Jason Wood (La Trobe, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Community Safety, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

I also rise to speak about my support for the Counter-Terrorism and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2023, subject to the review by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security. I acknowledge the presence of the member for Deakin, who was also chair of that committee and did a magnificent job. I've also been a member. I do have concerns about the bill. I'm not necessarily blaming the government. When I was first elected in 2004 under the Howard government, I raised these concerns. My background is with the Victorian Police counterterrorism unit, so I'm putting a bit of a policing perspective on it. When it comes to preventative detention, it was initially set up, in the first place, for if law enforcement had a person who could potentially be a suspect. They might have been looking at him, and they definitely did not have enough to arrest that person, but they got some intelligence where they believed they'd need to act. The intention was to go and arrest that person and hold them in preventative detention.

That sounds all fine and good, but this is where I have always had my issues. I do acknowledge Christian Porter. When we were backbench members, we actually wrote a paper on this, saying it did need a change. The concern I have is that it doesn't allow law enforcement to ask that person in preventative detention one question. It could be different at the state level, but, when it comes to the Commonwealth level, law enforcement are not allowed to ask a question. Basically, in policing terms, you've got the person on ice in the interview room, and you can't ask them one question. You can't say, 'Hang on; we heard you made a phone call,' or, 'You met with these people,' or, 'We've conducted a search, and we found some goods.' To be honest, once you get into a search warrant stage, you should be having enough to actually interview that person. However, once you realise you have enough evidence, then you can release that person and arrest them under part IC of the Crimes Act. Then you go through the process again of reading them their rights and everything else like that. The concern I have—and I've raised this previously, on numerous occasions, with the AFP and those involved in counterterrorism—is they cannot guarantee me that, if they've got a person in the interview room who may have knowledge, potentially, of a terrorist attack, that person would be allowed to even be asked a question. And, if they wanted to furnish any information, they can't do it. They would need to be released and re-arrested. It's absolutely crazy that that's in place, and that's something I'll continue to speak out about. The danger is: the day I'm proven right, which is going to be an awful day, is when a person is held under preventative detention and they have the knowledge that could have prevented a terrorist attack.

When it comes to control orders—I support control orders too—but it's at a very high threshold. In the initial stages it used to be police taking the request for an order to the Supreme Court. You can imagine the amount of paperwork and effort there is to go to the Supreme Court—and now to the Federal Court—with the information for police to prove that a particular person needs to be under a control order.

So what does a control order do? It can be the more simple aspects where the person may have a curfew—meaning they're not allowed out after certain hours—or they may have to give up their mobile phone or be prevented from using social media. It could be that they're barred from socialising with certain people. It could mean they need to wear a bracelet so police can tell their whereabouts at any time.

I support the control order measure, but something which was raised with me by my former colleagues in Victoria Police counterterrorism is that it has a very high threshold. I'll go to the case of Numan Haider, who was shot outside the Endeavour Hills Police Station when he was meeting two law enforcement officers. They had arranged an interview with Numan Haider, but Numan Haider had previously been going around Dandenong shopping centre with an IS flag. At that time, the only thing that could be asked of him was to leave the shopping centre. Tragically, it ended with him losing his life, but it also caused injuries to police members and long-term anguish. I congratulate former member for Holt Anthony Byrne because he did actually spend a lot of time with the police members.

What Victoria Police recommended to me was what they call the community based order. As I said before, with a control order, it needs to now go to the Federal Court. A community based order could be made a lot easier by simply having it align with something like an intervention order when it comes to a family violence matter, where police or a community member makes an application before a court. Most of the time it potentially could be a young people who is completely misguided and going down the wrong path. They actually go before the court, and the magistrate determines to make an order on the evidence given by Victoria Police or someone else. And it could simply be: 'You're not allowed to associate with these people here. You can't display certain flags.'

I'm not talking about counterterrorism. I'm not just talking about Islamic extremism. I'm also talking about right-wing extremism, anyone who's potentially a danger to the public, a person on a law enforcement watchlist. And can I say that the watchlist has greatly increased over the years. When it comes to control orders, there are only so many control orders that have been issued since 2004. I think there have been 28 orders in total on 21 individuals since 2005, yet we definitely know there are more people on the police watchlist than that.

