This article is more than 2 years old

This article is more than 2 years old

Universities and legal groups have warned that a government bill to require advocates for foreign interests to join a public register will harm freedom of speech and chill benign contributions to public debate.

The Law Council, Australian Lawyers for Human Rights, Universities Australia and the Group of Eight universities voiced the concerns in submissions to a Senate inquiry into the foreign influence transparency scheme bill.

The bill requires people who undertake political, campaigning or lobbying activities “on behalf of foreign principals” to sign up to a public register. Foreign principals include not only foreign governments but also businesses, political organisations and any individual who is not a resident or citizen of Australia.

The Law Council submitted that “the majority of foreign influence in Australian public policy is benign” and the bill would therefore “unduly impact those that have no intention to disrupt Australian democracy and sovereignty”.

Turnbull says Australia will 'stand up' to China as foreign influence row heats up Read more

It said the bill should be reconsidered in favour of disclosure obligations on the recipients of foreign influence.

The Law Council also proposed narrowing the scope of the bill so that only being controlled “directly or indirectly” by a foreign principal would be covered and only where the person had knowledge they were acting on such an order.

It called for much broader exemptions for charities and professionals making “occasional” representations to government and suggested criminal penalties be replaced by less severe civil penalties.

The Australian Financial Markets Association has warned the bill is “startling” in its reach and unsuspecting organisations – including community and arts organisations – will face criminal penalties for failure to register.

Australian Lawyers for Human Rights said the bill captured communications by parties with foreign associations even where that association was “irrelevant to the communication” and there was no intent to harm Australian interests.

It said there was “no foundation” for the bill’s apparent assumption that “any lobbying activity in any way connected with foreign entities is necessarily inappropriate and should be notified to the Australian government and/or made public”.

In its submission Universities Australia warned the bill would have “unintended consequences” including significant harms to academic freedom and international collaboration.



Coalition’s foreign agents bill attacked for overreach and curtailing ‘freedoms of expression’ Read more

It said it was concerned that “acting on behalf of a foreign principal” included receiving “funding or sponsoring” and “collaboration”, which could capture “legitimate academic research partnerships”.

Universities Australia said researchers who discovered blood tests for rare cancers could be forced to register if they received funding from an overseas university and advocated for the test’s inclusion on the Medicare benefits schedule.

The Group of Eight universities said the “hastily compiled legislation” could “severely limit” Australian academics’ ability to perform basic functions including providing advice on matters of public interest.

“We also cannot allow [the] rushed drafting process to fundamentally restrict the rights of all Australians – including those employed by Australian universities – to legitimately participate in the democratic process,” it said.

Both university groups recommended the government not proceed with the bill until it had undertaken consultation and proposed a new exemption for academic activities.

The attorney general submitted that, if undisclosed, foreign influence “can have serious implications for sovereignty and national policy as it may result in the prioritisation of foreign interests over domestic interests”.

While conceding that “foreign principals often have a legitimate interest” in political processes, the submission said that “obfuscating their interest via an intermediary” hampered informed decision-making.

It said the bill would “provide the tools necessary to illuminate such influence” while “also [protecting] the freedom of political communications”.

Brandis reveals plans to curb 'unprecedented' foreign influence on politics Read more

In his personal capacity the Australian Strategic Policy Institute executive director, Peter Jennings, said he had “absolutely no doubt” about the need for the bill.

He said attempts to present the bill as “threatening legitimate public comment and lobbying” were “mistaken” and did not take into account the bill’s safeguards.

“The case against the bill will most surely be made by those individuals who should disclose their connections to foreign entities,” he said.

The bill contains limited exemptions for people lobbying with respect to or providing humanitarian assistance, legal advice, consular help, religion, news media and in the course of commercial activities.

The university sector has been at the centre of debate about foreign interference after analysts raised concerns about a $100m collaboration between the University of New South Wales and the Chinese government and an acknowledgement from the Group of Eight universities chief executive that there have been “isolated” instances of Chinese government interference on campuses.