Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—When innocent people are dying at the hands of violent extremists, no matter where in the world this is happening, hard questions are asked of societies like our own—hard questions for which there are no easy answers. For all freedom-loving nations, the message could not be clearer: if we want to preserve the values that underpin our open, democratic societies, we will have to work resolutely with each other to defend and protect the freedoms we hold dear.

Following the recent mass killings of innocent civilians in Paris and around the world, I take this opportunity to update the House on Australia's global, regional and domestic policies to respond to terrorist attacks. Let me start by once again expressing our condolences to all the victims. Our hearts go out to the families who have lost their loved ones and to those recovering from their injuries. We should grieve and we should be angry. But we must not let grief or anger cloud our judgement. Our response must be as clear eyed and strategic as it is determined. This is not a time for gestures or machismo. Calm, clinical, professional, effective—that is how we defeat this menace.

The threat from ISIL is a global problem that should be addressed at its source, in the Middle East, by ensuring that our involvement in the coalition efforts in Syria and Iraq is resolute and effective. ISIL aims to overthrow all the existing governments in Muslim societies, and beyond. It regards as apostates any who will not submit to its own perverted view of Islam. Strategically, ISIL wants to create division by fomenting resentment between Muslims and non-Muslim populations.

ISIL emerged as an extremist terrorist group out of al-Qaeda in Iraq and Syria. Their territorial gains in Syria and Iraq have fed into their own narrative of conquest. By most measures, however, ISIL is in a fundamentally weak position. We must not be fooled by its hype. Its ideology is archaic, but its use of the internet is very modern. ISIL has many more smartphones than guns, many more Twitter accounts than soldiers. It does not command broad based legitimacy even in those areas under its direct control. It is encircled by hostile forces and it is under military pressure. And, through its depraved actions, ISIL has strengthened the resolve of the global community, including Russia, to defeat it.

The 60 nation strong coalition's objective is to disrupt, degrade and ultimately defeat ISIL. This will require a patient, painstaking, full-spectrum strategy—not just military, but financial, diplomatic and political. This involves a combination of air strikes in both Syria and Iraq and support and training for Iraq's army. Australia's contribution to the coalition forces on the ground in Iraq is second only to that of the United States and large relative to our population and proximity to the conflict. It is larger, for example, than that of any European nation, larger than Canada's or any of the neighbouring Arab states. We have six FA18s involved in missions in that theatre, with 240 personnel in the air task group, 90 Special Forces advisers, and around 300 soldiers training the Iraqi army at Taji.

The Special Forces are authorised by our government to advise and assist Iraq's Counter-Terrorism Service in the field at headquarters level. However, the government of Iraq has not consented to any of our defence forces being deployed outside the wire on ground combat operations. The government of Iraq believes that large-scale Western troop operations in its country would be counterproductive. Australia's service men and women are making a significant contribution to the coalition campaign and we will continue to support our allies as our strategies evolve in what is likely to be an extended campaign. In Iraq, ISIL's momentum has been halted, its capabilities degraded. Kurdish and Iraqi forces have won back territory with coalition support.

I have to report to the House that the consensus of the leaders I met at the G20, at APEC and at the East Asia Summit is that there is no support currently for a large US led Western army to attempt to conquer and hold ISIL controlled areas. In Syria, the broader conflict and the absence of a central government that the West can work with makes action against ISIL even more complicated. Following the destruction of the Russian airliner over the Sinai and the Paris attacks, Russia and France have raised their operational tempo against ISIL. But ultimately a political solution is needed in Syria. Only this would allow attention to turn more fully to eliminating ISIL as a military force. So we support the negotiations in Vienna to find a pathway to a political resolution in Syria.

Under the circumstances that I have outlined, and mindful that Australia has a range of security priorities across the globe and in our own region, there are currently no plans for a significant change in the level or the nature of Australia's military commitment in Iraq and Syria. No such change has been sought by our allies—if one were, we would of course carefully consider it.

