Andrew Hastie (Canning, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) notes that as the terrorist group, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, comes under increasing pressure in Iraq and Syria, there is the risk that more foreign fighters will seek to leave, with some trying to return to their home countries, including Australia;

(2) acknowledges that the Government:

(a)has given greater support, funding and legislative powers to law enforcement and security agencies; and

(b)continues to work in close partnership with international partners to counter the terrorism risk; and

(3)notes that the national security challenges facing Australia continue to evolve.

Last month I declared that Australia, as part of the global coalition against Islamic State was trending towards victory. In October, Islamic State lost control of additional territory—four per cent in Iraq and two per cent in Syria. Therefore, since there are high-water mark of August 2014, Islamic State has significant territory—56 per cent in Iraq and 27 per cent in Syria. Right now, the battle for Mosul is being fought. Its liberation will be among Islamic State's most significant losses to date, alongside the loss of Fallujah, another critical urban centre that was once under their control. Their grip on the Syrian city of Raqqa is being eroded by militia forces, backed by Australia and the coalition. The curtain indeed is coming down on the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. With every gain made, new stories emerge of the oppression and terror that people have faced under Islamic State. This only stiffens our resolve.

We cannot understand Islamic State without first engaging their world view. It is the keystone to their whole movement. It serves as the blueprint for their military strategy and their barbaric tactics. Australian academic Robert Manne has written on this subject both in The Monthly and in a recent book, The Mind of the Islamic State. I suggest that this is essential reading for Australian policymakers. He states that ideology is at the heart of Islamic State:

The more I read the more convinced I became that the Islamic State's barbarous behaviour could not possibly be grasped without some real familiarity with the character and content of their ideology. As so often in history, it is ideas that kill.

Very simply, Islamic State theology—a radical Salafist interpretation of Islam—gives rise to a totalitarian world view that is entirely incompatible with Western civilisation. Its demands are clear: all must submit to the Islamic State and become part of a worldwide caliphate. They despise our way of life and our democratic freedoms and traditions.

Territory is critical to the validation of Islamic State ideology, so every coalition advance undermines the ideological legitimacy of ISIS. As its territory recedes, we not only press the material advantage but we also strike hammer blows at their world view. This is a contest of ideas that must be waged both materially and intellectually. The liberation of Dabiq is a case in point. According to Islamic State, this small unremarkable Syrian village was to be the place where the armies of Islam would win a great battle against the West, the first in a string of apocalyptic victories. Dabiq fell to coalition backed forces last month. This is a profound setback for Islamic State, one that strikes decisively at the heart of their world view.

Australia is a partner to the global coalition which is disrupting and degrading Islamic State's activities and capabilities in the Middle East. Beyond training Iraqi troops and conducting air strikes in Iraq and Syria, Australia is working with coalition partners to tackle Islamic State's financing and economic infrastructure, to prevent the movement of foreign fighters across borders and to restore essential services in liberated population centres in Iraq and Syria. With Australian support the global campaign is making progress. This is welcome news; however, the campaign against IS is far from over.

As the caliphate continues to collapse, the bulk of its 30,000 foreign fighters will seek to repatriate themselves into communities in the West. Among that group are over 100 foreign fighters who hold Australian passports, which is to say that they are Australians in name only. They have rejected our way of life. The Australian parliament has passed five tranches of counterterrorism and national security legislation over the last two years. This legislation ensures our law enforcement and intelligence agencies are empowered to combat Islamic State and their affiliates.

Thousands of foreign fighters, without question, will flee the caliphate to hide in the West. They will come battle hardened and radicalised and will seek to sow discord and terror in our communities. Maintaining border sovereignty and rigorous immigration checks has never been so important. The Turnbull government's principled, realistic border security measures stand as an example to both Europe and the United States. By controlling the flow of migration, we have avoided the mistakes of Europe. We do not have the same security challenges on our shores. The Prime Minister and the immigration minister are to be commended for their resolve in keeping the people of Australia safe.

