Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Premier Minns was open and honest with the people of New South Wales when he briefed and provided confidence to the public in declaring what date he'd been advised of the planned terrorist attack by this unknown organisation or people or individuals. The Prime Minister has been embarrassed, because he wasn't advised by the police because they were worried about him leaking the information ahead of any action by the police.

Government Members:

Government members interjecting—

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

Members on my right!

Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm asking my question, Mr Speaker.

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

Yes, but reflecting directly on a member, as we discussed late yesterday in question time—

Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's not a reflection, Mr Speaker; it's a fact. Let the Prime Minister dispute it. I'm stating a fact.

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

Whilst we're dealing with this, resume your seat. The Leader of the House has risen on a point of order during a question, but it's an important point that I want to hear.

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

The reflection that was contained within the question cannot, under standing orders, be part of the question. Either, if the Leader of the Opposition insists on saying it, the whole question should be ruled out of order or he should simply frame the question without the part that's disorderly.

Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order: if the Prime Minister claims to have been misrepresented there are avenues for him at the end of question time to make that point. The statement I've made is a statement of fact, and it's the reason the Prime Minister keeps digging. I'm happy to—

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

Just as we dealt yesterday, in the last part of question time, with the Leader of the Opposition taking offence at the reflection that was directed towards him, to assist the House—to assist question time so we don't get bogged down—I'm going to ask the leader to rephrase that part of the question so that we can deal with this and he can have the right to ask his question.

Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm happy to assist. My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, Premier Minns was open, honest and transparent with the people of New South Wales when he declared that on 20 January he was advised by New South Wales police about the planned terrorist attack. The Prime Minister has been asked on multiple occasions to be honest, open and straightforward with the Australian public as to why he wasn't notified. The Prime Minister has previously advised dates on which he's been notified of serious events by the Australian Federal Police. Why can't the Prime Minister just be honest with the Australian people?

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There have been instances of people releasing or referencing classified material in the past, and, indeed, there was a rebuke by Senator James Paterson of the Leader of the Opposition for referencing classified information in this parliament.

Hon. Members:

Honourable members interjecting—

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

The question contained a range of issues about—Manager of Opposition Business, resume your seat. I'm not taking the point of order. We're not having this. The Prime Minister was asked a question about former issues. It was a broad question; it wasn't about the one specific issue. Other material was in the question. There was a long preamble. I'm not taking points of order just because you don't like the answer.

Government members interjecting—

Order! Members on my right, I don't need commentary. The question is in order. We dealt with the imputation. The Prime Minister is giving information to the House about the other issues that he was asked about in the question. It's different from the one that was specifically about this issue; there were other issues and content in the question. He is being directly relevant.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

 The Leader of the Opposition, to quote him, referred—prior to the last election, when he was a cabinet minister with access to information—to 'both open source and other intelligence I see'. He referred to that, and he was rebuked by Senator Paterson as chair of the PJCIS. Also, that was in 2022. It wasn't the first time, because, in 2020, to quote an article:

The office of Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton was suspected of leaking information it was told was classified about the cost of medically evacuating refugees …

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

We're one minute and 30 seconds in, so I'll hear from the Manager of Opposition Business.

Michael Sukkar (Deakin, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The point of order is on relevance, and, out of respect for you and your comments, I refrained from speaking earlier and listened further to the answer from the Prime Minister. There is absolutely no way that the Prime Minister's comments now can, in any way, be relevant to this question. We are asking questions that the Australian people want answers to and that Premier Minns has provided publicly, and the Prime Minister, if he doesn't want to answer, should sit down.

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

The Prime Minister is being relevant because it was a broader question, but he's going to have to come back to the substance of the question he was asked about. I'm going to draw him back to the question.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There are two choices you can make here. One is to prioritise getting to the bottom of what is happening here, supporting the police and intelligence agencies, or you can choose to play politics and play these games, and that is precisely what you are doing. You haven't asked for a briefing from the security agencies. When I offered a briefing of the security agencies to others, you didn't take that up. Indeed, you had an objection to a point of order to that, as well. AFP Operation Avalite has successfully made one arrest. They have joint counterterrorism teams operating. There have been 180 arrests in New South Wales. Twelve people have been charged in Queensland, 13 in South Australia, and two today in Western Australia. That is the hard work that is being conducted by our police and security and intelligence services. The idea that that is not the priority and that that should not be my focus is quite frankly absurd—absurd and irresponsible. And there are others on that side who know how irresponsible it is. (Time expired)