Subjects: Sydney terror plot; returning foreign fighters; migration; judicial decisions.
EO&E...........................................................................................................................................
LAURA JAYES:
Joining me now live here in the studio is the Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton. Minister Dutton, thank you for your time.
PETER DUTTON:
Thanks Laura.
LAURA JAYES:
I first want to ask about this confirmation from Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, he's confirmed that intel from his country did help foil an Islamic State plot to blow up a plane over Sydney last year. It is quite unusual for this kind of intelligence to be made public. How significant is it and can you confirm it?
PETER DUTTON:
I can confirm it and in doing so I want to thank the Israelis very much.
Obviously we've got a very close working relationship with them, with our other partners, but Israel is a very important intelligence sharing partner for us. If people cast their minds back to last July, a situation where somebody tried to board a plane, an Etihad flight out of Sydney carrying an explosive device, it's alleged, within the bag – obviously there are matters before the court at the moment – but we did get intelligence advice from Israel and it meant that ASIO then reached out to other partners and with all of the information packaged together, it resulted in arrests.
I think the Federal Police – if you look at the intricate detail of what took place – did an exceptional job in dealing with that threat.
LAURA JAYES:
If I can ask you about foreign fighters as well because this is something you flagged yesterday in your speech to the National Press Club. Now, laws to strip dual nationals of their citizenship have been in effect for about two years, and this was under your predecessor, and it was part of the Abbott-Turnbull Government. Now, it's only really been effective against one jihadist. Is that a failure in design?
PETER DUTTON:
I think there are a number of aspects that we need to have a look at and I said yesterday that I am open to looking at ways in which we can improve the law.
Obviously we've got constitutional constraints, we've got international legal obligations that we have to meet and we aren't going to render people stateless. We need to act obviously within the confines of the law, as you would expect.
There was a Bill that was put together by Senator Brandis, by then Attorney-General Brandis, in relation to this matter and obviously it has to go through the intelligence committee. So let's look at ways in which we can improve the Bill.
My sense is that because we've got a couple of hundred people who have gone overseas to fight, only one has been captured by this legislation to strip them of their citizenship. It is inadequate and that's why we're looking at it at the moment.
LAURA JAYES:
Okay. So there's difficulties in obtaining information from foreign countries, there's also a 28 day notification period for terrorists currently in Australian jails. So what are you saying here? Where do you go? Because you don't want to make people stateless. So should the Minister be given more power to strip dual nationals?
PETER DUTTON:
Well we have to rely on the legal advice as to how far we can go within the limits, as I say, not only of the domestic law and our constitution, but also our international law and treaty obligations.
LAURA JAYES:
What is that advice?
PETER DUTTON:
Well there are some restrictions about what declarations can be made. There's obviously a natural justice period. There's an obligation in terms of serving the notice on people. It's difficult to gather evidence in a war zone – obviously the focus is on defeating the enemy as opposed to a crime scene for instance where evidence would be gathered to substantiate a charge being laid or an action been taken – so it's difficult to gather all of that information together. But there are other jurisdictions, including the United Kingdom, that have different arrangements in terms of the law and the restrictions that our constitution has on us that doesn't apply in the UK, or that they haven't signed up to some of the international obligations. So we need to review all of that, but as I say, everything I believe should be on the table and that's the approach that we're taking.
LAURA JAYES:
But not to make people stateless. So would it be good enough, for example, if a terrorist with dual citizenship had the ability to apply for citizenship elsewhere, and you strip their Australian citizenship, that would technically not make them stateless. Is that a potential option?
PETER DUTTON:
Well look, as I say, I think everything is within scope and I think it's also important to recognise here that people can renounce their citizenship, perhaps from their country of birth fairly easily; so we need to be cognisant of that reality as well when we're either giving notice or informing somebody that this is our intent or this is going to be an operation of the law because of their actions etc.
There's a lot within this space and there was a lot of discussion at the time. Obviously, we can be realistic about the Parliament as well. So I think it's time for Labor to step up to support measures that we would put forward.
I know Mr Dreyfus, when he was attorney general in the Rudd-Gillard years, did nothing in the national security space by way of additional measures and we've done a lot since we've been in Government, but we need bipartisan support to get anything through the Senate and I think Labor will step up if we have a reasonable proposal to put and we're working on that at the moment.
LAURA JAYES:
Okay. There's a number of foreign fighters, many of them still remain overseas and they essentially are sometimes being punished by the Syrian Democratic Army there. Is there any risk at the moment? Have any of these foreign fighters tried to return home? Is there any immediate risk?
PETER DUTTON:
Well we've got a number of them that have left our shores, have been killed in action in Syria or Iraq and frankly that's the best possible outcome from our country's national security perspective. If more meet that fate because they're taking up arms in Syria and Iraq, well so be it. That's a decision that they've made. It impacts on their families. Destroys the lives of some of their family members back in Australia as well. But we will work with individual cases. There are some cases where other jurisdictions obviously are involved, either they've got an interest in the individual or the person may be incarcerated within another country, but they're not details that we disclose publicly. We work through each of the cases and we look at the cases where, for example, the AFP has issued a warrant, a first instance warrant – there are 20 of those that have been issued – so they will look at the packages around each individual and decide, from the Government's perspective and from our agencies' perspective, what is in our national best interest. That's what will prevail here.
