Senator XENOPHON (South Australia) (10:00): I would like to indicate my support for the Aviation Transport Security Amendment (Screening) Bill 2012 and for the proposed amendments by the Australian Greens. Can I say at the outset that I find myself agreeing substantially with what Senator Rhiannon said—that this bill could be giving a false sense of security, and I will go into those details further—and also with another considered contribution by Senator Fawcett in relation to the issue of airport security cards. I will refer to that briefly. What concerns me is that there is a bit of spin happening here. The government, the minister, said in the House of Representatives that this amendment bill will support the upcoming introduction of body scanners at Australia's international airports. He went on to say: This will ensure that Australian travellers are afforded the highest level of protection against aviation terrorism, bringing Australia into line with countries such as the United States of America, Canada, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. But it is not so simple, for reasons I will refer to when I make reference to the case of Allan Kessing shortly. Security has come to define the way we travel. There is something about trusting your life to a metal tube thousands of feet in the air. Sadly, in these times we have learned to trust the metal tube more than we trust our fellow human beings. There is no doubt that we must make our transport systems, and particularly aviation, as safe as we can. I do not think anyone disagrees with the idea of sacrificing some of our time and patience to fly in safety. The introduction of these scanners, and the measures included in the bill to ensure their safe and appropriate use, are a useful step. But we cannot become complacent. There are still serious issues with the integrity of the safety systems in place at our airports. In my home town of Adelaide, people have reported seeing passengers in the international terminal at Adelaide Airport having knives and other dangerous objects confiscated. This is after they have already gone through the standard scanning procedures in place at the terminal entry, effectively for domestic passengers. These basic procedures, including the current body and luggage scanners, have failed to pick up these dangerous objects, and they are only found in the more detailed security procedures undertaken in the international terminal. That is a cause for real concern. It would be easy to say that at least they are being picked up, and this is true. But we should be aiming higher. It begs the question as to why there was an issue in the first place and why those dangerous objects were not picked up at the first point of scanning. I hope the scanners implemented through this bill will live up to their promises in this regard. I have also been approached by a number of whistleblowers within airport security around Australia after my involvement with Mr Allan Kessing. In the early 2000s, Allan was part of the Air Border Security Unit within Customs, and he analysed a large amount of information relating to security that the organisation had accumulated. He produced two reports—erudite, articulate, comprehensive and forensic. As I recollect, those reports were prepared in 2002 and in 2003. The reports Mr Kessing prepared highlighted serious issues within Australia's border and airport security, including abuses of Customs regulations, theft, smuggling and systemic criminality. The reports were not released or actioned. What happened next is still under debate. Mr Kessing went to then shadow minister Albanese. Nothing appeared to come of this either. Months later, in a series of articles commencing in the Australian on 31 May 2005, the Australian published details from Mr Kessing's report. It was a front-page story by Martin Chulov and Jonathan Porter headed 'Airport staff "smuggling drugs" secret Customs report exposes criminal links"' The article started off: Workers at the nation's largest airport, including baggage handlers with high-level security clearances, have been involved in drug-smuggling and stealing from passengers, according to a classified Customs report that also suggests staff pose a terrorism threat. There were a series of articles that exposed that. For instance, on the next day the Australian published an article, again by Martin Chulov and, in this case, Dennis Shanahan headed, 'Secret Customs report reveals major security breaches: drug convict on airport frontline'. The article starts off by saying: A man who served eight years in prison for smuggling drugs into Australia is one of dozens of employees still working at Sydney Airport, despite his serious criminal record. These were the matters that were raised in Mr Kessing's comprehensive and forensic reports. At first the then Howard government denied there were any such reports. Then there was what could be described as a backflip and, to the government's credit, they commissioned the Rt Hon. Sir John Wheeler, from the United Kingdom, an airport security expert, to conduct a review of airport security. That report was published and released to the public in September 2005 and was headed, An independent review of airport security and policing for the government of Australia. The Wheeler report in effect endorsed Mr Kessing's reports. In effect it repeated its recommendations and it extended further substantial criticisms of airport security in this country. The report raised concerns about the lack of a mechanism to regularly draw together and assess the threat of crime and criminality at major airports, as well as a lack of reporting and a level of tolerance of theft at airports and cargo areas. So forgive me for being a bit cynical about the government saying that this is going to provide the highest levels of airport security. As Senator Rhiannon said, there is a concern that it will give us a false sense of security. It will not address the key issues that were quite rightly identified by Senator Fawcett in relation to airport security. The Rt Hon. Sir John Wheeler stated in his report: Intelligence material, particularly from Customs, confirmed significant threats and vulnerabilities at major airports that are consistent with the reporting by The Australian on 31 May and 1 June 2005 of the unauthorised release of a classified Customs staff-level assessment at Sydney Airport. The report went on to describe policing at airports in Australia as 'inadequate and dysfunctional' and described security systems as 'typically uncoordinated'. It also pointed out serious flaws in the aviation security identification card, the ASIC system, where applicants with a pattern of criminality or with major criminal associations were potentially not denied access. At that time, there were 188 ASIC databases and authorising bodies around Australia. They were neither consistent nor linked. The review concluded that significant improvements: … will require a changed culture of cooperation, sharing, and openness to new technologies and methods across Federal, State and private sector agencies and personnel, in order to replace the silos and insularity which continue to provide unnecessary weaknesses that could be exploited by criminals and terrorists. The Howard government, to its credit, allocated well over $200 million towards the reforms recommended by the Rt Hon. Sir John Wheeler. There is a question as to the extent to which they have been implemented. I think it is fair