Senate debates

Wednesday, 3 July 2024

Matters of Urgency

National Security

4:22 pm

Photo of Jess WalshJess Walsh (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

This is by its nature politicisation of security issues. As a member of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, I can say that this motion complete ignores the formal, considered and appropriate ways that terrorist organisations are, in fact, listed in this country. It is not the Senate that makes these decisions, because these matters of national security go well beyond this chamber. They go beyond politics. It is not for the Senate to decide whether to list an organisation as a terrorist organisation. It is not up to Labor senators, Liberal senators, National senators, Greens senators or other crossbench senators to decide when to list a terrorist organisation. There are legal processes for this set out in the Criminal Code. It is the law that sets out the processes that need to be followed. The law sets out how these decisions are appropriately then scrutinised by the parliamentary joint committee. These processes must be followed.

Critically, decisions to list terrorist organisations under the law, under the code, are informed by the advice of our intelligence and security agencies. These agencies serve the Australian people. They are not there to pander to the whims of senators in this place. They are there to serve the Australian people, to keep Australia safe and to keep Australia protected. Those opposite are well aware of this. The process for dealing with this matter is the one that must be followed, not this political motion in this chamber today. And the process will be followed.

The government has been clear. The government has of course condemned the hateful comments made by the members of this group, Hizb ut-Tahrir. These disgraceful statements and the glorification of terrorism have no place in Australia. That is why it is so disappointing that those opposite want to deal with the issue in this way. When they were in government they of course followed the processes appropriately, just as this government does, too—and just as any government should. And I think they respected those processes then, when they were in government. So they should respect them now, today, as well.

At the time, the then Attorney-General, George Brandis, rejected listing this organisation, and he followed the process. The decision was based on the strong view of ASIO at the time that the group did not fit the definition of a terrorist organisation in the Criminal Code. That was the process then. It's the same process now. The parliament has set up this process through the Criminal Code. At that time, back then, the Leader of the Opposition, when he was the Minister for Home Affairs, correctly said that the government relies on the advice of our intelligence and security agencies in deciding whether to list Hizb ut-Tahrir. That is exactly what is being done in this matter today.

If those opposite don't have the confidence in our intelligence and security agencies, they should say so, because they know that these decisions are made beyond this chamber, as agreed to, in this parliament. But, regrettably, we see—and we see it all too often—that those opposite just can't pass up the opportunity to politicise issues that really should be beyond politics: issues that should be about working together to keep people safe, to meaningfully address issues that may cause harm or that divide our community, to make sure that that doesn't happen. That is the responsibility of both sides of politics as parties that form government.

So, while this process is undertaken and we let our national security and intelligence agencies do their important work, we need to remind ourselves that the issue being debated here is not exclusively dealt with by listing this group as a terrorist organisation. There are a range of mechanisms in place to keep Australians safe, and that is what this government will do.

Comments

No comments