Richard Marles (Corio, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration and Border Protection) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. This week the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor completely refuted the Prime Minister's claim the citizenship proposal is consistent with his advice saying:

… my report does not provide a justification for what they intend to do ... I am saying the opposite.

Why has the Prime Minister Miss regret misrepresented the independent monitor and ignored his report?

Tony Abbott (Warringah, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I cannot speak for what has happened to the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor or the former monitor's position since he prepared his last report to the government, but last March when he presented a report to the government he recommended:

Consideration should be given to the introduction of a power for the Minister of Immigration to revoke the citizenship of Australians … where the Minister is satisfied that the person has engaged in acts prejudicial to Australia's security.

The former monitor is entitled to change his mind and obviously he has changed his mind, but back in March last year, when he made a recommendation to the government, the recommendation was 'a power for the Minister of Immigration to revoke the citizenship of Australians … where the Minister is satisfied that the person has engaged in acts prejudicial to Australia's security'. There was no mention of conviction—no mention of conviction but revocation 'where the Minister is satisfied that the person has engaged in acts prejudicial to Australia's security'.

I know it is news to members opposite but terrorism is prejudicial to Australia's security and where people have engaged terrorist activities, their citizenship should be stripped when they are dual nationals.