Sharon Grierson (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

The bill before the House has a long history. It is worth revisiting that history here tonight. On September 11, 2001 the world witnessed in real time a highly calculated and deliberate act of terrorism—the assault on New York and Washington by al-Qaeda terrorists in an operation designed to maim and kill as many people as possible, to destroy significant economic and security infrastructure and to instil fear and inflame hatred across the globe.

The September 11 attacks succeeded on all those fronts and in 2003 the United States of America and their allies, including Australia, invaded Iraq, beginning a prolonged and somewhat futile war. But at the time the special September 11th Victim Compensation Fund provided financial assistance to those injured and the next of kin to those who killed in the 9/11 attacks, including many Australians. Payments under that fund to Australians ranged from between $250,000 and $7.1 million. It was a very generous scheme but it was not an Australian legislated scheme.

In 2002 and 2005 terrorist bombings in Bali brought the brutal reality of terrorism directly to the people of Australia. Since Bali 2002, approximately 100 Australians have been killed and more than 200 Australians have been injured as a direct result of terrorist attacks overseas. The 2005 bombings in Bali affected families in my electorate of Newcastle. We tragically lost three of our citizens: Colin Zwolinski, Fiona Zwolinski and Jennifer Williamson. Seven of our families sustained injury and many people, their family and friends, experienced deep trauma from shock, grief and loss. In fact, the entire Newcastle community shared the pain of this event and rallied marvellously to support the victims of Bali.

Paul Anicich had been terribly injured and was flown to Singapore at the time where he spent a long time in hospital there before returning to Australia. I must digress because the member for Pearce has just spoken. She visited Mr Anicich in Singapore. I was supposed to be part of a delegation but I stayed in Newcastle at the time to support the victims. But I was always very grateful and Paul always remembers that. It is hard for him to remember it clearly. He thinks I was actually there. Member for Pearce, he was very appreciative of that intervention that you so generously and compassionately undertook.

Paul Anicich was moved by the plight of others and began a crusade to bring about some kind of financial payment for victims of terrorism. His efforts in advocacy with Tony Abbott, the Leader of the Opposition, and with Kevin Rudd, who became Prime Minister, led to some action on this issue. In 2009 the member for Warringah, the Leader of the Opposition, moved a private member's bill—Assisting the Victims of International Terrorism Bill 2009.

Originally it was my belief that the member for Warringah had intended to move a private member's motion, have that motion debated and then have negotiations with the then Rudd government to move this forward. At the time I spoke against the private member's bill because, as presented to the House, the bill had insufficient detail or specifics regarding the key issues of eligibility, criteria, payment thresholds or administration of that payment over the long term. What did happen, though, as a result of the advocacy of Paul Anicich and other Newcastle victims, was that then Prime Minister Kevin Rudd announced on the night the legislation was dealt with that the government would engage the Productivity Commission to examine the feasibility of a national long-term care and support scheme, a scheme that would address the issue of improving the support of those with special needs, no matter how their injury or harm was sustained.

In his speech announcing the decision, Kevin Rudd made special mention of both Paul Anicich and Tony Purkiss from Newcastle who he had met with and who were in the House that day, acknowledging his recognition of their circumstances and their specific commitment. At the time this was a wonderful outcome: proper consideration of the special needs of people over a long time requiring long-term care. Of course, today it is Prime Minister Julia Gillard who has acted on the Productivity Commission findings and driven the design of a National Disability Insurance Scheme now agreed to by all parties in the parliament and by all states, and now in a trial phase. So I often think that, if that is a legacy, for someone like Paul Anicich it is a pretty wonderful legacy.

That is the background of the legislation we are debating tonight. It was a great outcome for the federal Labor government and a great outcome of the advocacy of many Australians, but particularly my constituent Paul Anicich and all the other victims of Bali 2002, Bali 2005 and, of course, other terrorist attacks. So the member for Warringah's original bill was lost and negotiations were undertaken with the former Attorney-General Robert McClelland and then with Attorney-General Nicola Roxon, pursuing a bill to specifically support victims of terrorism overseas. Arising from those negotiations we now have this bill before the House, and also the Brandis bill, which is in most respects the original bill put forward by the member for Warringah and which is now before the Senate.

In the member for Warringah's original bill, there was no provision for retrospective legislation, but I understand that the opposition will be moving amendments to this bill to make the legislation retrospective. I have to say I am supporting the government's legislation as it is; however, I again have to express some reservations about this approach. First, after Bali 2002 I know that the most important thing of all is that when a terrorist attack injures or kills our citizens abroad the government of the day must respond instantly and generously. No effort can or should be spared in supporting our victims—organising emergency transport and accommodation, providing access to appropriate medical care, giving individualised attention through Centrelink to victims and their families, making sure the Australian Federal Police are responsive and proactive, and setting up the best information and communication systems so that media, families and anxious communities have accurate and reliable information.