Lucy Wicks (Robertson, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

Anne Aly (Cowan, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

First of all I would like to acknowledge the success of the military action by the Iraqi Army and coalition forces, including Australia, in gaining critical territory from Daesh in Iraq. At the same time, however, I caution that we need to heed the lessons from previous conflicts against terrorist actors in the region. Almost a decade after the terrorist attacks on the United States, the prolonged war on terror has failed to actually eradicate the threat of international terrorism. While this hard power approach of war on terror succeeded in decimating the operational and tactical capacity of al-Qaeda central, the belief that the destruction of training camps would successfully eradicate al-Qaeda's affiliates and its ideology was indeed misplaced. This wisdom of employing an orthodox military response against an unorthodox enemy has rightly been questioned. The war on terror has not weakened the ability of terrorist groups to inspire, recruit or mobilise.

The last speaker, the member for Canning, spoke of the need to understand the world view of Daesh or ISIL. I reiterate what he said, but I would also say that last year Major General Michael Nagata, the most senior general in charge of coalition forces in Iraq, threw his hands up in the air and stated: 'The problem is we do not understand Daesh. We do not understand their ideology. We do not understand what they want.' I would argue that actually we do. There has been much analysis and research on exactly what their ideology is, on exactly what their world view is and on exactly what their strategic motives are and what mobilises them. What we do not understand is exactly how that speaks to and influences young people, particularly those in the West.

I am reminded here of the words of Ban Ki-moon, the outgoing UN Secretary-General, who at the White House CVE summit last year stated, 'Missiles will kill terrorists but they will not kill terrorism.' That is why we need to be vigilant and steel ourselves against the urge to find simplistic explanations and answers that do not need take into account the complexity of radicalisation and violent extremism such as terrorism and that, importantly, hold no hope of offering solutions that are viable or effective.

The lack of empirical data to support many of the myths and assumptions that have been put forward not only to explain terrorism but also to develop frameworks to address it is an ongoing issue of concern. As an academic, I sought to answer questions about why people become terrorist actors and what we can do to prevent it. For me as an academic, access to data was a major barrier, and that is because it is very difficult if not impossible to interview terrorist actors—especially if they are suicide bombers—to engage them and to gain those valuable insights into their psychologies and their histories. So, in the absence of robust data and research, we tend to fall into the pattern of making assumptions based on myth and conjecture and single-line statements based on crumbs of information that are gleaned from media reports.

There are two things with regard to the particular motion. The first is that, based on past evidence, it is much more likely that the mujahedin, as they call themselves, will follow conflicts to the next theatre of jihad, as have those who fought before in Afghanistan and then in Iraq and Syria. That is, of course, if they survive and manage to escape from Daesh, who are known for executing those who try to desert the organisation. Secondly, the one study that has been done on this has been done by a man named Thomas Hegghammer. According to Thomas Hegghammer's data, which was also very limited, most foreign fighters do not leave the theatre of combat with the intention of returning for domestic attacks. In fact, around one in nine foreign fighters return to perpetrate attacks in the West. Nevertheless, it is prudent to be aware and ready to respond to any threat posed by those who are returning, for today's terrorism is characterised by the ability of small numbers to cause large-scale mass-casualty attacks, as the events in Paris have shown us.

Daesh is but one iteration of a global violent jihadist movement that is likely to continue even after the last operative is gone from Syria and Iraq. This is not the fight of my generation but the fight of generations to come, and we need to keep paying attention to it.

Tim Wilson (Goldstein, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to follow on from the previous speaker in saying that there is an enormous challenge ahead for not just our generation but future generations in making sure we take on the challenge of Islamic extremism, Daesh and all of its different guises. Today we fully acknowledge the ongoing efforts of the government and coalition forces in combating the atrocious and hateful crimes of ISIL and the tragedy that is befalling so many people across the world. There simply is no place for the jihadism, misogyny, temporary forced marriage, polygyny or patriarchal coercion that exists in the 21st century, as well as the acts of horrific violence that are committed by people in groups such as ISIL against vulnerable and innocent people who have done no wrong and should not become victims simply because of who they are or how they live their lives.

The atrocities inflicted on minorities, in particular, by ISIL are indefensible. Their actions represent the worst outcome of an extremist interpretation of Islam that is profoundly incompatible with the modern world. The free world does not seek to homogenise belief or conscience; instead it affirms diversity and advocates for tolerance and mutual respect. Those are the sorts of values that are directly under assault when you look at ISIL and its objectives around trying to dehumanise people unless they conform to a particular world view—and in the most aggressive and violent way possible if it suits their ends.