We will always proceed on the basis of the considered advice of our military professionals in the Australian Defence Force, just as we rely on the advice of our counter-terrorism experts and security experts domestically. The current advice to the government is that the unilateral deployment of Australian combat troops on the ground in Iraq or Syria is neither feasible nor practical. As a supplement to our already significant military commitment, our interests—and those of the countries and people in the region—are served by supporting stability in countries neighbouring Iraq and Syria, particularly Jordan. We will continue to look for ways to further strengthen cooperation with Jordan.

The rise of ISIL and the conflict in Syria have increased the threat environment in South-East Asia. I have discussed this issue at the East Asia Summit and in depth with the leaders of Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Singapore, among others. We are working more closely than ever to share intelligence and counter-messaging strategies. From an Australian perspective, we see a real risk that terrorist groups in the region might be inspired by attacks such as we have seen in Ankara, Beirut, Bamako and Paris and we are very mindful of the fact that hundreds of thousands of Australians visit South-East Asia every year for business, study or holidays.

Just as Australia cannot fight any military conflict against ISIL unilaterally, we cannot counter violent extremism alone, particularly online. In my recent discussions with regional colleagues at the East Asia Summit and at APEC I further committed Australia as a leading partner in this area. We look forward to supporting the new Malaysian counter-messaging centre and to further cooperation with Indonesia, beginning with the Attorney-General and the Minister for Justice, who is also the minister assisting me on counter-terrorism, shortly taking up an offer to visit Indonesia in December to hold discussions focused on furthering our efforts in countering terrorism and violent extremism in the region.

The Paris attacks demonstrate ISIL has an ability to launch concerted attacks in Western cities. It was also a reminder that, while coordinated, there is not much sophisticated planning required for armed fanatics to slaughter unarmed civilians with military assault rifles and suicide vests. As Prime Minister, and speaking on behalf of the heads of ASIO and the AFP, as well as the Chief of the Defence Force, I want Australians to be aware that a terrorist incident on our soil remains likely but also that Australians should be reassured that our security agencies are working diligently and expertly to prevent that happening.

In addition to being the most successful multicultural society in the world, Australia as an island continent has some natural advantages over Europe, which is currently facing the uncontrolled movement of hundreds of thousands of people. Unlike the Europeans, we are in control of our borders. For example, people who successfully enter Greece are able to move at will throughout much of the European Union. We are an island nation. The people smugglers' business model has been broken. The boats have been stopped. We also have very strong gun laws that make access to weapons more difficult and play a vital role in keeping our public safe.

As your Prime Minister my highest duty, and that of my government, is to keep Australians safe. We cannot eliminate entirely the risk of terrorism anymore than we can eliminate the risk of any serious crime. But we can mitigate it. We will continue to thwart and frustrate many attacks before they occur. We are examining closely the implications of the Paris attacks for our own domestic arrangements. I am receiving updated intelligence on this every day. We are working more closely than ever with our European partners.

Public safety is the highest priority, and a major part of this is to be as open and transparent with Australians as possible about both the threat and what everyone can do to help. In September last year, the alert level was raised to high, and it has remained there ever since. We have subsequently seen terrorist attacks against police officers in Melbourne, the Sydney siege, and the murder of a police worker in Parramatta by a radicalised young man.

The tempo of our domestic counter-terrorism efforts has increased and our capabilities have been tested. Since September 2014, 26 people have been charged as a result of 10 counter-terrorism operations around Australia. That is more than one-third of all terrorism related charges since 2001. Counter-terrorism units at our airports are also stopping people leaving for, and returning from, the conflict zone.

The fact that there has to date been no mass casualty attack owes much to the vigilance of our security agencies. ASIO and the Federal Police have advised me that there is no evidence that the recent attacks, including Paris, will materially affect the threat level in Australia, but we are constantly on the watch for any evolving or emerging threats.

The Council of Australian Governments agreed in July to develop a new threat advisory system to make it clearer to the public what our security experts believe to be the current threat from terrorism. The new framework, recommended by ASIO, has been subject to extensive consultation and review. I can inform the House that the National Threat Assessment Centre (or NTAC) that sits within ASIO will this week transition to the new National Terrorism Threat Advisory System. The new system will provide the public with more information on the nature of the threat we are facing. The adoption of a five-tiered system will also provide ASIO with greater flexibility in determining threat levels, reflecting the need to adapt to an evolving security environment.

