February 29, 2024
GREG JENNETT: James Paterson, good to have you back with us on a pretty hectic afternoon around here. We appreciate that. Might just take you to some comments on the politician spy revealed by director general Mike Burgess's ASIO threat assessment last night in an interview that I doubt you've had the opportunity to watch, but which we broadcast on Afternoon Briefing. Clare O'Neil, the Home Affairs Minister, responds to Joe Hockey's demand for the name to be named here by saying "I'm a politician. I'm not remotely offended by what the director general has shared here. It's very important that political leaders, business leaders, ordinary Australians understand that they are, or could be targets of this sort of espionage behaviour." Is she right?
JAMES PATERSON: Well, I'm not offended by what Mike Burgess said either. In fact, I welcome it. I think it's very important because there is a bit of complacency and a bit of naivety which is settled in to our country on the risk of foreign interference and espionage. And we can see that by the reaction today. I mean, Mike Burgess has said in every annual threat assessment for the last three years, foreign interference and espionage is at the highest levels it has ever been. And he's also said that's higher than it was even at the height of the Cold War with the Soviet Union. I'm not sure what people thought that meant if it didn't involve people betraying their country? That's what happens when you have foreign interference and espionage.
JENNETT: There's a huge amount of intrigue around this building as people try to deduce who it might be. Clare O'Neil also said a foreign government has attempted to infiltrate at the very top of Australian politics. Now, that might, on one interpretation, go further than Mike Burgess, who only alluded to a discussion among the spy and his A-Team members. A discussion about cultivating a relative of a Prime Minister. What does infiltrate at the very top of Australian politics, Clare O'Neil's words mean to you?
PATERSON: I'm not sure exactly what she was referring to. What I would say, though, is this is very serious. And our foreign adversaries, including the Chinese Communist Party, use every available lever and every available opportunity to try and undermine our sovereignty and our democracy and try to exert influence over us and force us to make decisions that are consistent with their national interests instead of our own. And they don't have any compunction about the lowest level or the highest level. They are willing to approach a local councillor or an aspiring politician not yet in parliament, a university student, and they'd be willing to approach a Prime Minister or their family members. There's no hesitation that they have.
JENNETT: Yeah, I've tried to keep across most of your comments today and you've made a few around this building. You were the chair of Parliament's intelligence commitee in the last parliament, to kind of cut through what I think a carefully worded responses that you've given today. Is it accurate to say you have protected and privileged knowledge? In effect? You know who we're talking about here.
PATERSON: I've said, I have a fair idea, and I'm being careful about what I say publicly because of that. I do have obligations under the Intelligence Services Act about what I can say and not say. But also, like you, I'm subject to the laws of defamation, and it would be a very bold call to name someone who hasn't been convicted, although they've been very credibly accused here.
JENNETT: So are you somewhat at odds with Joe Hockey? I don't see that you have demanded that the name be named. I don't see that Simon Birmingham has said that either. Would you like to see any more information put in to the public realm at all, or are you quite comfortable with where it stands.
PATERSON: If this person needs to be named, I think that's a mater for the government. I think a Minister who would have this knowledge could go into the House of Representatives or the Senate with the protection of parliamentary privilege and say so, that's a mater for them.
JENNETT: Should that happen?
PATERSON: Where I disagree with Joe Hockey is he said that this cast aspersions on every member of parliament who's ever served. That's a ridiculous assertion, because the Director-General very clearly explained, this is a person who led a delegation with academics to a foreign country, and that they were cultivated. Now, that's a very, very small number of people. Very, very few people have ever led a delegation to China where this kind of opportunity could arise. So it doesn't cast an aspersion about everyone.
JENNETT: Would it be helpful if there was some delineation, some clarification here between this person being from federal politics formally or from politics at another jurisdiction, state?
PATERSON: Generally speaking, I think as Peter Dutton said on radio today, the more information that our intelligence agencies and the government can share, the beter, because I think that would help inform the public beter, and it would also reduce the speculation about some people who are genuinely innocent and may be impacted. So I think Peter is right to make that call. As much detail as is possible to be provided should be provided.
JENNETT: We'll see where that one takes us. I know you're really tight for time today James Paterson, but NZYQ caseload. There's been yet another arrest in your home state of Victoria. Questions were put to Andrew Giles today. It looks like he got knowledge of this only after the incidents occurred in Richmond. What do you say should have happened in this case. Should preventative detention have been applied here before the offending?
PATERSON: This person was in detention because they already were convicted of serious multiple sexual assaults against Australians and they were released following the High Court's decision by this government. But the Parliament passed a law to deal with this. We passed a preventive detention regime and because the government has not applied for a single preventive detention order, this person has been in the community and they have re-offend against an Australian, another sexual offence. So a serial sex offender has offended again because this government has done nothing to take him off the streets and that is a disgrace.
JENNETT: Was that foreseeable?
PATERSON: Entirely foreseeable, we've been warning about this for months. We first called on the government to pass this scheme in the first place. They initially said they couldn't do so. They finally agreed that they would. And then we said, get down to it, use it, apply for these things, get the highest risk offenders off the streets first, and we'll worry about the rest later. The murderers and the sex offenders would be a good place to start in my view. They haven't done that, and this crime has now been committed as a result.
JENNETT: Well, we'll try and put questions to Andrew Giles if he ever presents. We had our opportunity with Clare O'Neil, which we discussed with you, alas that was before this news came to hand. James Paterson, really appreciate it, as always.
PATERSON: Thank you.
ENDS
