Melissa Price (Durack, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. At Senate estimates, officials gave evidence that the Attorney-General released a convicted terrorist into the community by granting him parole. Prime Minister, what was this individual's offence? Into which state or territory has he been released? And does this individual pose a threat to the Australian public?

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I give the call to the Attorney-General.

Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party, Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The safety of the community is the government's highest priority at all times, including when making parole decisions. In relation to cases such as, I think, the one that the member referred to, there is a very high threshold that must be met before a person can be granted parole. The decision is informed by advice from relevant agencies and the safety of the community is the most important consideration in these decisions. Parole keeps the community safer. It means mandatory controls and mandatory supervision are in place which would otherwise not be available at the conclusion of someone's sentence. And the opposition knows that these decisions are informed by a range of expert assessments about an offender. They also know that individuals on parole are subject to strict supervision conditions which are informed by the advice of law enforcement and corrective services agencies. At all times, parolees are under the close supervision of state—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Attorney-General will pause. He was asked—and I know where the member for Wannon is going—about a specific case, but, as you know, under the standing orders I can't make him directly answer the question on the specifics the member for Durack asked. But I will make sure he's being directly relevant to the question, and talking about the parole process, in this case, is directly relevant. I'm just going to remind the member for Wannon that it's going to be really difficult to raise a point on relevance, in light of what I've said. The member for Wannon has the call.

Dan Tehan (Wannon, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It does go to relevance because the question asks: 'What is the individual's offence? Which state or territory was he released into? Most importantly, does this individual pose a threat to the Australian community?' And the Attorney-General should answer the question.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Moreton will leave the chamber under 94(a).

The member for Moreton then left the chamber.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Just to the point of order, the Attorney-General is going to the exact principles that are worked through by the government in making these decisions.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

And he will need to return to the question and ensure that what he is addressing the House does remain directly relevant. It was a specific question, There is detail required, but I'm just going to ensure that he's being directly relevant. If he strays into any other topics, I will sit him down. The Attorney-General has the call.

Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party, Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. The opposition know that individuals on parole are subject to strict supervision conditions which are informed by the advice of law enforcement and corrective services agencies. At all times parolees are under the close supervision of state and territory corrective services agencies. I can also advise the House that, when in government, those opposite made similar decisions to release offenders on parole. As the Attorney-General's Department advised Senate estimates just two days ago, a Liberal attorney-general and a Liberal assistant minister released three offenders on parole between 2020 and 2022.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Attorney-General will pause. The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, You have given a clear direction to the Attorney-General. Standing order 91(c) makes it clear that a member's conduct is disorderly if they wilfully refuse to conform to a standing order, and that is what the Attorney-General is doing.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

To get through this, you will need to make it directly relevant to the question through the Senate estimates part of the question without simply talking about alternative policies or the previous government. I will give the Attorney-General one more chance. I want him to listen carefully to me. If he strays beyond that he will have to return to his seat. The Attorney-General has the call.

Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party, Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We are not going to talk about the details of individual offenders. And it is very disappointing to see the opposition seeking to politicise what is an important part of the criminal justice system, particularly when it is a part of the criminal justice system that the former government utilised. I include in that the three offenders released between 2020 and 2022 who were convicted of online child sexual offences and people smuggling.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Attorney-General will resume his seat. He has finished his answer—well, he has now.