that that framework exists across the entirety of the Australian parliament and that shapes and frames every um scenario that is thrown up about an individual parliamentarian. In other words, threat, vulnerability and risk are assessed through that framework. The second point I'd make is that how those agencies convene is through the protective security coordination center home affairsled but all of the agencies you would expect to be involved are security agencies, intelligence agencies, operational agencies. So the framework um applies to those scenarios. that convening body brings together those entities uh at least fortnightly and decisions are taken then based on the data that's put into that group about uh the types of actions that need to be taken in relation to a particular parliamentarian. So for example home um the federal police might bring to the table uh an increased threat level for an individual or a specific threat by one perpetrator against a particular parliamentarian. finance might bring to the table that in fact there's been a series of um uh damage to the elected office. Others may bring to the table that in fact you know local, state and territory police have been involved in a number of incidents and I'm I'm giving these as examples from that the framework is applied and a series of steps are then uh taken and recommended. One of those of course can be hardening of security settings in various forums. It might be in their transport arrangements. It might be in their home and residential arrangements. It might be in their personal arrangements. And of course, from a finance perspective, it might be at their elected office. And out of that comes, as I said, a series of recommendations. And it was on finance to implement those security settings. I I'll just while I've got the floor say one more thing. Even before you get to those settings, every single electorate office in Australia has standard security settings right now before or despite individual data points coming in about individual threats to parliamentarians. And whilst I can't go into the totality of those elements, they include things like closed circuit TV uh and duress alarms and security alarms and reception barrier hardening for example. So um I suppose I just wanted to put that on the committee's radar that that exists and there is calibration and scaling according to uh additional information that comes in to the federal police or AIO or finance
I I I appreciate that and I realize um uh following last week's uh horrific attack, this will be an ongoing uh discussion as to how we we as a parliament can come forward with working through the government to ensure that um our staff and and families and parliamentarians um appropriately uh looked after. I might just move on to another quick block of questions.