House debates
Monday, 30 November 2015
Private Members' Business
Iraq and Syria
1:06 pm
Anthony Byrne (Holt, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I rise to support the member of Sydney's motion:
That this House calls on the Minister for Foreign Affairs to support a parliamentary debate during the current sitting on the Australian Government's strategy in response to the crisis in Syria and Iraq.
That motion was moved by the deputy leader and acting leader of the Labor Party on 19 October this year. Much has happened since then.
The reason why I am supporting—and so strongly supporting—the member for Sydney's motion is that I have always had the most profound belief that this House, this chamber, is where our collective voices and the voices of the people are heard. They are heard in another way collectively: through a federal election. That federal election empowers us, the 150 members of the House of Representatives and the 76 senators—less so the 76 senators and more so the 150 members of the House of Representatives—to act as their voice, to contemplate the issues of the day, to have the serious debates that need to be had in this place and in the life of the country. We are having this discussion—and I welcome the Father of the House, who is about to make a contribution to this debate. We do so—and I think it is instructive to talk about this point—in a torrent of social media: of Twitter, of Facebook, of Google, of YouTube. Many voices are being heard in different fora. Our voice in this place should be able to be heard equally. Our voice in this place should be the one that sets the tone for all of those other debates that occur, because we have been elected by the millions of Australian people to be their voice—to have the discussions about the big issues of the day.
What we are confronting overseas in Iraq and Syria at present, 16 months after ISIL declared that they were a self-appointed caliphate in Syria and Iraq, is almost the largest issue of all. I say that from personal experience because, as I have said in this chamber on a number of occasions, on 23 September 2014, ISIL motivated terrorism came to our shores and to Endeavour Hills—literally almost to my doorstep—in the attacks on two brave police officers by an ISIL inspired young person who was then killed by a police officer. Subsequent to that there has been a thwarted Anzac Day attack. I do not want to go into the details of what was proposed in that attack but, had that attack been successful, it would have had a profound impact on our national psyche. That is what these attacks are designed to do. Interestingly, I was looking at ISIL activity after that date—after 23 September—did you know, Deputy Speaker, that there were 59 ISIL-related terrorist attacks in 16 countries during and after 23 September? We are talking about an ideology that is as dangerous, in my view, as communism—and I have said this on 7.30. We are talking about a self-declared caliphate that needs to be removed and exterminated. This source—this contagion—if not dealt with by the international community cohesively, cogently and diligently; if not uprooted, eradicated and destroyed, will extend its ideology to the furthest corners of the globe. You can see the manifestation of that ideology in Yemen and in other places, in other portions of the Middle East, and in Africa. It is a force for the most dangerous transmission of a political idea since communism.
As the international community, we have an obligation to remove it, notwithstanding all of the other conturbations and conniptions of other countries around ISIL and where it is based. It is our obligation as a civilised community to remove this stain from humanity. It is our obligation as an international community to take this poison away from the well of the Middle East, which is already contaminated by too many hatreds and by bitterness. It is our obligation to have a discussion in this place about this and about how we do this—in a measured, even and bipartisan way. We cannot leave it for people on social media to have that discussion for us. It is not for them to determine what course of action we should take; it is for our sovereign parliament. We are elected to have these discussions on behalf of the community. That is why I think we need to continue this discussion, and that is why I strongly support the motion moved by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition.
1:11 pm
Philip Ruddock (Berowra, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I always enjoy the comments from my colleague—always constructive and very helpful. But in this matter, let me say: I do not think there is any shortage of debate, and I do not think there is any shortage of opportunities to deal with these issues. I was somewhat surprised when the Deputy Leader of the Opposition moved her motion. As she said, she was seeking a parliamentary debate, during the current sitting, of the Australian government strategy in response to the crisis in Syria and Iraq. It did not offer a view about where we should be going and what we should be doing, but it did say we should have a debate. Let me just assure my colleague—and I am sure he knows—there is a debate. It was initiated by the Prime Minister. It was responded to by the Leader of the Opposition. I must say, I picked up the speakers list for the House of Representatives today, and I noted that the statements on the terrorism attacks around the world—initiated by the Prime Minister; responded to by the Leader of the Opposition—are still being made, with one member of the opposition and 15 members of the government contributing.
This is an important issue. I have taken the opportunity to inform myself on these matters. As the honourable member knows, as part of a field trip from this parliament, following a visit sponsored by Save the Children Australia for me to go to Jordan, I later travelled with my colleague, the member for Fowler and Chief Opposition Whip, to Lebanon, Turkey and Jordan. I came back despairing about the future, because I can see continuing conflict. I am very, very anxious to ensure that this conflict, which is contributing significantly to potential risks now reaching Australia, is dealt with with a degree of determination. But it cannot be dealt with by Australia alone. It needs the leadership of those that we call our coalition partners. It needs the leadership of many others, and I have spoken about this from time to time. We cannot go in and do what needs to be done, but we can help those who are prepared to do so. It is in that context that we are playing our part now. We are supporting with an Australian commitment the effort to contain the organisation known as Daesh. We are working to support the government of Iraq. We are working to advocate for political solutions in relation to this crisis.
As part of the global coalition we have committed 300 Australian Defence personnel to help train the regular Iraqi army to reclaim and hold territory. We are providing about 80 ADF personnel in support of the Iraqi counter-terrorism service to assist and advise in the work that they are undertaking. We are contributing to the air strikes on Daesh targets in Iraq and now extending them. To date we have had something in the order of 2,100 Iraqi personnel trained by Australians. Our Special Forces have trained and guided others. We have contributed 480 air strike missions over Iraq and Syria, and I want to thank all of those Australians who are playing this important role.
But I just make the point that we are not going to be able to deal with this alone. We need clear political leadership and I hope we will see that forthcoming. I am sure our Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Prime Minister are clearly advocating that in all of the engagements in which they are participating. There have been some positive signs, but there is a long way to go, and the dispossession of so many people in the way we have seen is a tragedy of enormous proportion. It is appropriate we debate it, but there has been no unwillingness on the part of the government to ensure that there are opportunities for that debate.
Debate adjourned.
Sitting suspended from 13 : 17 to 16 : 00