Rapid developments in communications technology present both opportunities and challenges for our agencies; modern messaging and voice applications are generally encrypted in transit. Human intelligence, relationships with communities, are more important than ever. I have therefore asked that ASIO and other relevant agencies work with our international intelligence partners to address the challenge of monitoring terrorist groups in this new environment.

I will be meeting with my state and territory colleagues next month. Cooperation between all tiers of government and state and federal agencies is vital in the counter-terrorism effort. At COAG on 11 December, I will continue our discussions with premiers on how best to counter violent extremism. I will raise with them initiatives under consideration to address the problem of radicalisation in prisons. I have also asked that our law enforcement agencies test their responses to a mass casualty attack. Such an attack leaves little, if any, room for negotiation. This work is in addition to the extensive reform of our national security laws which has already seen the introduction of five tranches of new legislation. These laws ensure that our agencies have all the tools required in the effort to keep us safe.

Within Australia, our counter-terrorism strategy calls for partnership between all levels of government, community and the private sector. It emphasises the need to limit the spread and influence of violent extremist ideas. The root cause of the current threat we face is a perverted strain of Islamist extremist ideology. Not all extremism ends in violence but all politically motivated violence begins with extremist ideology. Any war with ISIL is not just one in a military sense, but is also a war of ideas. Through their extensive use of social media, they seek the maximum propaganda advantage from any territorial gains as cover for their fundamental military weakness and the barbaric nature of their mindset.

The government's investment in countering violent extremism programs has tripled over the past four years to more than $40 million. The government's approach has four tiers:

Importantly, governments cannot win this battle alone. Community leaders and groups have great responsibility both in denouncing violent extremism and teaching unity in diversity and mutual respect instead of hatred. The condemnation of ISIL and the promotion of authentic, modern and tolerant Islam by the leaders of big majority Muslim nations—including Indonesia, Turkey and Malaysia—has been especially important. To this end, I thank all those Muslim groups and leaders who have made statements denouncing the Paris attacks. A strong and trusting relationship between the government and communities is crucial to ensuring the right messages reach the hearts and minds of those who might be vulnerable to the propaganda of terror groups. Part of the message is promoting the truth that Australia not only does its part in the military coalition to defeat ISIL but in the humanitarian cause as well.

Australia has committed to accepting over four years an additional 12,000 people who have fled the conflicts in Syria and Iraq. Australia has also provided around $230 million in humanitarian assistance since 2011 to support Syrians and Iraqis affected by the conflict. This is a significant humanitarian initiative by Australians. We have one of the strongest records of any nation for resettling people facing persecution in their homelands. Since the end of World War II, Australia has resettled more than 825,000 refugees and others in humanitarian need. The focus of the 12,000 intake of Syrian and Iraqi refugees is on persecuted minorities and those assessed as being most vulnerable—women, children and families with the least prospect of returning to their homes. All applications are rigorously assessed on an individual basis—in line with Australia's existing refugee and humanitarian policies. Our national security interest is always the first and the abiding priority. Strict security, health and character checks will not be compromised.

In Iraq and Syria, ISIL must be defeated militarily—enabled by a durable political settlement in both countries that will reduce the capacity of the extremists to recruit and mobilise. The threat of ISIL-inspired terrorism must be addressed through domestic, regional and global counter-terrorism efforts; as an ideological threat, it needs to be, and will be, confronted globally. There are no quick fixes. We will redouble our efforts in support of domestic and regional counter-terrorism efforts. Across the region, our engagement will intensify, pursuing collective counter-terrorism objectives by better prioritising and coordinating with regional partners.

We will defeat these terrorists. And the strongest weapons we bring to this battle are ourselves, our values and our way of life. Our unity mocks their attempts to divide us. Our freedom under law mocks their cruel tyranny. Our mutual respect mocks their bitter intolerance. And the strength of our free people will see off these thugs and tyrants as it has seen off so many of their kind before.

