Media
|
PETA CREDLIN: Joining me now to discuss this, Shadow Minister for Home Affairs, Senator James Paterson...The government should of been better prepared...and now they can't tell us who is out in the community, can they?
JAMES PATERSON: Peta, I know this is going to be hard for you and your viewers to believe, but actually, the government's handling of this got even more shambolic today then it already was last week. One is that breaking news story from Andrew Clennell this afternoon, which clearly demonstrated that the government was in grave fear that it was going to lose its case and was trying to do everything it could to get this applicant out of the country, which contradicts what Clare O'Neil told Andrew Clennell on his program a few weeks ago, that the government was confident that it was going to win the case and therefore it didn't need to prepare for it. But secondly, the government last night wrote to the Opposition to tell us that today they would need to introduce two urgent bills...
CREDLIN: Welcome back. Sorry for that. We've lost all communications with Canberra, though we have managed to get him back. Now, Senator James Paterson, Shadow Minister for Home Affairs, is still with us now. James, you were just outlining for us, I thought it was pretty bad up until this afternoon when we saw those revelations from Andrew Clennell. But you say it's actually worse than you think. Tell us more.
PATERSON: That's right, Peta. So yesterday afternoon, the government contacted us to tell us that they had two urgent bills that they want to brief us on this morning at 7:45 am and in that briefing, they told us that these two bills must pass the parliament today. One of them was to clean up drafting errors that they had identified in their own legislation, which passed the Parliament only a week ago. And the other was to deal with this citizenship cessation law, which the High Court had ruled partially invalid. Now they gave us an ultimatum. They weren't able to answer basic questions. They didn't even provide us all the relevant documentation at 8 a.m. this morning and basically put a gun to our head and said these bills must pass and yet this afternoon, they've now admitted actually, maybe these bills don't need to pass today. Maybe they can be put on pause, and we are going to get the High Court's reasons tomorrow afternoon. So perhaps we should wait until we have the benefit of that. I mean, it really is utterly shambolic here in Canberra. This government has no idea what it is doing when it comes to national security and border protection and the community is in danger as a result because we have at least 141 people who are in the community, not all of whom are being electronically monitored, contrary to their commitment to do so.
CREDLIN: What surprises me, and I have to say, I agree with you there. I've not heard of anyone running a process like this, as shambolic as this. But what surprises me, you're talking there about, I presume, the dual citizenship provision that was put in place by the former government knocked out again by the high court. We've seen, in fact, one convicted Islamic terrorist, Benbrika regain his Australian citizenship after it was taken off him. I think at the time. Peter Dutton, is this what the legislation is supposed to fix or remediate?
PATERSON: Exactly, Peta. But one of the concerns we have with the draft legislation that we've seen today, which the government is proposing should not go to a parliamentary committee inquiry, should not be examined at all, should just be passed, is that it in fact doesn't deal with any historical cases like Benbrika and others. It doesn't have any retrospective elements to it. It will only now deal with future terrorism cases. So Benbrika, who's had his citizenship restored, will remain an Australian citizen, and that means a whole lot of options are taken off the table to deal with people like that. For example, you can't deport him because he's an Australian citizen, so we're really concerned.
CREDLIN: For people at home to understand this, he is one of the worst of the worst. So if and when he comes out of jail, he will be an Australian citizen. He will be able to come and go, perhaps go overseas into countries that we would be very concerned about him visiting again and then return to Australia. Why can't he be dealt with under this legislation? And if it doesn't allow a Benbrika to be dealt with? Why can't I fix it up now and get it right?
PATERSON: Really good questions, Peta, all of which we asked this morning, none of which we got good answers to and frankly, we're not prepared to rush through legislation that doesn't even deal with our most serious ever convicted terrorist offender in Benbrika, who will wander around the streets as an Australian citizen, under the government's proposal. We want them to go back to the drawing board, have a look at this again, see where the cases like his can actually be dealt with, whether or not it can apply retrospectively. Because this person has had his Australian citizenship taken away from him for good reason, he violated the principles of Australian citizenship. He has citizenship of another country. It should be taken off him. And the government's unwillingness to explore all possible options to ensure that's the case reflects very badly on their commitment to protect the community.
CREDLIN: And the courts have also said in evidence that there's absolutely no evidence that this guy has been rehabilitated in any way. Without going into the ins and outs of the removal today of Michael Pezzullo, who was the former head, now the secretary of home affairs, stood aside. What I thought was extraordinary, the minister and her off side the immigration minister, front that press conference this morning. And then afterwards, after she's left the room, the government squeaks out a press release saying that that Pezzullo is being sacked. Now, the ordinary course of events would be that press release goes out. She turns up at a press conference. She takes questions from the media. I just thought this was cowardice, you know, absolute cowardice. Today, James, what did you think?
PATERSON: That's right, Peta. This is another example of the government's incredibly cynical media management strategy. They did it when the Prime Minister was leaving San Francisco when they only released after his press conference and he got on the plane that the PLA-N had been attacking Australian navy [divers] in the Indo-Pacific. And they've done it again here. In fact, Clare O'Neil was even asked about this issue at the press conference and she pretended not to know anything about it and said it's a matter for the Prime Minister. Well, either the Minister for Home Affairs didn't know that the Prime Minister was about to sack the Home Affairs secretary, or she deliberately misled the parliamentary press gallery here in Canberra. And I think it says something that even the press gallery, which has been pretty soft on this government so far, is now starting to get really frustrated with this cynical media management and hold them to account much better, as they always should have been.
CREDLIN: James Paterson. Thank you.
ENDS