Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Immigration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills, Science and Research (Senator Evans) to a question without notice asked by Senator Brandis today relating to Mr Taji Mustafa and Muslim protests in Sydney, New South Wales.

Australians have been unanimous in their condemnation of what occurred in Sydney, New South Wales, on Saturday. There is absolutely no excuse whatsoever for the violence that occurred and it must be and has been rightly condemned by so many across society. No-one wants to see violence on our streets perpetrated by anyone—by anyone of any colour or of any creed—and I support the comments by some of the Labor ministers, who have rightly condemned this unacceptable behaviour.

However, in supporting the condemnation of this behaviour, I also observe that, in particular in relation to the answers given in question time today, those ministers failed to admit that their earlier actions were a contributing factor and, as such, it is hypocritical after the event to act in a way which seeks to avoid mention of the government's earlier actions. It is for that reason that, in condemning this grotesque violence, the government and the minister must now explain to the people of Australia why, despite repeated warnings from the opposition, they decided to issue a visa to Taji Mustafa, the UK leader of the extremist group Hizb ut-Tahrir, who has on occasions in the recent past called for the military destruction of Israel and, further, condoned the killing of Australian troops in Afghanistan.

The government needs to explain to the Australian people why, despite this evidence, it knowingly gave a visa to the leader of this extremist group so that he could come to Australia and address Australian Muslims. In the address that he gave yesterday, which was at the annual conference of Hizb ut-Tahrir at Bankstown in Sydney's south-west, Mr Mustafa urged his brothers and sisters to go forward and offer Islamic solutions to a world that is struggling in the aftermath of the Arab Spring uprisings. He also said that Muslims needed a louder voice, especially in the Western world. I also note that an eight-year-old girl fronted the congress of Islamic fundamentalists yesterday, and she herself urged the crowd and Muslim youth to fight for the restoration of the Islamic caliphate, a single global government for all Muslims established under strict Sharia law.

It should also be noted in relation to Mr Mustafa's particular group that, unlike other Muslim groups who have loudly and properly gone on the record and condemned the actions of those involved in Saturday's riots, Mr Mustafa's group has failed to do this. As the Leader of the Opposition has said, I do not believe that the people on the streets of Sydney yesterday were truly representative of Islam. I do not believe that the ugliness we saw on the streets of Sydney yesterday fairly reflects the Islamic people of our country, and that is why their actions should be condemned.

There are very clear public interest criteria for the granting of visas in this country.

Ministers have the full authority to refuse visas to people such as Mr Mustafa who hold extremist views such as belief in the use of violence as a legitimate means of political expression. It cannot be disputed that Hizb ut-Tahrir believes in and promotes violence. As I have stated, they have openly called for the destruction of Israel, and last year at one of their conferences in Sydney their leaders condoned the killing of Australian troops in Afghanistan.

The coalition has long had concerns about this extremist group. We said prior to the last election that we would examine the legal options available to us for closing this group down in Australia. The government, in being aware of the coalition's concerns, had all the more reason to not grant Mr Mustafa a visa to come into this country.

As the Leader of the Opposition has stated, the Australian government should be saying clearly and unambiguously that we do not need preachers of hate in this country and we certainly should not be giving visas to people who are preachers of hate. It is the position of the coalition that the government should not have given a visa to Mr Mustafa and that the visa should be immediately withdrawn. It is wrong that in the tolerant country of Australia we should have people like this preaching this kind of bile. Again, we call on the government to revoke this visa and to get this man out of the country. Newcomers to this country are not expected to surrender their heritage but they are expected to surrender their hatreds. Those hatreds have no place in Australia society. (Time expired)

Ursula Stephens (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I too rise to take note of the answers to questions today, particularly relating the disgraceful performance on the weekend. The protests in Sydney were sparked by an anti-Islamist video, which is a grubby piece of rubbish that adds no value to the sum of human experience. It triggered an extraordinary level of violence not just here in Sydney but also around the world. It has led to injury and even to death, the death of US ambassador Mr Stephens. It was Mr Stephens who did so much for our own Australian who was caught up in Libya; he did much of the negotiating that led to her release.