The magistrate then could make an order, which could be, as I said, who they can associate with and to not use their social media. But, importantly, quite often we find that those involved in terrorism have manipulated the faith they follow to use that as a way of committing awful terrorist attacks. So the order could actually be that the person meets someone of faith, of their religion, so they can get the necessary guidance. They can say, 'In actual fact you're going down completely the wrong path.' Again, my concern about preventative detention is that law enforcement—definitely at the Commonwealth level—needs the ability to interview. That's especially so now, if we look at what's happening in the Middle East. When it comes to control orders, I can say that law enforcement counterterrorism right across this country will be watching a lot of people and trying to keep up with it all—with the social media posts and potential threats. Sadly, we have seen a number of those recently. Bringing in something like a community based order is very important.

In the past, the coalition government had a very strong record on the fight against terror, including an extra $1.3 billion for the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation. I thank them and also the Australian Federal Police, whose annual budget is now more than $1.7 billion. I really thank our law enforcement people, and also their families, because I know that at this time it's very time-consuming for members to be out there, trawling through emails, messages and community tips in order to keep Victorians and, obviously, the Australian people, safe.

The other project which I was involved in in my former role as assistant minister for home affairs was the Building Safer Communities Program funding, where we had invested $315 million in support for 800 projects since 2016. I was very disappointed with the Albanese government back in 2022 when $50 million for safer communities funding was ripped out of that budget. That was on two fronts: one was for high-risk youth, which can be youth who simply fall out of school and go down the path of getting involved in gangs or crime. This was to keep young people at school and, if they had left, to get them back—either to get some education or training—or, if they were incarcerated, to make sure they had mentors while they were in the youth justice system. Basically, when they left, it was to give them someone to support them and give them a hand to go down the right path.

The other front was infrastructure. This was put in place especially for places of worship and faith based organisations. I'll give credit to the former prime minister Scott Morrison for putting this in place after the awful Christchurch terrorist attack in New Zealand. On that occasion it was a right-wing extremist, and this was put in place. It was funding for different communities—whether Jewish, Muslim, Sikh, Hindu or Christian. It didn't matter what your religion was, you put your application in and it was assessed on the threat level. That funding was ripped out of the budget in 2022. It actually took Prime Minister Modi of India to raise it with Prime Minister Albanese when he was in India, who then said, 'We will look at it.'

I thank the government for making $40 million available and another $10 million, but the concern I have is that it has now been 12 months since the May 2022 budget and there have been no security applications or upgrades. The safer communities program also included security guards. I have been to many Jewish communities where, sadly, they have to have security guards on foot. I intervened on behalf of a number of Muslim mosques and also the Islamic Museum of Australia in Thornbury because of my concerns. And there was another hate crime about a mosque up in Canberra and also at some Sikh and Hindu temples. To my great disappointment, when I intervened I was actually taken to the Auditor-General by the Labor Party for intervening and trying to make communities safer. That seems quite bizarre; I did the right thing and I think that even the Auditor-General acknowledged that those interventions were in a number of Liberal-held seats.

It's a very trying time at the moment, which is a good reminder to have stronger counterterrorism laws. One thing I was also very proud of the former government for was that in 2013-14 it allocated $130 million to countering violent extremism programs. I acknowledge Dr Anne Aly, who, prior to being a member of parliament, ran a program called MyHack. She came to my electorate of La Trobe, and we ran that program together, which, member for Cowan, was really important.

The Nationals and the Liberal Party passed legislation to revoke citizenship of dual nationals who engage in terrorism. This includes that those engaged in terrorism-related conduct or fight for declared terrorist organisations outside Australia are sentenced to at least three years for specified terrorist offences. Twenty-two people have lost their Australian citizenship. Of great credit to law enforcement, since September 2014, Australian law enforcement agencies have disrupted 21 major terrorist attacks and plots. There have been 148 people charged, resulting in 75 counterterrorism-related operations around Australia. Fifty-four terrorist offenders are currently behind bars for committing Commonwealth-related terrorism offences. Sadly, that's what's required.

When it comes to extending the operation of the stop, search and seizure powers for another three years, that's just a very commonsense requirement for law enforcement. I remember speaking, years ago, to a psychologist and saying that, as a police force, you have a gut reaction if you think you see something which is not right. The psychologist said: 'No, it's not a gut reaction; you can just read people's behaviour from the way they've acted in the past. If you see certain behavioural traits in your law enforcement, and you've ended up realising they've been up to no good, then in the future your brain switches on when you see someone doing the same thing and you pick them up.' So I support the stop, search and seizure provisions.

I'll leave it there, but, just finally, I thank all our law enforcement agencies for everything they've done in making Australia safe.

See this speech in context