I present a copy of the ministerial statement.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the Prime Minister for updating the House. On behalf of the opposition, I join him in offering our condolences to all who have lost someone they love as a result of terrorism in these dark and difficult days. I think the scenes that we have seen from overseas have at some level reminded us all that the great advantage of being an Australian is that we enjoy our freedom without most of us having had to fight for it. I, of course, acknowledge the remarkable exception, which is the service of our people in the Australian Defence Force. But, in the recent times, we have been reminded that, whilst we may be an island, we are not immune to the fanaticism and the psychopathic crime that we have seen witness.

Terrorism is an affront to all humanity wherever it occurs and whoever it affects. It is a crime engineered expressly to strike at the innocent, to spread fear, to engender hatred. At times when terror threatens our way of life, it is right that Australians expect cooperation from their national leaders. That is why Labor has consistently sought bipartisanship on national security. We worked with Mr Abbott, and we will do so again with Mr Turnbull. We know the security of our nation runs deeper than partisan differences, because no individual and no party has a monopoly on patriotism. We all love our country. We all care for the safety of our citizens. All Australians should enjoy the rights and liberties of our safe, peaceful democracy equally—and we all have an equal responsibility to uphold them, to defend them and to preserve the security of our nation.

I am proud of the approach that every single member of the caucus has taken to questions of national security while I have been leader. Labor have not shied away from difficult argument and we have not shirked hard decisions. Labor have engaged with the issues deeply and thoughtfully and, in doing so, we have supported and enhanced four rounds of national security legislation, including the citizenship legislation which is currently before the parliament, and we will work with the government to progress the fifth round of legislation, which was introduced into the Senate in the last sittings.

We have made over 100 substantive amendments to the national security bills put forward by this government, including 26 substantive amendments to the citizenship bill before the parliament. Many of these amendments have established new measures to strengthen accountability and oversight of newly created powers, and include measures such as the creation of a public interest advocate to help protect the sources of journalists and freedom of the press, as well as mandated reviews of many powers in order to ensure that these powers are conferred for no longer than is necessary. Our focus is about the best interests and safety of Australians. Our focus is always on striking the right balance between national security considerations and the fundamental democratic rights and freedoms all Australians cherish: mindful always that, in seeking to defend ourselves from the terrorist threat, we do not undermine the very foundations of our strength that the terrorists would wish to destroy and that we seek to protect; knowing that alongside law enforcement and security powers, every cent invested in ensuring our national cohesion has a definite practical outcome for our security, because words and ideas, hearts and minds are at the core of winning the struggle against terrorism. Mr Chip Le Grand put it well in The Australian this morning when he told the story of four Iraqi girls living in Broadmeadows, in Victoria, who convinced their parents to allow them to join the rest of their classmates in a sleepover at school. He wrote:

It seems the smallest of things. Yet on such things the defence of Australian suburbs partially rests: winning the trust of parents newly arrived from the Middle East; overcoming cultural aversions to 11-year-old boys and girls bunking out together; allowing four girls be a part of things rather than made to feel apart.

Right now, at home and abroad, we face a common challenge in a different guise—the gruesome slaughter in Iraq and Syria, the suicide bombings in Bamako and Beirut, the bringing down of innocent travellers from the skies over Egypt, the random shedding of blood on the cobblestones and concert halls of Paris. Here in our streets and suburbs we grapple with violence fuelled by violent extremism. While our fundamental goal is the same—the utter defeat of those who would wish us harm—our means and methods will differ according to the situation we face. In the operations in Iraq, the ADF is there to protect civilians and to build the capacity of Iraq's security forces. I had the privilege of meeting with the men and women serving in the region. Their bravery and professionalism is a credit to them and I think the source of a pride for all Australians. Indeed, I wish all Australians could just have a glimpse of the sheer professionalism of the people who serve in our defence forces. I think it would make every Australian feel a little more prouder even.