While I agree so much with what Senator Cash has had to say this afternoon, I think that it is only fair to acknowledge that the notion that Mr Abbott has asked for the government to withdraw the visa for Taji Mustafa is an issue that needs to be dealt with quite carefully. Mr Mustafa is, as we all know, a member of the Hizb ut-Tahrir organisation, which in fact, despite its offensive manner and despite its offensive agenda, is not proscribed as a terrorist organisation in Australia; nor is it proscribed in the UK or the USA. So one of the things we do need to be very careful about is the way in which we set precedents around terrorist organisations. There is a process for assessing and doing that.

As the minister explained today, when this organisation was brought to the attention of the previous government, in 2007, the Attorney-General was Mr Philip Ruddock, and he said at the time that that organisation had not done anything to warrant its banning in Australia. So we do need to be very mindful of the criteria we use as a government through our intelligence services to determine the international status of organisations like this and we need to be mindful that it is a big decision that we make when we proscribe an organisation. The Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence and Security reports to the parliament justifying reasons for proscribing organisations. The assessment of this organisation remains the assessment of the Gillard government.

The New South Wales Premier called for that organisation to be banned, but he was not able to make the case that would have the Attorney-General at the time, Mr Ruddock, agree. He said at the time—and I believe this is certainly true—that this is an organisation that basically says that it wants to declare war on Australia, on our values and on our people. It is an offensive organisation. But, until we can justify its proscription here in Australia, we are not able to take that step.

Minister Ruddock made that assessment and made the statement that the organisation had not done anything to warrant its banning in Australia. Then the Prime Minister of the day said that the federal government would not ban the Hizb ut-Tahrir unless it breached antiterror laws. That is the threshold test.

What has happened over the last few days—the escalation of violence, which was absolutely abhorrent and condemned by everybody on all sides of politics—provides an opportunity for ASIO and our intelligence services to now determine, through due process, whether or not Mr Mustafa deserves to remain in the country. Until that time, we have to abide by the rule of law, because that is the strength of our democracy. We do not do things— (Time expired)

Cory Bernardi (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary Assisting the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Following Senator Stephens in this debate on the motion to take note of the answers given by Senator Evans today, I would like to say that there are some shared concerns on most sides of the political debate on this. I would make the point to Senator Stephens, though, that it has not been condemned by everybody. Indeed, there was an article published in Green Left Weeklyblaming the police for the riots on the weekend—which beggars belief, even for an extreme green organisation and outfit.

It would be of no surprise to people in this chamber and anyone listening that I have been concerned about the impact and the progress of fundamentalist Islam in this country for many years. I have sounded many warnings, and I have been pilloried, attacked, condemned and criticised. I have been told that I am not telling the truth. When I produced the evidence, when I showed that the government was facilitating the demands of some of the extremists in respect to sharia compliant finance, I was told that I was making it up—until I gave them the press releases that Senator Sherry had put out and the booklets that they had launched. This necessitated changing our laws with regard to insolvency and Corporations Law. It would have established a sharia compliant tribunal.

The point that I am making—not to attack the government, because I think they have condemned these riots, like everything else—is that every single appeasement of sharia or Islamic law in this country is a step enhancing and emboldening the fundamentalists who want it. Every time they say, 'We want polygamy,' and it goes unchallenged, it advances their cause and emboldens them. Every time they say they want legal plurality, as the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils did in a submission to a joint committee, it undermines our critical values and the pillars of Western democracy, which are, firstly, the rule of law—one rule applying equally to everybody—and, secondly, the Judeo Christian values, which, whether you are a person of faith or not, have built the bedrock of how we treat each other in this society.