LAURA JAYES:
Okay. Now, on immigration you've strongly made the case for keeping the current migration levels as they are. Do you accept though that there's a pretty large chunk of the population that does think it's too high?
PETER DUTTON:
Yes. I don't think there's any doubt about that. I think we need to speak more about the benefits of some of the migration. Some of the greatest Australians today and the reason that we're a prosperous country is the fact that we brought wonderful people in post World War II out of war-torn Europe. People came in, settled, they worked hard, they educated their children, they've amassed wealth and their grandchildren will be forever grateful for the opportunity provided to them.
So we need to make sure that we talk about the benefits of international students coming here who are counted in that net migration figure each year, which makes up about 45 per cent of the number, but it adds well over $20 billion a year to our national economy. Many of those won't go on to become Australian citizens…and I can understand the frustration around some of the services: people sitting in traffic, people worried about…
LAURA JAYES:
…but it's not because of immigration.
PETER DUTTON:
Well it may well be an element to it, but there's a lot more. I was speaking this morning about the New South Wales example. People know that nothing happened a state level here under Bob Carr for years and years and years. To Mike Baird's credit and to the current government, I mean they have done a lot of work in the infrastructure space.
LAURA JAYES:
But Minister, how difficult is it in this era of politics because these comments around immigration, they're a little Trump-esque. It's a popular line from the populist right. How much more difficult does it make your job?
PETER DUTTON:
Well I always think that if you stick to the facts and you stick to good principle, then the politics will follow and we are a migrant nation. We want to bring in the right people and I've made the point repeatedly – as John Howard did in his government, as Tony Abbott did in his government – that we will make decisions about where the number should be set that serves our national best interest.
LAURA JAYES:
Just on Tony Abbott though, because he's doubled down today and he's put out a Facebook post saying that Scott Morrison well knows that in 2015 he argued that the migration level should be brought down and he's criticised Scott Morrison quite strongly, saying that he should learn to think for himself. How helpful is that?
PETER DUTTON:
Well I'll let that conversation take place between Scott and Tony.
LAURA JAYES:
But in all seriousness, we've had two weeks of blanket Barnaby Joyce coverage. Malcolm Turnbull's now meeting with Donald Trump talking about important things in the United States to do with the economy, jobs and national security. Then you have this kind of tantrum being played out on social media. I mean talk about distractions for the Government, these are self-inflicted wounds, aren't they?
PETER DUTTON:
But Laura as I said yesterday I mean we have serious issues of national security to contemplate. I mean we've got serious espionage threats in our country. We've got the returning foreign fighters issue. We've got a huge issue around criminals using encrypted devices and apps to send communications about planning for terrorist attacks and the rest of it. They're the things that I believe Australians want us to concentrate on. It is what I'm concentrating on. We've had great success.
LAURA JAYES:
But how helpful has Tony Abbott been then?
PETER DUTTON:
Well as I say, I'm not going to make any comment in relation to conversations between individuals. I have formed the judgement very strongly that I still maintain a great respect for Tony Abbott as a former leader of our party. I don't have any criticism to make of him.
I've disagreed with him on a couple of issues, including in this one, but I've been guided by the principles in this area that I think served the Howard Government well: that is that about a two-thirds mix of skilled people coming in through our migration program, a third non-skilled. That's the same principle that operated in the Abbott Government as it does in the Turnbull Government. It's down massively on the numbers under the Rudd-Gillard Government.
So I think we continue with those settings and as I say, the numbers will be down over the 12 months to date by about 6,000 or 7,000. So, these are never hard and fast targets that we must achieve; we get the balance right.
LAURA JAYES:
Look, you've been accused of making attacks against the judiciary – accusing lawyers for refugees of engaging in un-Australian behaviour, accusing some judges of having a soft touch. Do you stand by that criticism?
PETER DUTTON:
Yes.
LAURA JAYES:
Do you think that those comments have undermined public faith in the judiciary?
PETER DUTTON:
No I don't. I hope that they strengthen public faith because it's an incredibly important institution, but if the public have a perception that the judiciary in the sentencing of people for serious crimes, including child exploitation, don't reflect community values, then the community will lose respect and believe that there is a gap between what's being delivered and the expectation of the public. This doesn't go to what's admissible in court or me telling a judge who's guilty or innocent. No. None of that and if people want to suggest that then it's a nonsense and it's a red herring.
My argument is that where you've got a legislative provision for a maximum of 10 years for a particular crime, and people are getting a suspended sentence or 12 months for possession of serious child pornography or for – there's been recent discussions around one punches – all of that, if there is a divide then I think the public start to lose faith. And so I hope that if we see a better reflection in some of the sentences of the public's attitude, then I think we restore and help build that faith within the judiciary and I think that would be a good thing.
LAURA JAYES:
Minister Dutton, thanks so much for your time. We got to mere a fraction of what you will cover now in your portfolio, but we will speak to you again.
PETER DUTTON:
Thanks Laura.
LAURA JAYES:
Thanks so much.
[ends]
