|
November 23, 2023
PETER STEFANOVIC: Home Affairs Minister James Paterson. We will get to that story in just a moment. James, I should still ask you, though, as a member of the opposition, your thoughts on this alleged terror attack that's taken place at the US Canada border this morning at Niagara Falls.
JAMES PATERSON: Good morning Pete. Well, based on the early details we have, it's a very concerning incident that I think you're rightly calling a terrorist attack. It certainly looks like a terrorist attack. It's hard to imagine how you could accidentally cause an explosion of that size at a place like that. And it is a reminder that the terrorism threat in our societies is ever present and that even Western societies far removed from conflict in the Middle East are not immune from that. And we need to be ever vigilant against that threat because it still has great potential to do harm and cause loss of life.
STEFANOVIC: Okay. Now on to the 860 visas that have been granted to Palestinians who have been living in Gaza with Australian links. What concerns or questions do you have about that this morning, James?
PATERSON: Well, Pete, the Australian citizens and permanent residents who have returned from Gaza who number in about the 60 odd have an absolute right to return to Australia and we welcome the fact that they were able to leave. This much larger cohort is people who are in some way connected to those Australians. They might be family members or close associates. And there needs to be rigorous scrutiny of the granting of the visas to these people in particular to make sure that all of the usual security checks and processes were followed and that no corners were cut and nothing was rushed in the granting of those visas. Because 860 visas in a six week period in a conflict zone in which the Australian government has no presence on the ground, is a very large number of visas in a very short period of time and I am looking for reassurance from the government that no corners have been caught in granting of those visas.
STEFANOVIC: Can someone just lie in a security check?
PATERSON: Yes, they can Pete and it is not uncommon for that to happen. People who are connected to terrorist organisations who have committed crimes obviously don't have the motivation to disclose that in the process. And so that's why our intelligence and security agencies, including ASIO, have quite robust approaches in how they test the propositions put forward in the information provided. They don't just accept at face value. But they need time to do that. Duncan Lewis, the former director general of ASIO, testified before a Senate committee in 2019 when he said that in cases like these, it can typically take months to do that level of checking, to have that level of assurance. And obviously, we haven't had months to do that for these cases. And it's a very large number. So, I want to be sure that the Department of Home Affairs and ASIO, that our agencies haven't been pressed, haven't been pushed to rush these through.
STEFANOVIC: I think that the Foreign Minister, Penny Wong, coming up on the program next hour, so be sure to put that to her. Meanwhile, James, a High Court challenge has already been made over the former detainees. This time, a Chinese refugee doesn't want the curfew or the ankle bracelet because the alleges or his lawyers allege it treats him like a criminal. What are your thoughts on this?
PATERSON: Well, I probably wouldn't want one either. But let's remember that these are people who otherwise would not and should not be in Australia. They do not have valid visas to be here. Their visas were cancelled, and they were to be deported to a third country or back to their home country. But for reasons relating to the nature of their offences or the reasons they breached the Migration Act and its character provisions, they can't be deported because no other country wants to take them. So, I think it is entirely reasonable that the Parliament, in a bipartisan way, has imposed these very tough conditions on these former detainees. And it's very predictable that the political activists and lawyers who associate themselves with these people have decided to try and make a case out of this. But the government advised us, including during the Senate committee stage and the debate in the parliament, that they believe these provisions are constitutionally sound and we expect them to robustly defend them in the High Court.
STEFANOVIC: Okay. So, would you expect this to kind of open up the floodgates? Would there be more challenges to come?
PATERSON: That's certainly the objective of refugee activists and others. They want to open up the floodgates. They want to end indefinite detention. They want to an end our border protection regime as it's been in place for the last couple of years and while they may be sincerely motivated about concern for those individuals, the consequences we know will be catastrophic if they're successful. We know that the boats will start again. We know that people will die at sea. We know that our border protection, community safety will be put under great pressure and so it's critically important that this government does not give them an inch. Unfortunately, since they came to office, they've said that they're abolishing temporary protection visas, which is one of the three key pillars of the successful Operation Sovereign Borders regime. They've trashed offshore processing and really, the only remaining successful deterrent element that we have is boat turnbacks. And unfortunately, we know that it's possible that at any time a boat can get through the cracks. We know that the Australian Border Force and the Australian Navy are under great pressure at the moment. They're struggling to meet their expected hours of patrols and surveillance of our northern approaches and so I fear that any day now, a boat could get through.
STEFANOVIC: Okay. James Paterson, thanks for your time, as always.
ENDS