Since day one of Australia's involvement in this conflict, Labor has consistently said that success in Iraq depends most upon the government and the people of Iraq themselves. The conflict in Iraq is for Iraq to win. Australia's role in the region is to build capacity, not dependency. We do not want to perpetuate another cycle as occurred following the invasion of 2003: a large-scale troop movement, civil unrest and ongoing violence, escalation, withdrawal and eventual return. We can and we must provide Iraqi armed forces with the skills and training to repel and overcome Daesh, to focus on building their own capacity to train themselves and protect themselves. But this will have to be matched by efforts of the Iraqi government to develop a coherent strategy that includes all sections of the Iraqi population in this endeavour. Without an inclusive strategy, the cycle of conflicts spurred on by radical groups exploiting historical and deep-seated sectarian and ethnic tensions will continue to undermine Iraq's long-term survival. As I have said previously, we cannot hope to drain the swamp of terrorism by military means alone or by imposing leadership from the outside, or, to put it more bluntly in the vernacular: we will not bomb our way to victory. The leadership will have to come from within Iraq and the region, and that challenge must be answered by Iraqis. Iraq is, of course, only one theatre in a regional and global struggle.

Investigators from the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights have labelled Syria the world's worst humanitarian catastrophe. Civil war has claimed around 250,000 lives and driven millions more from their homes—at least four million Syrian refugees externally and six million are displaced internally. And the Syrian regime continues to inflict war crimes and crimes against humanity against its own citizens. Talk of pragmatism in the search for peace is fine but it cannot result in Assad remaining permanently in power. His ongoing presence would only serve as a spur to armed resistance and provide a rallying call for extremists. A leader who uses chemical weapons against his civilians, who orders massacres of the innocent with impunity, who commands the imprisonment and torture of children for painting graffiti on the wall and who thinks nothing of the mass slaughter of his own people belongs in a jail cell, not in charge.

We have called for and continue to call for a coherent strategy for Syria. It must be based on a sustainable political solution and a peace plan that has a chance of gaining traction. This will need to be underpinned by a reconstruction and humanitarian effort that demonstrates the dividends of peace.

Like Mr Turnbull, Labor does not support unilaterally sending ground combat units into Syria. The history of success of Western-led armies in this region is poor, to say the least. We understand the very real risk of a protracted ground war involving Australian personnel in danger, with limited potential for it to contribute to the long-term solution we should be seeking. And in the short term, an escalated presence of Western troops will only feed the propaganda of Daesh.

The conflict in the Middle East has profound consequences in our region too. Australia has suffered 112 terrorism related deaths since 2000, most of them of course, sadly, in Bali at the hands of Jemaah Islamiyah. Now Sidney Jones, a leading foreign policy thinker in Jakarta writes, most disturbingly:

The conflict in Syria has captured the imagination of Indonesian extremists in a way no foreign war has before.

And in the medium-term we face the risk of people returning from Syria, not just to Australia but to the region, poisoned by fanaticism, with ill-intent in their hearts and skill in conflict.

Australia has to show leadership here, particularly through multilateral institutions, as a key architect of OPEC and a founding member of both the East Asia Summit and the first ASEAN dialogue partner. ASEAN has made a remarkable contribution to establishing stable relations amongst the countries of South-East Asia. We need to support and maintain that focus; that cooperation is so important in tackling the challenges on doorsteps.

But as much as we can deal with our neighbours and our partners in the region we can never negotiate with Daesh, because there is nothing rational about their world view. There is nothing we can say to them and nothing they can offer us. They are not just weak; they are deluded. They are the enemy of Islam and an enemy of people everywhere. Engaged in crimes against people of all faiths and traditions, they deal only in violence, fear and murder, and they must be met with uncompromising, resolute force.

Here in Australia we put our trust in the expertise, professionalism and skill of our security agencies and our emergency services personnel. As parliamentarians we should continue to be guided by the best advice of our agencies and experts with regard to the new terrorism threat advisory system. We must give agencies and communities all the support we can to enhance their capability and to counter the radicalisation of vulnerable youth. This should include removing all impediments to the passage of information amongst agencies, effecting their seamless cooperation and ensuring that we match the right capabilities to a given situation in the timeliest manner possible.

And we count on standing together with a clear message to all who would seek to do us harm. There is never any excuse for violence aimed at the innocent. People who would seek to kill their fellow citizens in the name of Islam are not martyrs: they are murderers. And any individual whose actions cross the sharp boundary between right and wrong must feel the full force of the law, particularly those who would seek to prey upon vulnerable, isolated young people and make them instruments of hate.