These sorts of values of tolerance and mutual respect are central to our way of life, which is why there is such a polarity between us and them. This is not to seek a dichotomy and simply to say, 'It is us and them, and you are with us or you are against us.' It is simply to highlight that the inconsistency between who we are and what they are seeking to achieve is so great because they envisage a future without the values that we share, the values of liberalism and democracy that we hold so dear and that foster and create a society of tolerance and mutual respect for all.

Our Defence Force has an important role in assisting and advising the Iraqi government to help build capacity and take control of their borders and security. It is equally important and crucial in a contemporary sense that the Iraqi security forces take back Mosul. It forms part of broader objective to undermine the claim of terrorist organisations for a so-called Islamic caliphate. For Iraq to benefit from enduring stability, it must secure its own borders and be able to resist any resurgent terrorist activity once ISIL is defeated. That is a long-term objective of the 400 Australian Defence Force personnel currently involved at the invitation of the Iraqi government. We acknowledge today the heroic efforts of those who serve in uniform for our great country for their contribution today not only in seeking to aspire to the values of our country but in promoting peace and security in that region as well as in protecting so many people who would otherwise be victims of the insane political ideology that seeks to use violence as a means of expanding its influence.

There are also other security concerns beyond the Middle East as foreign terrorist fighters start to return home, whether that is in Europe, South-East Asia or, indeed, Australia, where sometimes there are threats. That is where the tragedy of last week's footage of Melbourne's landmarks was featured in the terror group's hateful propaganda videos. These messages call for lone wolf attacks on the streets of Brunswick and Broadmeadows and at the MCG, while showing recordings of violent acts, including beheadings and bomb blasts.

A government's first priority is to protect the safety of its residents by both securing its borders and holding those people who wish to commit crimes, violent crimes against its citizens, to account. That is why the political objective of this government has been so important not just around border security but following it through to making sure it delivers security for people within our country. As such, the coalition has increased the funding and legislative powers of our law enforcement and security agencies, giving them the resources needed to protect us from hardened terrorists who seek to destroy our way of life.

Getting the balance between how we have those security agencies keep us safe and free is always difficult, and that is why I will never shy away from being engaged in those important conversations as part of getting the framework right to preserve the freedom that we hold so dear so that we do not end up selling short ourselves or the traditions and values that we inherit to give to future generations. Behind the ideological conflict for Islamic fundamentalism, the stories of human misery are the real tragedy. We fight this conflict for the sake of our children and those who have suffered so much already but also those who tragically may suffer into the future. We must gift upon this world a nation as well as a world where we seek mutual respect and harmony to the advancement of all. (Time expired)

Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Attorney General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Labor are proud of our record on national security. In government, between 2007 and 2013, Labor increased funding for national security and public safety by hundreds of millions of dollars in real terms. Regrettably, the government's claim expressed in this motion that they have given greater funding to law enforcement does not bear close scrutiny. The Australian Federal Police, in particular, have been forced to cope with budget cuts while having to provide increased counterterrorism and security activities. In response to Labor's senators questions on notice on police resources from earlier this year, the Australian Federal Police responded that they 'did not receive any portion of the $1.2 billion national security funding announced in the 2015-16 budget'. Further, the Australian Federal Police responded that their 'capacity to respond to increased volumes of activities and threat means that resources are stretched'. Yes, the government has increased the legislative powers of law enforcement and security agencies, with Labor's bipartisan support, but there remains resourcing issues that must be acknowledged.

Labor will support measures to increase national security to ensure that our community is safe. We have at all times since September 2013 aimed to work with the government in a bipartisan manner on important issues of security and defence. However, that does not mean that Labor will write a blank cheque for the government on this or any other matter. As a responsible opposition, Labor will continue to work with the government to strike the right balance between improving community safety and protecting human rights, privacy and the freedoms of all Australians. Throughout the term of the Abbott-Turnbull government, Labor have worked in a constructive manner, particularly through the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, to ensure all proposed national security legislation is fit for purpose. We have helped to enact over 100 substantive amendments to the national security bills that have been put forward over the past three years. Labor worked with the government to not only pass but improve the citizenship bill, the data retention bill and the foreign fighters bill. Labor members of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security pushed for a number of amendments to the recently enacted Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2016. We have most recently sought and agreed with government members of the intelligence committee on recommendations to improve the Criminal Code Amendment (High Risk Terrorist Offenders) Bill 2016 and to ensure that appropriate safeguards are in place.

