Subjects: Foreign interference; Richardson Review; extremist ideology; state borders & COVID-19 cases.
EO&E...........................................................................................................................................
QUESTION:
Morning Minister, thanks for your time. Just on the relationship with China. As Home Affairs Minister, are you aware of there being a misinformation campaign in Australia led by the Chinese Communist Party?
PETER DUTTON:
Well Jonathan I’m not going to comment on some of these matters, but I’ve made the general point over a long period of time, that Australia has been under a sustained attack in a cyber sense. We’ve been very mindful of working with companies, working with hospitals, with aged care facilities, etc – all of which have been under attack – and that’s been ramped up and we’ve been very clear about that over recent times.
There’s a lot that we’ve put in place in terms of new legislation; the investment that we made into the cyber security strategy and people need to be very careful about what they’re reading online, check the sources and make sure that people understand where that information is coming from. That’s been an issue for us for some time.
QUESTION:
Minister, Labor has indicated it might block the Foreign Relations Bill that is currently before the House and the Government really want it to passed this week. How disappointing is that given the level of threat that Australia faces at the moment from foreign interference?
PETER DUTTON:
I think there needs to be a unity ticket on this issue at the moment and the unfortunate comments by Anthony Albanese during the week where he placed this each-way bet really sent a shudder across those in the Caucus of the Labor Party. I think his comments were cringe worthy to be honest. I think it was very unfortunate because most of Labor – Penny Wong, Richard Marles, other senior members of the Labor Party – had been in lockstep with the Government, to their credit, because this is an incredibly important issue for our nation.
Now, the fact that Mr Albanese went off script is bad for him, it’s bad for the Labor Party, and frankly it’s bad for the country. I think he should reflect on that because it wasn’t helpful.
I think as you would have seen in the papers today, I think a piece by David Crowe, there is a big split within the Labor Caucus on these matters and that’s what we’re seeing play out in relation to whether or not the Labor Party’s going to support the Foreign Relations Bill.
I mean they’ve been in favour of it, they’ve been against it and obviously there is a significant divide on this, and other issues in the Labor Party at the moment, and it’s at exactly the wrong time because at the moment our country needs a united Labor Party; and instead under Anthony Albanese we’ve got a divided Labor Party.
QUESTION:
Minister, is Victoria’s belt and road agreement signing with China a risk to national sovereignty?
PETER DUTTON:
Let’s concentrate on getting this Bill through the Parliament and then we can have a discussion about individual agreements or what councils or universities or state governments have entered into in these bilateral agreements.
QUESTION:
Are you concerned by that agreement?
PETER DUTTON:
The Government’s been very clear that we don’t support the agreement that the Victorian Government’s entered into. I don’t think it’s in our national interest. It’s against our foreign policy and Mr Andrews should’ve reflected on that by now. The other State Premiers and Chief Ministers haven’t entered into such agreements, and I think he should reflect on it.
QUESTION:
The Richardson Review will be released later today, it’s sort of been quite long awaited…pretty much our intelligence laws stack up and there’s room for improvement. Having led many of those agencies, what do you expect to be the take homes from that?
PETER DUTTON:
I’ll leave that for the Attorney-General later in the day, but obviously we’ve done a lot of work with Dennis Richardson who is a highly respected Australian, and we’ve looked at recommendations. We want to make sure that our legislation is fit for purpose. As I pointed out in the Parliament yesterday the threat of violent extremists is still with us. These people are still plotting and planning to kill Australians and we need to make sure that legislation we have in place is fit for purpose. That’s the principle aim. We look at all of this through the lens of how can we keep people safe, and if there are improvements that we can make, we’ll do that.
QUESTION:
Should one COVID case in Sydney cause the country to go into lockdown again?
PETER DUTTON:
No, it shouldn’t. I mean put these things into perspective. When you look at what’s happening overseas, compared to what’s happening in Australia, our decision at the beginning of the year to close the border, firstly with China and then with the rest of the world – now whilst it was criticised by some – it was exactly the right thing to do. We've obviously got a geographical advantage as a continent, and we've taken advantage of that.
We've got the hotel quarantine arrangement in place. We’ve bolstered our health response, both in terms of ICU places, our addition to the stockpiles of PPE equipment etc. There is a very rigorous contact tracing program in place. All of that is what has kept us safe, not borders being closed between, you know, arbitrarily between New South Wales and Queensland or WA etc. What has saved Australia, and if you look at what’s happened overseas; clearly what has saved our country is the fact that we closed our international borders at the beginning of this year and we haven't allowed the virus to come in from overseas.
In Europe, places in Europe, America, in Asia, Middle East etc, people are still flying into those jurisdictions and in a way that they're not quarantining effectively in some places. The virus continues to spread. That is not a feature of our system.
So we should have confidence in New South Wales, as we would in WA or in Queensland, or Victoria or elsewhere, to identify a single case and to be able to track it down. Now, the Premier of New South Wales has been very clear that it's a serious issue for them to deal with. They're dealing with it and if it requires an elevation response; well, that will come, but on the available evidence at the moment, it's clear that they’ve contained it and we shouldn’t see a closure of borders – particularly in the run up to Christmas. People have made bookings from Victoria to go and visit family or from New South Wales to go and visit family, or family to go there. People they haven't seen for months; grandchildren, aged parents, you know, sick relatives etc. and I think we just need a greater level of compassion than we're seeing from some at the moment.
QUESTION:
Given the evidence of the ASIO boss and other intelligence agencies, how worried are you about the documented growing threat of right-wing extremism?
PETER DUTTON:
I'm very worried about, as I've pointed out before, the extreme right-wing extremism, Islamic extremism. I know that the Labor Party seem to make some differential between the two. They're not. I mean if there's a lunatic who’s preaching some Neo-Nazi propaganda or some perverted, you know, interpretation of the Quran, and they’re with the same desire to hurt Australians; they get treated exactly the same by me and by ASIO and by our agencies. They look at the risk wherever people are on a spectrum and they are treated no differently. And it's just such a nonsense argument. I hear some within the Labor Party pushing this stupid lie around. ASIO does not differentiate, they assess the threat based on the intelligence, the evidence that they’ve got, and that will remain the case.
QUESTION:
They have specifically pointed to a rise, a sharp rise in right-wing extremism, and with respect, it is a different type of extremism.
PETER DUTTON:
It doesn't matter; I mean if somebody wants to blow up a movie theatre, or if somebody wants to go in with a semi-automatic weapon into a food court, I don't care what their dress is, I don’t care of their religion, their skin colour, their creed, I don't care; our resources will be applied to neutralise that threat. Right. That’s it.
We are here to keep Australians safe. There are people seeking to do us harm and I'm not getting into silly, stupid, petty arguments or discussions about that sort of interpretation. It's a ridiculous interpretation and I feel very strongly about it because ASIO looks through it, as I do, through the lens of keeping Australians safe. We are not going to take our foot off the throat of somebody who is an extremist, who is seeking to kill Australians or, you know, take somebody hostage or whatever it might be because of their ideology. I just don't care what their ideology is. What I focus on is their threat, and I've been clear about this in the past and any suggestion to the contrary is nonsense.
Thank you.
[ends]