We agree with the government: we must stand strong in the defence of our people's safety, resilient in our defence of Australia as a diverse, generous and inclusive multicultural society. The handful of Australians lured to the war zone of Iraq and Syria and the tiny, twisted minority tempted to replicate acts of terror here at home do not reflect the values of faith, or of Islam in particular. Nor, in my experience, do they represent in any fashion at all our nation's diverse and generous Muslim community. I have heard many Muslim leaders say that Islam is a religion of peace. I know they mean it and I thank them for that leadership. We should always strive to work with the Muslim community through cooperation, not isolation.

The respected former Director-General of ASIO, David Irvine, expressed it most powerfully when he said:

… the strongest defence against violent extremism lies within the Australian Muslim community itself.

This must inform a balanced approach to our counterterrorism community engagement, drawing on new means and new methods, and adapting to new challenges.

In the 2014 review of US Department of Defense strategies and priorities, the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, wrote:

My greatest concern is that we will not innovate quickly enough or deeply enough to be prepared for the future for the world we will face two decades from now.

We should heed those words.

The security threats facing Australia are no longer limited to forces coming to our continent by sea or mounting a long-range air attack. We live in an era where disruptive technologies present genuine threats to our national security. We are fortunate in Australia to have a regime of strong gun controls, introduced by former Prime Minister Howard and supported by Labor, that make it difficult for criminals to readily access the kinds of high-powered weapons that inflicted such dreadful loss of life in Paris. But individuals and loosely-arranged organisations are adapting, harnessing emerging and relatively inexpensive technologies in their attempt to do us harm. More than ever, our security agencies need to be competitive and responsive to deal with new and emerging threats.

We must engage proactively in driving an effective international approach to cripple the financial operations of terrorist organisations and their supporters. The international coordination of intelligence operations and the exchange of information requires greater urgency and energy; countering the rapid adoption of the emerging low-cost technologies, such as drones and cyberattacks, will be increasingly important.

This needs to be a global, multilateral process. Our treaties, conventions and export controls need to reflect that we live in a time when bomb-making instructions can be easily found on the internet and 3D printing is common. As the distinguished and, as of today, outgoing head of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Peter Varghese, has said, global agreements must 'be updated and built upon so that they remain relevant as the landscape shifts'.

But countermeasures are not always available off the shelf. We are in a constant battle of lessons learned, adaptation and anticipation, which require imagination and initiative. That is why it is essential for Australia to nurture its national defence research and development effort. If we are not in the business of creating new ideas and quickly turning new ideas into new technology, the ADF will become slower to respond and less effective over time. Now is not the time to be making cuts to important organisations such as the Defence Science and Technology Group.

Our parliament should always be a place where we can debate the important issues in a rational and considered way. This parliament should be a forum not for fear mongering or jingoism but for the considered examination of the best way to keep our nation safe.

I understand Australians are anxious and concerned about their security. We open the papers, go online or turn on the TV and there seem to be more stories than ever about threats to our way of life and about random, senseless acts of violence afflicting the innocent. It is a challenging time for our country and, indeed, the world. I say to our fellow Australians: take heart and be of good courage. Take comfort from the knowledge that our security agencies, our police and our Defence Force are amongst the very best and bravest in the world. Australians should take comfort from this parliamentary speech by the Prime Minister and reply by the opposition today. I can assure those who are listening that, despite our very fierce debates about many aspects of Australia, we go together into the future with a united strength in terms of national security.

There can be no 100 per cent guarantee against terrorism occurring here. We already know this. There can be even less of a guarantee of the safety of Australians overseas, no matter how much we wish to protect our family, friends and children when they travel. There is a possibility that some few people with some infamous training and malice in their hearts would seek to come causing harm. But Australians should be reassured that our defence forces, security forces and, indeed, our parliament and leaders across various faith communities are committed to securing our future together. Australians should know that the very qualities that we love about our country—the rule of law, respect and inclusion—remain our most powerful and enduring defence against those who would seek to attack and undermine our way of life. In this parliament it has been said about our national security previously that:

Whatever has been done; whatever must be done; and all that we can hope to do in the future …

That will be the first responsibility of all of us as elected representatives. I thank the House.