Labor believes that these bills require expert consideration and advice to ensure that they strike an appropriate balance between keeping a community safe and protecting people's rights. The report on the Criminal Code Amendment (High Risk Terrorist Offenders) Bill 2016, which was tabled on 4 November this year, recommends that the government obtain legal advice from the Solicitor-General on the constitutional validity of the final version of the high risk terrorist offenders bill before it is further debated in parliament. We understand that terrorist groups like ISIL threaten liberal democratic values and seek to harm our friends and allies around the world. People are particularly concerned about Australian citizens fighting with overseas terrorist and insurgent groups and different forms of homegrown terrorism. Around 110 Australians are reportedly fighting or engaged in some way with terrorist groups in Iraq and Syria.

Despite the increased economic ties between nations that globalisation has delivered, there are still a significant number of conflicts and tensions in the world right now. There is, of course, a wide diversity in the challenges set by different conflicts around the world: wars in Syria and Iraq continue; there are on-and-off conflicts in parts of Turkey; Libya and Yemen still simmer; and countries including Nigeria, Niger, Chad and Cameroon face a developing threat from Boko Haram—all of which create their own global and regional issues and challenges. Labor is ready and willing to meet these challenges, whether they be challenges caused by threats to the sovereignty and stability of democratically elected governments or challenges caused by changes in migratory patterns or territorial groups. I repeat: Labor stands ready to adopt a bipartisan position with the government on necessary changes to our national security legislation framework. This does not mean that we will agree with the government on every single bill or every single aspect of every bill that the government presents, but does mean a very constructive attitude, which we have demonstrated at all times. (Time expired)

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Our nation's identity is defined by an overriding commitment to our democratic values that rise above race, religion or ethnic background. As a society, we are united around shared values of freedom, common decency, mutual respect and the rule of law. As one of the oldest and most successful continuous democracies, Australia has consistently rejected those who seek to impose their world view on others through intimidation and violence, and I am happy to say that I am part of a government that stands firm on its commitment to maintaining a harmonious society as a necessary precondition to keeping Australia safe. Our primary focus is to prevent harm to our families and communities, and to do this we are working closely with our state and territorial counterparts to ensure our police and security agencies have the powers they need to fight terrorism. However, as we know, terrorism is a global challenge and we must also work closely with our international partners in the region and beyond.

Given Australia's staunch defence of our democratic values at home and abroad, it would come as no surprise that Australia faces national security challenges that continue to evolve. To combat this situation, we keep our legislation and capabilities under constant review to meet these emerging needs and threats. Australia is one of more than 60 coalition members committed to tackling ISIL on all fronts. Australia plays a major role in the coalition as a leading contributor of troops training Iraqi forces, as a participant in airstrikes in Iraq and Syria, and as a significant humanitarian donor.

Beyond the direct military campaign in Iraq and Syria, we are tackling ISIL's financing and economic infrastructure, preventing the flow of foreign terrorist fighters across borders, supporting stabilisation and the restoration of essential public services to areas liberated from ISIL, and working hard to undermine and expose ISIL's deluded propaganda. As result of this sustained effort, ISIL are under increasing pressure. They are losing territory, finances, fighters and battles. Since Iraqi security forces started their push to liberate Mosul, ISIL has lost control of more than 100 villages. In fact, they have not gained any new territory since 2015. In the past 12 months, ISIL propaganda has been reduced by more than 60 per cent, and Australian forces in Iraq are training more local soldiers than ever before.

