March 11, 2025
ALI MOORE: Well, James Paterson is the Shadow Home Affairs Minister, Senator for Victoria, James Paterson, welcome to Drive.
JAMES PATERSON: Good to be with you, Ali.
MOORE: Did Peter Dutton avoid a briefing?
PATERSON: No. That is an absurd and desperate accusation that's been made by Tony Burke today, which I assume is just because he's trying to distract from the government's failures on these issues of national security and community safety. I requested, on behalf of the opposition, a briefing. And I was briefed on the 30th of January, on the same day that the Prime Minister and the Premier made those comments about this being the very definition of terrorism and a potential mass casualty event, and that was the best information that was available to us at the time.
MOORE: So what were you told on January the 30th?
PATERSON: Look, I am reluctant to go into the details of these briefings. I would never normally talk about them at all, even that they'd been scheduled let alone the content of them. But Tony Burke has done an unprecedented thing today, which is to disclose on the public record the existence of these briefings. A responsible government, acting in the national interest, briefs the opposition all the time about sensitive national security matters that never find their way into the public realm. And I think it is quite reckless and desperate for him to have disclosed what he has today.
MOORE: I guess, though, that in the light of what we found out yesterday if you were briefed on January 30th, that's the same day that you gave an interview where you referred to one of the most serious domestic terrorism crises in living memory for most Australians. So was that comment made before the briefing or after the briefing? And the reason I ask you that question was, were you given any indication that this was a pure con job?
PATERSON: No, I was given absolutely no indication whatsoever from police that this was possibly a hoax or possibly a con job. On the contrary, police told me that we were taking this incredibly seriously, and the joint counter-terrorism squad was investigating it. And that's why the Prime Minister at that time was describing this as the very definition of terrorism. That's why the New South Wales Premier, who was also briefed, was describing this as a potential mass casualty event and the Prime Minister continued to use that language in the days that followed.
MOORE: Does it bother you that we then find that the police actually never thought it was going to be a mass casualty event? I mean, it was very clear yesterday that they say that this caravan was never going to cause a mass casualty event. And yet, for days and weeks afterwards, it would seem they weren't clarifying that to the important people who run the country.
PATERSON: Well, I certainly would have welcomed any updated information that police were able to provide me, but no updated information was ever provided to me or offered to me on behalf of the Opposition. And what I would say is that even though this has now turned out to be a concocted terror plot, it still struck a very serious fear in the heart of the Jewish community. And no one should downplay that as Tony Burke did today. Someone put explosives in a caravan and put the addresses of Jewish community organisations in it, and that has terrorised the Jewish community. And we should remember that the people who've been arrested under this plot are also alleged to be involved in actual attacks on Jewish community residences and businesses. They firebombed, allegedly, a bakery owned by a Jewish person. So this is serious political violence targeting the Jewish community, whatever the motivation.
MOORE: But James Paterson, is it not reasonable to ask the question that if they really were, you know, if this really from the outset had been considered nothing but a criminal con job without in any way compromising their investigation or underplaying the threat, they could have, in fact, alleviated some of that feeling of terror by saying to people, you know, we understand, this has happened before. We understand what these people are potentially looking for. Would that not have made people just feel a little bit safer instead of this, you know, the constant conversation around potential blast areas about mass casualty events?
PATERSON: Well, I note it was the police who put on the public record that statement about the potential blast radius of being 40m, which obviously political leaders take seriously when that's put on the public record by someone in uniform. I think there is a question, Ali, as to why the Prime Minister never corrected the record because he was the one who publicly called it terrorism, and he would have been briefed on a regular basis, but he never sought to correct the record.
MOORE: Was it up to him or up to police to correct the record?
PATERSON: Well, it was the Prime Minister that said those things. And no higher office in the land exists than the Prime Minister. So if he says it's terrorism and never corrects the record, then I think it's quite reasonable for everyone else to assume that that's what it is until someone does correct the record. So for Tony Burke to attempt to say that this is someone else's fault, I think you should be taking his feedback to the Prime Minister and the New South Wales Premier, who were constantly briefed and put this on the record.
MOORE: So, James Paterson, at what point did you realise that it was a con job?
PATERSON: Yesterday when the police made their formal announcement. That was the first confirmation I had of these facts.
MOORE: But you believe the government knew otherwise?
PATERSON: Yes, I know for sure that they knew otherwise because the police were keeping them up to date and briefed on this, and because the government was briefing the media that there was going to be a significant development in this case and that we're looking forward to that development in this case. So, it was open to them to disclose this earlier to correct the record earlier and they chose not to.
MOORE: Is that not what Tony Burke has been referring to? That if he had been having updated briefings, they also would have been available to your leader, Peter Dutton.
PATERSON: Well, it was never offered to us. If a proper offer for a briefing was offered, we would have taken it. In my nine years in the Parliament, I have never on one occasion turned down a national security or a law enforcement briefing.
MOORE: So from the 30th of January until yesterday, there was no offer of a briefing to give any further clarification about the circumstances?
PATERSON: No, there wasn't. And the way that this normally happens is that the Opposition either requests the briefing, if we're aware of things we need to be briefed on, or the government contacts us by writing us a letter or contacting my office saying there's something that's happening that you need to be aware of, and we'd like to provide you with a briefing, and we always take them up on that. The only thing that the government did was make rhetorical, political references to this in the Parliament, across the dispatch box. That is not a serious way to treat national security. That is not a proper offer of a briefing.
MOORE: So, James Paterson, do you see any learnings out of this for anyone? And I mean not just the political sphere and especially, you know, talking to you from Melbourne. I was shocked yesterday when, when I heard that having, you know, obviously we're not in New South Wales, so maybe not reading it on a daily basis, but there had been so much said around what this caravan represented, and then we just get such clear information that from the word go, they had thought it was nothing but a con job. So there had been a lot of fear for, you know, what seemed to be not a justifiable reason. So is there any other learning for you in how some of these things should be handled in the communication around these things?
PATERSON: I'm reluctant to give public advice to the police. They have got a difficult job to do, and I know they're very dedicated and professional in the way they go about it. If they say there were good reasons why they couldn't update the public, then I would have to take them at their word rather than second guess them on that.
MOORE: Well, then if you're going to accept that, you must logically accept that even if the Prime Minister knew he couldn't update us either. They're both in the same boat, aren't they?
PATERSON: If that is indeed the case, if that is indeed what police have told the Prime Minister, I don't know what they told the Prime Minister. So I have no visibility of it. And to this day, we still don't know when the Prime Minister was first briefed, and he has previously hid behind police still conducting their investigations as to why he couldn't answer that question. Now that arrests have been made, he should be able to answer that question. We should know once and for all when he and Tony Burke and Mark Dreyfus and other ministers were first briefed on this. But what I would say, though, is that even though this incident turned out to be a hoax, the Adass Israel synagogue was bombed in Melbourne. It was burnt to the ground. The people behind that have still not been caught. But that's a serious act of violence targeting the Jewish community. And they still live in fear because of that.
MOORE: James Paterson, I appreciate your time. Many thanks.
PATERSON: Thanks, Ali.
ENDS
