Linda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Defence) Share this | Hansard source

I thank all senators for their contributions to the debate on the Counter-Terrorism (Temporary Exclusion Orders) Bill 2019 and the consequential bill. Senator Patrick just called this an extraordinary bill, and I agree with him. It is extraordinary for very good reasons. This hasn't been a rushed bill. It is balanced, and it is required now.

Around 230 Australians have travelled to Syria and Iraq to fight in the name of ISIL since 2012. Though many have died in fighting, many of those who survive intend to return to Australia, a country whose values and way of life—and responsibilities as citizens—they have rejected. Indeed, the advice of our national security agencies is that, following the recent collapse of the Islamic State's territorial control in Syria and Iraq, many of these people will be seeking to return to Australia in the very near future. Their return, and the significant risks they pose, must be carefully managed. It must be controlled in the interests of all Australians and our national security.

As we already know, the threat beyond our shores is also resident here in Australia. Since 12 September 2014, when the national terrorism level was raised, our police and security agencies have thwarted 16 terrorist attacks right here in Australia. It is against this backdrop, and on the advice of our intelligence and law enforcement agencies, that the government has introduced the temporary exclusion orders bill and advocates for its urgent passage. Keeping Australian communities safe from those who seek to do us harm is, and will always continue to be, this government's No. 1 priority.

But let us be very clear who we are talking about to be the subject of this legislation. These are not Australians who have taken themselves and their families on a war zone, a conflict zone, Contiki tour. These are Australian citizens who have enjoyed the rights of, and also the responsibilities accorded by, Australian citizenship: the right to live in a free and open society free from fear. These people have now come to the attention of counterterrorism interest. Why? It is because they travelled to Syria and Iraq. Maybe, in a few cases, they went unknowingly, but many actively went to support the work of ISIS—a terrorist organisation that has inflicted rape, torture and death on innocent people in both Iraq and Syria, an organisation that sought to subjugate people to the tyranny through force of arms.

Some of these people even took their own children with them to be trained to hate, to become martyrs, to become murderers, to become jihadi, and they raised their children under the ideology of terrorism and hate—the so-called 'cubs of the caliphate'. Now they want to return to Australia to benefit, once again, from the rights of being an Australian citizen. I'd ask all in this place: are you comfortable with having these Australians returning to Australia uncontrolled and unsupervised? We have to make sure, as much as we can, that they are safe to live next door to you or your constituents and that it is safe for their children to go to school with your children. Our view is that we must have formal controls in place to manage their return and allow Australian authorities the time they need to gather any outstanding evidence and to finalise any prosecution that may be required. This is why we are introducing these temporary exclusion orders—to keep Australian communities safe.

There have been many claims made in this debate by those opposite. They undoubtedly will be raised again when we go into committee, so I'll leave the rebuttal of those issues until that point. But I would make these two points. There's been a lot of discussion in the chamber that these are unfettered rights—and, again, there's been a lot of demonisation of the Minister for Home Affairs. Any cursory read of this bill would demonstrate that what they have said is patently untrue. All decisions by the home affairs minister to make a TEO are subject to administrative review before the TEO can be put in force, and they are subject to judicial review as well. So that first claim by those opposite is patently untrue and fearmongering.

The second issue that we've debated and discussed at some length today is about the release of the Solicitor-General's advice. I'd say two things in relation to that. Firstly, as has been pointed out, this government will never, ever release information that would be patently of use to terrorists and their own lawyers. That, simply, is something we would never support. Secondly, we did seek that advice at the recommendation of the Law Council of Australia and the Human Rights Commission. I understand they are happy with the fact that we did that. They asked it and we did that.

In conclusion, I'd like to acknowledge the significant work in this regard on this bill by the ministry of home affairs, ASIO, the AFP and the Office of Parliamentary Counsel. I thank also my colleagues for their debate and consideration. It's for these reasons that I commend these two bills to the Senate.