May 6, 2024
.png)
PETA CREDLIN: I'm joined now by the Shadow Home Affairs Minister, James Paterson. Senator, thank you for your time since this attack against Ninette Simons, allegedly at the hands of a released detainee. We've had another man from this cohort charged with theft, charged with threatening police with a knife. Well, he also got bail, this one in Melbourne. Another former detainee also given bail again after further breaches of curfew. Now, why on earth are we not locking these foreign criminals up? The government's got all the powers. Why aren't they using them?
JAMES PATERSON: You're right, Peta, and there is no good explanation for that. It's now almost six months since the Parliament gave the government these powers, and they have failed to use them. It's no wonder the Prime Minister's grumpy though, because in just a couple of days he's been contradicted by two of his ministers. On Friday, he said the “decisions” of the Community Protection Board are “independent.” Well, the Minister for Immigration contradicted him in a statement and said it wasn't “decisions”, it's only “advice.” And today the Minister of Home Affairs has contradicted him and said they're not actually “independent.” So there's really only two options here either. The Prime Minister is grossly ignorant of the way in which this system operates, or he is knowingly lying. And a rare credit from me to Clare O'Neil and Andrew Giles. At least they are not willing to lie to the public about their portfolios in the way that the Prime Minister is apparently comfortable doing.
CREDLIN: Yeah, but Andrew Giles doesn't have a lot on his desk, right? I mean, he has said in the parliament. The biggest job he's got after these 150 foreign criminals were let out, was to look after Australians. He swore he would keep Australians safe. So he only has to make at best 150 decisions about would be bail or ankle bracelets. Now, sure he gets advice from his Community Protection board, fair enough. But it should be on his desk, not on the desk of a faceless bureaucrat down in the department. That's what I'm cranky about. I think that's what most Australians are cranky about. Why are we paying him nearly $400,000 a year to be the Minister, if he can't even turn up and take these tough decisions?
PATERSON: That's spot on, Peta. And to make it even worse, the Migration Act is very clear here. The decision maker is the Minister. The Minister does have the power to choose to delegate that to someone in his department. But legally, he's the decision maker. And we know that in the case of some of these 153 applicants, he was the decision maker because the Border Force Commissioner, Michael Outram, admitted that to me in Senate Estimates in February. Now, since that time, he has delegated this. But that's a decision that he makes. And ultimately he is responsible for everything that happens in his portfolio. And as you say, this is 153 people. These are not hard decisions. This is: should they be subject to a curfew? Should they wear an ankle bracelet? And I can't imagine, why the answer shouldn't be yes to both of those things. And yet, the Minister and the system he has set up has allowed them out in the community, in some cases without ankle bracelets. As you say, to then go on and allegedly offend against elderly women in our community. It is an utter disgrace.
CREDLIN: If you were the Minister, would you make the decision or would you delegate it?
PATERSON: Of course I would. I mean, we are elected to take responsibility. We are elected to make decisions. If I have the legal responsibility under the act to make decisions, I will take those decisions.
CREDLIN: I've got to ask you about some breaking news. Just come in. If I can Senator Paterson, a Chinese fighter jet, as this has been reported, drop flares in front of an Australian Navy helicopter in international waters. Apparently it happened on Saturday evening off the coast of South Korea. It could have been catastrophic if it wasn't for the reflexes of the Australian pilot. Richard Marles has now called this unacceptable, but we're only finding out about it now, of course. And this comes after that sonar pulse incident last year, and real questions about what action the Prime Minister took with his Chinese counterpart and in that case, also a delay in us finding out. How concerned are you with this report?
PATERSON: I'm very concerned. HMS Hobart was in the Yellow Sea enforcing United Nations sanctions against the North Korean government. They were in international waters, not in China's waters. And the People's Liberation Army Air Force has taken an extremely dangerous and coercive step here and put the lives, again, of Australian serving personnel in danger. This should not be allowed to happen, and the Australian government must be incredibly robust in our response. I want to know what the Prime Minister has done about this, because last time he abrogated his responsibility to our men and women in uniform by failing to raise it directly with Xi Jinping when he had the opportunity. Have they convened the National Security Committee of Cabinet? What representations have been made to the Chinese government and at what level?
CREDLIN: What do you make of those comments too? Former head of the US Office of Naval Intelligence Michael Sturdivant. He says he has a concern that China's stockpiling. He thinks something is coming over the horizon? He points to rapidly expanding reserves of oil, iron ore, copper, zinc, rare earths, etc. he says a storm from Beijing is heading towards Taiwan. I mean, he's concerned, are we concerned, should we be concerned?
PATERSON: We need to take warnings like this very seriously, as well as others that have been made by the US Indo-Pacific commander, Admiral Aquilino, by our Ambassador to Washington DC, Kevin Rudd, who have all said that conflict in our region is foreseeable in just the next few years. And Xi Jinping himself has said that he is willing to use force to annex Taiwan and subsume them into the People's Republic of China. And he's also right now building the military he needs to achieve that aim. Now, I'm not suggesting that there is going to be war imminently, but we have to be prepared for the possibility of conflict because it would be utterly detrimental, obviously, to the people of Taiwan, but also Australia and our interests in the region. And our interest is the maintenance of the peaceful status quo. That's the rationale for AUKUS. That's why we're trying to invest in deterrence, to contribute to the prevention of conflict in our region. And yet what that requires is a government that understands the seriousness of the moment we're in and is willing to invest accordingly. We haven't seen that yet from this government.
CREDLIN: Now I remind people, Senator Paterson, of course, everything is on the long finger. It's ten years down in terms of the budget cycle. Not in the immediate budget four year estimates. Thank you for your time Senator.
ENDS