The second thing I know is essential is the assurance for victims and their families that there will always be ongoing medical and emotional support and that they can come back at any time and access that support. That is exactly what happened after Bali 2002 and Bali 2005, and that is what continues to happen. There may have been some glitches and some matters that needed special intervention to improve outcomes, but this is what our country does well: we do not pull out support. We have a safety net of services that are ongoing. I never want any government to be in a position where they do less than that because of a cost that may be incurred through a special cash payment of any kind. I never want any government to limit the support they give when these terrible events occur.

Third, although I understand and am appalled that terrorism is an act of violence against a government and that innocent people are the consequential targets and victims, I continue to ask: what is the best way to deal with all victims of war, of terrorism and of natural disasters? Prisoners of war were belatedly granted special one-off payments of $25,000 and the prisoner of war recognition supplement of $500 per fortnight, but innocent victims of war on our soil have never had anything more than the best safety net of care and rehabilitation offered by the government of the day. Victims of natural disasters since the 2007 Pasha Bulker storm in Newcastle have received a one-off payment of $1,000, and the cost of this program does continue to increase as weather phenomena become more extreme. That instant cash payment definitely helped many Novocastrians, and I imagine it has helped wherever it is being implemented, allowing people who have lost everything or are temporarily disconnected from their home and possessions some cash to access emergency accommodation, food and supplies until insurance claims and emergency and disaster funds are set up. But the reality is that no amount of cash can adequately compensate ordinary Australians for extraordinary incidents and moments of great tragedy and loss, no matter the cause or the circumstances.

Fourth, we must always be vigilant in the quest to protect Australians from terrorism—and we are. This is where risk identification and management, cooperative international intelligence approaches, joint policing operations and information sharing, the research of the Australian Crime Commission and the painstaking work of all our security and intelligence agencies are absolutely paramount. Again, we need adequate resourcing for all those things to do the job well.

The best immediate response when these dreadful things happen is the most generous support possible at that very critical time, the comfort of a vigorous security regime, as well as a National Disability Insurance Scheme to ensure long-term care. They are all vital measures in supporting victims of terrorism. Add to that strong communities with built-in social health and welfare infrastructure that supports ongoing care and ongoing compassion. Those things are priceless, I have always thought. Again I stress that it is so important that we continue to fund the things that make this nation a great nation that gives people the comfort when they travel overseas that their country is there for them and will always be there for them. If we can always ensure that approach in this nation and we can afford additional cash payments such as those proposed in this legislation, then we are indeed a very fortunate nation, a very fortunate people. So we should pass this legislation.

In the case of this legislation the actual payment will range between zero dollars and $75,000, and it will not be retrospective. The regulations around eligibility are still to be written but will be activated following a declaration by the Prime Minister of the day that a relevant overseas terrorist act has occurred. Australians physically or psychologically harmed as a result of a terrorist act will be eligible for financial assistance under the proposed scheme. Close family members of Australians killed as a result of a terrorist act will also be eligible for financial assistance. The bill will ensure a payment made under the scheme does not impact on other entitlements, and that is as it should be.

Also, there is no intention for the proposed scheme to apply to past overseas terrorism acts. That will disappoint Paul Anicich, who has very much advocated for this legislation, and it will obviously disappoint those who have been victims and who remain traumatised in many cases and have been seriously affected. But this is the legislation before us. The opposition leader's private member's bill, when introduced, like this one, did not specify particular events. Nor did it specifically state that it would apply retrospectively. This legislation today, then, is consistent with the position taken by the coalition when in government. For example, in August 2003, after the first Bali bombing, then Prime Minister John Howard ruled out a compensation scheme for victims of terrorism. Further, in May 2006 the then Minister for Justice and Customs, Senator Chris Ellison, ruled out a compensation support scheme for victims of the second Bali bombing, the one affecting citizens of Newcastle. Although it will disappoint, I think it is usual practice by any government, as is evidenced by the previous decisions.

But it is important to know that at the time of the Bali bombings, terrorist attacks on our citizens, significant targeted assistance was provided, including disaster healthcare assistance schemes, ex gratia assistance, consular and repatriation assistance and immediate short-term financial assistance through the Australian government disaster recovery payments. Since the Bali bombing in 2002 the Australian government has expended more than $12 million on assistance and support for Australians killed or injured as a direct result of overseas terrorist attacks.

We are a generous nation. We are a rigorous nation. We are a nation that does tend to the arms of government in all shapes and forms that keep our nation safe, keep the people of this nation safe around the world, hopefully, and respond to disasters of any kind that affect them. In conclusion, I do support this legislation. I also continue to offer my ongoing concern and support for the people of Newcastle, the families so sorely impacted by the devastating attacks in Bali in 2005.

See this speech in context