So we need to reject at every single turn the demands of the fundamentalists, no matter how minute, small or petty they may seem to be. Until they are denounced and until they are condemned and rejected out of hand, we will continue to see the progress of their agenda. And their agenda is a dangerous one. What happened on the weekend, including the signs of 'Behead those who insult the prophet', or 'Behead those who insult Islam', is exactly the same signature and signage of the same small group of dissident extremists who started this campaign in England and in parts of Western Europe. If you want to see the demonstration of that 10, 20 or 30 years on, go there now and have a look and you will see that there is isolation, there is a separatist culture and there is fear. We cannot be scared to stand up for the values of the right of peaceful protest and the right to have freedom of religion in this country. But that does not give anyone the right to undermine and destroy the essential pillars that have united us through generations of migration.

I welcome the fact that many people and leaders in the Muslim community have condemned these attacks, but some of them would be more genuine if they did not have a history of pushing for sharia or accommodations of Islamic laws themselves. That is what worries me. It worries me that they completely change their course to appear reasonable in the face of public sentiment, when perhaps they are doing something else behind the scenes. I say that because I genuinely fear for the future of our country if we allow these extremists to continue along their way of making demands—whether those demands are about not showing their face to a police officer and then running to the press and saying that the police officer is a racist because they wanted someone to unveil themselves or whether it is about making all sorts of hysterical outbursts every time there is any examination of the agenda of the sharia advocates—and we are going to stifle public debate.

It worries me that people like Senator Conroy are critical of Google for having the YouTube video up—which is just a ridiculous movie, might I add. I have watched it and it is just ridiculous, pathetic and hopeless. One person made that movie—one person—and four people have died and dozens of people around the world have been injured. This is an outrage. It is a disgrace. Rather than condemn Google, we need to condemn the perpetrators of these terrible acts and we need to denounce their agenda fulsomely. I look forward to bipartisan support for that. (Time expired)

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do not disagree with much of what Senator Cash said in terms of condemning the violence. I think everyone in this chamber would and should condemn that sort of behaviour. There is no excuse for violent protests—none at all—in our country. We do not support it and I know no-one on the opposition side supports it. As far as the comments of Senator Cash were linked to that issue, she gets no objection from me.

I do not personally have any information about Mr Mustafa. I do not know what he stands for. But there is no place for hate speeches in this country, either, and we certainly do not support that. What I do know is that we have a very strong security and intelligence community in this country. For some time I was actually on the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Intelligence and Security, and I am very much aware of the very thorough process that our security and intelligence agencies go through to keep our country safe and to also screen people who have agendas that do not fit with the expectations of the Australian community. Whether or not they have gone to the step of saying that this person should not have a visa is not something I am aware of. But what I am aware of is that there are proper processes for the granting of visas. It is not something that the government should get themselves involved in every time there is the potential for some issue. It is something the government should take very serious advice on. We have professionals who are skilled in giving this advice to government—and, as someone who has been on the security and intelligence committee, let me tell you that they do not waste any time in giving that advice to government if they think there is a problem.

As Minister Carr pointed out, this individual has been to Australia before. He was granted a visa at that time under what I understand are the same conditions that are in place now, but that visa was granted under the previous government. So it was somewhat disappointing—and I certainly disagree with some of the things Senator Bernardi said—to hear a hint in his speech that, while we abhor any violence and do not support any violence, somehow the government should take some responsibility for that violence. If that was what was being suggested, we absolutely reject that. We have condemned the violence, as people should.

I do want to take exception with one of the things that Senator Bernardi said. He talked about Muslim leaders being genuine and saying that they would be more genuine if some of their actions reflected that and they called on everyone to actually condemn the violence.

The Muslim leaders in this country did condemn the violence. It is not appropriate for Senator Bernardi to come in and question the sincerity of that condemnation. They publicly went out and did so. They did so very quickly. They did not have to do so, and I think it was inappropriate for Senator Bernardi to question the sincerity of that condemnation.

I saw some of the condemnation on TV. I certainly thought it was sincere. I thought they spoke very eloquently on behalf of their community, of which we know the vast majority, like all communities in this country, are honest, law-abiding citizens who want to get on with making a prosperous and viable life here in Australia.