to say that many of those recommendations have been implemented. Their effectiveness and monitoring is an issue for legitimate questioning at Senate estimates and through this parliament. So the matter seemed to be settled at a public level, at least. But it is worth reflecting on a couple more recommendations by Sir John Wheeler. He said in his report that staff could be bribed to ignore criminality or paid large sums to assist in drug trafficking or theft. Once compromised, such employees may be unable to stand up to terrorists. Any airport staff who are not thoroughly background checked and routinely searched are potentially weak links. He went on to refer to the lack of cooperation between agencies. His report said: The Review had great difficulty in obtaining comprehensive airport crime data … However, there is a culture of under-reporting and tolerance of theft at airports and related cargo areas … That compromises people when there is a real threat of terrorism—because they have been compromised, they could be subject to blackmail. Sir John Wheeler said: Policing at major airports in Australia is often inadequate and dysfunctional, and security systems are typically uncoordinated. The roots of this include bureaucratic turf protection and unresolved Commonwealth/State conflicts over resources. It went on and on and on with recommendation after recommendation that indicated everything that Allan Kessing said in his reports and more. Was Mr Kessing given an Order of Australia? Was he congratulated by Customs for writing these reports, which were hitherto suppressed? Was he praised in the parliament? No. Mr Kessing was charged with providing the information published in the Australian under section 70 of the Crimes Act, a charge that he denies. Having spent many hours with Mr Kessing, I believe absolutely in his innocence. He was not the person who released those reports to the Australian. Many others could have released those reports. He was not that person. I believe that. Mr Kessing has been unable to clear his name. He was convicted and given a suspended jail term. It has had a devastating impact on his life. I have taken up Mr Kessing's cause for three reasons. Firstly, I absolutely and fundamentally believe he was not the one who leaked the report to the Australian and therefore he should not have been convicted—his conviction was an unsafe one. Secondly, I believe we need to stand up and protect people who seek to speak out where others would prefer to remain silent and let others take the fall. Thirdly, these reports, vindicated by the Wheeler review, were very much in the public interest. Mr Kessing should have been congratulated for preparing the reports. They should have seen the light of day much earlier than they did. There are serious doubts about the safety of Mr Kessing's conviction and that is why, as long as I am in this place, I will agitate for a full pardon for Mr Kessing. Let's turn to this bill and the false sense of security it will provide us because of the unambiguous statements of the government. We cannot assume that introducing new scanners will solve all of the problems at Australia's airports, but I do welcome these changes. While I acknowledge that there have been steps taken to address these issues, including the introduction of airport police commanders to coordinate security matters in airports, we cannot assume that everything is now okay. But what is most worrying to me is that we might not even know what all of those problems are. We did not know what was happening before Mr Kessing's report was leaked, triggering the Wheeler review. So what is to say we know what is happening now? It is interesting that an article in the Fairfax media back in June 2009 was headlined 'ID cards and good intentions won't solve old problem'. It was an editorial in the Age that began: It is time to overhaul security at Australia's docks and airports. It continued: At airports there are problems of inadequate screening of casual employees, nepotism and security camera blind spots. More than three years after the Wheeler inquiry found major problems at airports, it raises the question of what effective measures have been taken. It went on to say: What is also now apparent is that many hundreds of aviation and maritime workers with criminal records are being approved for security cards. Of 5764 applicants found to have a criminal record since last October, fewer than 200 were refused security cards. That is a very serious issue. Before the government waxes lyrical about aviation scanners, which I welcome and support, how about dealing with those issues that appear to still be unresolved since Mr Kessing's reports of a decade ago and the Wheeler review back in 2005? We need to encourage and protect whistleblowers who work within Customs and our airports to come forward. Unless we do that, we will not get the full picture. We can only know all the necessary details—all the loopholes and clauses and ins and outs—if we listen to the people on the ground. But these people will never speak out as long as their jobs and futures are in danger, because they will look to what happened to Allan Kessing. They will look at the shameful and disgusting way he was treated by the system.There are great opportunities for us if we care to take them, if we encourage and support those whistleblowers to come forward. We might have to shift our thinking a bit to try new things and come up with new ideas, but the outcomes will be better for us all if we encourage those whistle blowers to come forward. I wish to record my support for the proposed amendments put forward by the Australian Greens. These amendments are in line with the recommendations made by the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee during their inquiry into the bill. So I would like to hear from both the government and the opposition why they appear not to support those amendments. The committee did its work, and Senate committees do a particularly outstanding job of analysing legislation, hearing evidence, hearing the facts and making recommendations to improve legislation. These amendments are straightforward and common sense and they will help the bill stay true to its intentions. I strongly encourage my colleagues on both sides to support them. This bill and the technology it introduces is an important step in improving our airport security but it is only part of the process. We need to heed what occurred to Mr Kessing. We need to heed his report and the Wheeler review and the fact that it appears those recommendations have not been carried out fully. Just because this is a big and visible step does not mean it is the only one we should take. It is important to be seen to be taking action, but sometimes the small things are the details which can have the biggest impact. The fact that there seem to be some serious problems with airport security cards is a real worry. I encourage the government to continue its reforms but also call on them to conduct greater consultation with people who work in the industry, to encourage whistleblowers to come forward and to heed the information on the ground, which can be the most valuable in deterring terrorists. If the government wants to be true to its word and true to its 2007 election manifesto, about looking out for Mr Kessing in particular, they can start by giving him a full and absolute pardon for his reports back in 2002 and 2003 and to overturn what many regard as a wrongful conviction.