August 13, 2024
JAMES PATERSON: Good afternoon everyone. There is no more sacred duty for a federal government than national security and keeping Australians safe. And I am very proud to be standing here with my friend and colleague Julian Leeser, who has taken the important initiative of arranging a letter to Tony Burke today, to call on him to do his job and put the national interests before his political interests and ensure that no supporters of the listed terrorist organisation, Hamas or any other terrorist organisation, come to Australia. We were both very alarmed by the revelations over the weekend that the Albanese government's approach to these issues is that if you're simply a rhetorical or political supporter of a terrorist organisation, that that is not a barrier for you coming to our country. There are two things that need to happen immediately. Every single application from the Palestinian territories to come to Australia should be referred to ASIO for assessment. It was remarkable that Mike Burgess said on the weekend that was not happening. And secondly, the department needs to be directed to not approve the visa of any person who can be identified to be a supporter of a terrorist organisation. If you think violence is an appropriate means to achieve your political objectives, then you are a supporter of a terrorist organisation and these organisations are listed in our country for very good reason. Julian.
JULIAN LEESER: Thank you, James, and thank you for the work that you're doing to keep Australia safe. Unfortunately, the security situation in Australia today is declining. We've seen the threat level increase in recent days. We have a terrorism listing regime in Australia to discourage people from associating with terrorist organisations or supporting terrorist organisations, We list organisations like Al-Qaeda, like Islamic State like Hamas and Hezbollah. And it was disturbing at the weekend to hear the Director-General of security state the government position, which was that the mere rhetorical support for a terrorist organisation was not enough to have a visa cancelled. We're seeing this at a time when countries like Germany, a like minded country to Australia is expelling Hamas supporters. So today, myself along with 70 colleagues, have written to the Minister for Home Affairs, Tony Burke. We've asked him to do two things. To direct his department to ensure that supporters of terrorist organisations like Hamas are not granted visas to come to this country, and secondly, that they consider the cancellation of any existing visas of people who are currently in this country who are terrorism supporters. Even having one additional terrorism supporter in this country makes our country less safe. So we call on Tony Burke to take action and to demonstrate to the country that he's serious about his job.
JOURNALIST: It sounds tacky, but the old phrase one man's terrorist is another’s freedom fighter. Where exactly do you draw the line on what is a terrorist supporter and what is someone who might support the aims and objectives of Hamas, raising questions about a Palestinian homeland and things like that?
PATERSON: Yeah look, people may well say that, Andrew, but the law in Australia is very clear. We list terrorist organisations. We have objective criteria for how we assess whether an organisation is a terrorist organisation and it relates to an organisation that has an political objective, to which, it seeks violence to achieve those political objectives. So if you are a supporter of any of those listed terrorist organisations, you are potentially running afoul of law. And we don't think you're someone who should come to our country. That is very different for someone who is a completely peaceful supporter of the cause of Palestinian self-determination. That is a absolutely respectable cause. People in Australia are entitled to peacefully campaign for that cause. We have no issue with that. What we have an issue with is people who support violent means to achieve that objective. If you support the 7th of October and what happened on that day, if you support Hamas, then you should not be welcome in Australia.
JOURNALIST: You said that Mike Burgess was giving the government's position. Was he not giving his independent view as the head of ASIO as to what the standard should be on who gets allowed in?
PATERSON: No, it's not a matter for Mike Burgess to set immigration policy in Australia. He wouldn't seek that role for himself. He's very careful about what he does. And I listen to him carefully, as we all should. He was very clearly describing the status quo under the Albanese government, which consists of two things. One, there is no problem for having rhetorical supporters of terrorist organisations come to this country, ASIO has not been asked to look for that. And two, that they will only refer some applications for visas from the Palestinian territories to ASIO, for a security assessment. I cannot understand why that would be the case. Let's remember this is a war zone governed by a terrorist organisation. There are opinion polls in Gaza, which shows that support for Hamas is anywhere between 40% and 70%. There's opinion polls which show the majority of residents of Gaza support what happened on the 7th of October. This is a cohort that should be screened carefully to make sure that there's no risk to our safety and security.
JOURNALIST: What would constitute support? Say liking a tweet about Hamas?
PATERSON: I have great confidence in the capabilities of our intelligence agencies to assess that. Anyone who expresses support for terrorism or terrorist organisations would qualify.
JOURNALIST: Senator Paterson, could I ask you your view on whether you think it's unusual or surprising that so many people released from immigration detention into the community were issued with visas after the fact?
PATERSON: Yes. Extraordinary on two levels. One, why on earth was the Albanese government releasing those 83 people without any valid visa? And second, why did Andrew Giles tell the Parliament that they were issued visas? Why did he say they were in the community on bridging visas with strict conditions? We know that is not the case. It seems like a textbook case of having misled the Parliament, and there should be consequences for that under the Prime Minister's own ministerial code of conduct. It doesn't matter that he's in a different portfolio. If he's misled the Parliament, he should be sacked.
Thanks everyone.
ENDS
