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

I, too, rise in support of this very important motion. I note that there has been some invective and a bit of emotion used in opposition to this motion, but I think this is probably one of most important issues that this Senate should review. I say that for a couple of reasons. First of all is the issue of the sanctity of people's homes. In this case it was a pre-eminent businesswoman in Perth, Meg O'Neill, who is the CEO of an outstanding Western Australian and Australian company. But that aside, it should be that everybody is safe.

I listened to Labor speakers earlier on saying, 'Well, yes, this is an important issue, but we don't need to refer it to a Senate inquiry.' Yes, we do. If any of you opposite had that happen to you, if you had protesters who had recently gassed a building in what I could only describe as akin to domestic terrorism, if you had them turn up to your house, case your house and then have a home invasion of your house at 6.30 in the morning, simply because you are a senator or had a different point of view from them, you would be the first ones not only to refer this to the police but to refer it to the Senate for a Senate inquiry. The issues that come to light from this go far beyond one person in one home.

Everybody has a right to feel safe. Whether you're the CEO of a company, whether you are a bricklayer or whether you are a politician, you have the right to be safe in your own home from what look to be domestic terrorism-like activities. When you have a look at the four misguided people who were doing this most horrific thing of terrorising people in their own homes, they couldn't even say what they were protesting about. This then brings on the next question in my mind, which is: what the hell were Four Corners doing there in the first place? Social activism has no place, whether, as we've seen in the last 24 hours, it's the DPP, or whether it is the ABC or a news journalist. If you want to be a social activist, fantastic. As Senator Brockman has just read out from the media alliance guidelines, you do not allow yourself to become a tool of a protest group.

That is exactly what Four Corners have done yet again. They became the story rather than reporting the story. I find it completely beyond belief, as other people have said here tonight, that Four Corners could claim that they just turned up to this domestic address in Perth at 6.30 in the morning and there was this protest or this home invasion that was about to occur. 'We just happened to have our cameras here, but we didn't really know what was going on.' What a load of complete bunkum. They knew exactly what they were there to do. That's why they were in Perth. They were there to film this group of probably somewhat amateur protestors, to give them a voice and to give them a platform on their program. Disgrace on Four Corners and disgrace on the ABC.

The ABC certainly cannot be trusted to do this inquiry into themselves, because guess what they'll find in a few months time? 'Nothing really to see here. Oops, we got it wrong. They were actually on the driveway on the property. We thought they were out.' They cannot investigate themselves. Do you know what they won't investigate? They are not going to be investigating what Four Corners was doing there in the first place when actually doing this story. They were there as activists and they were there to promote activism, which is what the media alliance guidelines warns prudent and professional journalists not to do.

I say to all in this chamber that this motion should be supported because this is exactly the issue that we should be looking at in this place. This is not just about Meg O'Neill and it's not just about Four Corners becoming an activist program. This is about a much greater principle for each and every one of us here and everybody else in Australia. We have to say, 'It is not okay to be an activist and to threaten somebody's home.' Apart from anything else, how cruel is it? Anybody who's actually had someone try to break into their home—

Debate interrupted.