Terrorism poses a grave threat to Australia and its people. It is important to manage terrorist offenders, who may continue to pose an unacceptable risk to the community following the expiry of their custodial sentences. To address the threat of terrorism, the Australian government has taken five tranches of legislation through parliament since August 2014, including the Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2016 and the Criminal Code Amendment (High Risk Terrorist Offenders) Bill 2016. Since the national terrorism threat level was raised on 12 September 2014, 55 people have been charged as a result of 24 counterterrorism operations around Australia. Since the national terrorism threat level was raised on 12 September 2014 there have been four attacks and 11 major counterterrorism disruption operations in response to potential attack planning in Australia. In addition, close cooperation between intelligence and law enforcement agencies has led to a series of targeted disruption and other activities to contain those threats.

There are currently 40 people before the courts for terrorism-related offences, seven of whom are juveniles. Around 200 people in Australia are being investigated for providing support to individuals and groups in the Syria-Iraq conflict, including through funding and facilitation, or through seeking to travel there. The overwhelming majority of these are young men and women. Around 190 Australian passports have been cancelled or refused in relation to the Syria-Iraq conflict, and four Australians have been listed for counterterrorism-targeted financial sanctions. Australia is part of an unprecedented international effort to combat and defeat ISIL and terrorism. Our commitment is steadfast and our resolve is absolute. (Time expired)

Michael Danby (Melbourne Ports, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Canning is to be congratulated for moving this motion. One of the primary duties of members of this House is to protect the right to life of all Australian citizens. Only last Thursday we saw Daesh call on jihadis to target my city of Melbourne. The pictures of Tullamarine Airport, Qantas aircraft and St Paul's Cathedral were among the graphic images of bomb blasts and beheadings that Daesh put in with their propaganda videos. This, of course, primarily affects the people of the Middle East, particularly the minorities, who have been brutalised by this terrible political movement that misuses one of the world's great monotheisms and speaks in its name without its authority and without any spirituality. It has devastated that part of the world. In Syria we have seen nearly half a million people die—not solely as a result of the Islamists but also as a result of the Russians and Assad. They are facing increasing casualties as Western troops, the Syrian defence forces and the Iraqi army, in particular, and local people move to fight back against them in that part of the world. Director of National Intelligence Clapper, in testimony to the US Congress, said there were 36,000 Daesh fighters in eastern Syria and western Iraq.

Amongst those, at least 61 Australians—possibly up to 68—have been killed in the conflict as a result of their involvement through their support of Daesh. ASIO assesses that 110 Australians are still fighting or engaged with those groups there. And some of these individual Australian characters have been involved in the despicable slavery of women and minorities et cetera. Some of them have taken their children to this conflict and, of course, we now face the very difficult task of dealing with people who are coming back from there. Of course, Australians are very afraid, quite naturally, that some of these people will bring their so-called skills back to this country.

Apart from the 190 Australian jihadis who are actively supporting these extremist groups, 40 have allegedly returned from the conflict zone. There are up to 70 children of Australians who have been exposed to extremist groups there. We saw the terrible sight that we all remember of two Australian children holding up the heads of citizens of Syria who had been killed by members of Daesh, including the father of the two children.

In the four years since 2012, about 200 Australians have travelled to Syria and Iraq and joined in the conflict. About 110 are currently fighting. We also now have the problem of people languishing in prisons who are unrepentant jihadists. What do we do with them? Can we let people like Mr Benbrika, who promised to blow up the MCG and injure and kill people in Australia on behalf of his jihadist beliefs, out of prison once he has finished his sentence? Australians respect the rule of law; we believe that people, when they finish their sentences, should be allowed to be newly judged. But, at the same time, the Labor Party supports the government in saying that we cannot let Australian citizens be at risk from people who have these unrepentant demands for a war against Australia which we have done nothing to deserve.

We support the toughening of the laws for 14- to 18-year-olds too as, very unfortunately, in Endeavour Hills a 17-year-old was involved and in Parramatta a 15-year-old was involved. Who can believe that some wicked ideology would influence young people to commit crimes against a man such as Mr Curtis Cheng, who was the innocent accountant for the police in Parramatta. We must be vigilant about these kinds of things. We must maintain our civil liberties at the same time, and we must also not lose sight of the fact that these people want to damage Australia.

I am very pleased that Senator Xenophon is claiming credit for the data breach legislation, which I first mentioned at the intelligence committee, to match the privacy considerations of the metadata legislation which deals with the terrorist— (Time expired)

Lucy Wicks (Robertson, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.