Australia’s intelligence agencies are increasingly centre-stage as cyber threats, foreign interference, grey-zone competition and the prospect of Indo-Pacific conflict reshape our national security. This means that the need for robust, adaptive oversight of those agencies has never been more pressing. A new report from ASPI’s Statecraft & Intelligence Policy Centre, released today, underscores the need to reform and reinforce the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security (PJCIS) to ensure it remains an effective pillar of democratic accountability. Key to that reform will be refocusing the future work of the committee back towards intelligence oversight.
Australia’s trilateral intelligence oversight model—comprising ministerial control, the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security (IGIS) and parliamentary scrutiny via the PJCIS—has long been praised for effectiveness. The 2024 Independent Intelligence Review (IIR) reaffirmed its fitness for purpose, citing its independence, clarity of mandate and comprehensive coverage. Yet, this new report, A critical juncture: now’s the time to sustain and strengthen the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence & Security, highlights that the PJCIS is under significant strain, facing mounting workloads, limited resources and an expanded remit that risks diluting its core oversight function.
A longstanding political issue is the committee’s composition. Legislative amendments in 2023 expanded the PJCIS to 13 members and sparked debate over the potential future inclusion of crossbenchers, a move that could disrupt the committee’s traditionally bipartisan and confidential culture. While broader representation may better reflect parliamentary realities, it risks politicising an institution whose historical effectiveness has been enabled by a unique level of trust and discretion.
The lapse of the Intelligence Services Legislation Amendment Bill 2023 (ISLAB 2023) following the May election represents unfinished business. The bill, following recommendations made in the 2017 IIR, would have extended PJCIS oversight to the entire national intelligence community, including the Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre, the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission and the intelligence functions of Home Affairs and the Australian Federal Police. It would also have enabled the PJCIS to request operationally-related inquiries via the IGIS—a hybrid model balancing parliamentary visibility with operational confidentiality. Reintroducing the bill should be a priority.
Staffing and resourcing reforms are also necessary. Recommendation 66 of the 2024 IIR was to allocate additional staff to the PJCIS chair and deputy chair, using secondees with top-level security clearances and intelligence expertise. Such a staffing enhancement, advocated for in my submission to the IIR, would address a longstanding constraint: committee members currently lack their own staff who can access and produce classified material on their behalf. Additionally, access to expert external advisers (IIR recommendation 67)—and more broadly, including representatives from think tanks such as ASPI—would significantly bolster the committee’s capacity.
Most critical is the committee’s workload. Historically focused on intelligence agencies, the PJCIS has increasingly been tasked with reviewing counterterrorism and broader national security legislation. Analysis of inquiries over the past three parliaments reveals that only 35.5 percent were directly related to intelligence oversight, with the remainder split between counterterrorism (40.9 percent) and other security matters (23.6 percent). This mission creep has stretched the committee thin and diverted attention from its foundational role.
So, A critical juncture calls for a reset. The PJCIS should refocus on its core mission: intelligence oversight. Successive chairs have warned of the committee’s unsustainable workload, exacerbated by its role as a de facto national security legislative review body. The government should consider alternative mechanisms—such as subcommittees or a sister committee—to relieve pressure on the PJCIS.
The incoming committee chair, expected to be appointed shortly by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, will inherit both challenges and opportunities. Whether continuity is maintained through reappointment of Senator Raff Ciccone or a new face is chosen, the chair should act decisively. Priorities should include lobbying for ISLAB 2023’s reintroduction, getting government to act on the IIR’s recommended staffing enhancements and an expert advisory panel, and advocating for a more focused committee workload.
Strengthening the PJCIS’s structure, clarifying its remit and enhancing its resources are essential to maintaining public trust and ensuring effective oversight of the national intelligence community. The reforms outlined in today’s report offer a roadmap for renewal, one that the next chair can seize with urgency and resolve.