I know many Muslims who are active contributors to society and who would be—not that I have spoken to them since this violence—appalled by this and the signs that children were asked to hold. I know these are not actions that are supported by the mainstream Muslim community. We know that there were about 100 people at that protest, whether they were all there in order to do what was ultimately done in the first place is something I do not know. We know that, even if they all were, it is still a tiny number and we ought not condemn a whole community simply because of the actions of a few. It is something that we would not tolerate anywhere else. We would not tolerate it with other communities. We do not condemn whole countries or nationalities on the basis of the actions of a few. If they acted unlawfully, the law will and should deal with those people.

Taking note on this issue, it is fine to condemn the violence but to suggest that people are insincere in their condemnation is not an appropriate thing to do. (Time expired)

Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I also rise to take note of answers. In my maiden speech on 14 June 2005, I spoke of having lived my life across the diversity that is Australia. I spoke of cultural diversity having brought us many advantages but also challenges. I spoke of when my parents and millions like them experienced prejudice when they first came to Australia. It was a fact of life. They got on with it. They assimilated. They shared their culture, traditions, values and beliefs. They accepted and became accepted. Through this, they and many others helped forge the unique Australian way of life that we have today.

I then spoke of divisions in our society and I want to restate those today: while some seek to gloss over divisions in our society by affirming a desire for harmonious coexistence and religious tolerance, divisions do exist. We need to address them before the rifts become so deep that our society's very existence is threatened. Australia is a tolerant and compassionate society founded on understanding and respecting social and religious differences. Our success as a culturally diverse society comes from putting our commitment to Australia first.

Last Saturday in Sydney we saw the ugly side of multiculturalism in our community drastically rearing its horrid face—this is what I mean about the divisions in society. Some commentators are suggesting that the elephant in the room within our Australian community has reminded us of its presence. Firstly, this film has more than once been officially condemned by the US government with the White House even taking the extraordinary, albeit unsuccessful, step of asking Google to pull the video down. Therefore one must ask the question: what was the justification for marching and protesting against the US consulate?

One must also ask why the level of unwarranted vitriolic chants like 'Our dead are in paradise, your dead are in hell'? As Waleed Aly correctly asked in the Sydney Morning Herald today:

Pardon? Which dead? Weren't we talking about a movie?

This can only be interpreted as a reference to their holy soldiers that are rewarded in paradise and must therefore be a comparison to our, in their eyes, not so holy soldiers. Therefore one can only conclude that the dead that they are referring to are our diggers, our ANZACs, the brave men and women, who made the ultimate sacrifice for our country. They fought to defend our basic freedom—the freedoms that afford those very people chanting offensive slogans on Saturday the right to protest. What was the justification for the level of violence?

The scariest and perhaps the most offensive part of Saturday's disgraceful events was seeing children holding placards above their heads calling for people to be beheaded—signs that they were not even old enough to read, let alone understand. Worse still, their parents were proudly taking photos on their phones for the family album.

Contrast this behaviour to the Christian response to the deplorable and intentionally offensive films such as Hail Mary in 1985 and The Last Temptation of Christ in 1988 to name a few. As a lawyer with the Australian Government Solicitor, I acted on behalf of the Chief Censor in proceedings related to the entry and classification of The Last Temptation of Christ. In both cases the Catholic Church appropriately invoked legal argument to argue that the films were blasphemous. The Christians who were offended did not march in the streets. They did not riot. They respected the law and argued their case in a measured manner through the appropriate avenues—namely, through the office of film classification and the courts.

I commend the Muslim organisations lining up to condemn the violence. There are thousands of Muslims who, like my parents, have come here to build a better life for themselves and for their children. Many have been very successful. Only this week we saw the election of Councillor Ned Mannoun, Liberal mayor of Liverpool, in one of my patron seats of Werriwa.

I say this to those in the community who have come out here with little or no intention of integrating themselves, who have no desire to assimilate, who preach hatred and violence: you are not welcome. As the daughter of migrants to this country, I say to you: 'Accept our laws. Respect them and make the most of the opportunities that this country can give you. If you do not want to do this, it is time to go back to where you came from.' This is the view that millions of Australians, the silent majority in this country, think about every day, and it is time that we should not be afraid to say it publicly and openly.

Question agreed to.