August 12, 2024
JAMES PATERSON: Good morning. Mike Burgess as Director General of ASIO is a first-class public servant and everyone in ASIO does an amazing job in protecting Australians and keeping us safe. But I was concerned about some of the revelations that came out of his interview on Insiders yesterday. He said ASIO conducts checks on people who come to this country when they're referred to them by the Department of Home Affairs. But he also said there were some instances where people were not referred to ASIO. Mike Burgess also said that it is possible that political supporters or sympathisers of terrorist organisations like Hamas could be brought into Australia and it wouldn't violate Australian law. And in that, he very accurately described the status quo under the Albanese government. Now, it's not the task of intelligence agency chiefs to set policy. That is the task of politicians and governments. And it seems clear under the Albanese government's watch that they have not asked the Department or our intelligence agencies to make sure that there are no terrorist supporters or sympathisers among the cohort of Palestinians being brought to Australia. Let me be very clear: under a Peter Dutton led Coalition government, the acceptable number of Hamas supporters to come to Australia is zero, and we'll take whatever steps are necessary to make sure that that's the case. Happy to take questions.
JOURNALIST: Should we be forwarding all Palestinian visa holders who want to come and stay here to ASIO?
PATERSON: I was astonished by the revelation that it does not appear that every single person coming out of a war zone controlled by a terrorist organisation is not being referred to ASIO for a security assessment. Of course, every single one of those people should be referred, and on top of that, the Department of Home Affairs and the officials reviewing those visa applications should be using the character provisions of the Migration Act to reject the application of anyone who is a supporter of a terrorist organisation. With all the problems we've had with social cohesion, with all the problems we've had with anti-Semitism, how are we going to make that better by bringing in supporters of terrorist organisations to our country?
JOURNALIST: Mike Burgess also revealed that we have so-called friendly nations conducting foreign interference in our country, that's probably not a surprise to hear that?
PATERSON: Look, it's not a surprise to me as a member of the Intelligence and Security Committee and former Chair, it might come as a surprise to some Australians though. And the truth is, in the world of espionage, almost anything goes. A lot of countries, including those with whom we are on good terms, do engage in this kind of behaviour because they're ruthlessly pursuing their own national interest. I should make clear, though, that this does not apply to our closest allies and friends. This is not the kind of behaviour that we see from our Five Eyes partners, it is other countries that we don't have such a close intelligence and security relationship with.
JOURNALIST: Should we be naming them?
PATERSON: Look, that's a matter for government. I generally think it is helpful to tell the public more about foreign interference and espionage, it is now alongside terrorism, our principal security concern. I think it's important to understand the pressures that our democracy is under. In every single case, it won't be appropriate to reveal the source nation, but in some cases it will and I think the more disclosure, the better.
JOURNALIST: The Korolevs are back in court next week, the alleged Russian spies. What are you hoping to learn out of these next few court appearances and just your thoughts about the whole situation?
PATERSON: These are incredibly serious allegations. That someone who signed up to and was admitted to the Australian Defence Force allegedly betrayed that trust and stole secrets from our military to pass on to the Russian government is a very grave matter. And it is critically important work done by ASIO and the Australian Federal Police to bring this matter to the court, it is now a matter for the courts to decide. But I hope we do learn about more about the motivations of the person involved, the tradecraft that they used and whether any damage was done to our national security in the meantime, whether any secrets were indeed handed over to the Russians.
JOURNALIST: I might just grab you on the poll out today, how concerned are you that we could end up with a minority government?
PATERSON: Well, the polls certainly show that the next election will be very competitive. That's what I always thought would be the case. And it does raise the very serious risk that if Anthony Albanese is re-elected, it will be as part of a minority government that will be reliant on the Greens and the Teals. And if Australians think the Prime Minister was weak in his first term, particularly on issues like national security and the economy, just imagine how weak the Prime Minister would be if re-elected dependent on the Greens and the crossbench. Imagine having to negotiate with the Teals and the Greens aspects of the AUKUS agreement, or fundamental economic policy. I think that would leave our country weaker, not stronger. I think Australians should vote Liberal-National to make sure we have a strong majority government.
JOURNALIST: And, the CFMEU legislation, will you support the legislation to allow an administrator?
PATERSON: The Labor Party has taken the weakest possible action against the CFMEU. What they should have done is deregister the CFMEU and re-establish the Australian Building and Construction Commission as a tough cop on the beat for the construction industry. Instead, they're going for a tortured process where they appear to think that it's possible to reform the CFMEU. The CFMEU is unreformable, and the idea that appointing some public servant or lawyer as an administrator is going to fix it is extremely naive. But we'll consider the legislation on its merits. But frankly, we're not just going to wave this through, we think there's other things that could be added that would actually deal with those problems.
JOURNALIST: Do you think returning ASIO to the Attorney-General's Department was the right call?
PATERSON: I thought it was very revealing that, when asked about this on Insiders yesterday, Mike Burgess said it is a good thing to have ASIO and the Australian Federal Police work more closely together again - of course they were under the previous government under the Home Affairs portfolio. But one of the first decisions of the Albanese government was to split the AFP and ASIO in different portfolios, and that caused a whole range of problems, including with the listing of new terrorist organisations. The time taken for ministerial consideration massively blew out on this government's watch because two ministers were now involved instead of one. So it is a good thing that they're working together again under the same portfolio, but it should be under the Home Affairs portfolio, not the Attorney General's portfolio.
JOURNALIST: Just one quickly on the AUKUS, the new deal that was signed last week. The prime minister on the weekend sort of playing down concerns about these other political conditions, or however it's worded. What's your take on that?
PATERSON: As far as I'm aware, none of my colleagues have been briefed on this matter, and I'm sure we'll be seeking a briefing on this because I think the government does need to be, at the very least, transparent with the Opposition about these so that we can assure the Australian people that there's nothing to be concerned. I will be very surprised if any Australian government signed up to any condition that would be objectionable to the Australian people. I'm sure Australians would be reassured if they knew what that was, but I'm standing where I am today as a member of the Opposition I don't know what those political comments are. Thank you.
ENDS
