Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Immigration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Conroy. Does the minister agree with the AFP Deputy Commissioner, who said that law enforcement agencies around the world rely heavily on Interpol red notices and take in good faith the accuracy and content of them, and who also testified that, in his experience, he had not encountered an inaccurate notice; or does the minister support the view of the immigration minister, who stated yesterday in relation to red notices that quite often claims have been found to be wrong?

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, I do not accept the premise of the question at all. As Mr O'Connor has said on a number of occasions, there is no contradiction here at all. Mr O'Connor has full confidence in the operational decision making of not only the AFP but every one of our hardworking security agencies. Mr O'Connor pointed out that he would have expected those opposite to already know that the AFP takes Interpol red notices very seriously and examines very carefully the veracity of the claims made in each notice, and in this instance Interpol did reissue a red notice in relation to a person. It is a simple statement of fact to say that from time to time Interpol notices are updated and amended.

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Immigration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I rise in relation to a point of order on relevance. I did not ask the minister about general statements that the minister for immigration had made. I asked the minister about a specific statement that the minister made yesterday, that statement being that, quite often, claims have been found to be wrong in relation to Interpol red notices. I contrasted that with the statement made by the AFP Deputy Commissioner, which was completely in opposition to that, and I asked the minister which statement he supported. I would therefore ask you to direct the minister to the question.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Collins.

Jacinta Collins (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for School Education and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, this is not a point of order. Senator Cash has taken the opportunity to express her views in what should be limited to a point of order. Senator Conroy was making general statements which are indeed relevant to the context of this question. Any suggestion that general statements rather than specific statements might be not relevant is ludicrous in this case.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I took it that the minister had finished his answer. That was my interpretation of the minister sitting down. But, if there is a point of order, the minister, as far as I was concerned, had concluded his answer. So there is no point of order at this stage, Senator Cash. You have got the right to two supplementary questions.

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Immigration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr President, and I therefore ask a supplementary question. What was the rationale for moving the said individual to high-security detention in April? When did the government form the view that the individual identified by ASIO and the AFP from August last year as a convicted jihadist terrorist did not pose a national security threat to Australia?

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Again, the opposition are engaging in serial, reckless fearmongering. We on this side of the chamber prefer to deal in facts, and I am happy to provide the opposition with the facts. First, a red notice is not an arrest warrant. Australian police cannot arrest a person solely on the basis of an Interpol red notice. There are a variety of Interpol notices for different purposes, including for persons who are wanted for extradition or who are simply subject to investigation. Interpol notices are even used to locate missing persons. A red notice can be issued for offences of a scale including issuing an unfunded cheque or causing bankruptcy. The Prime Minister has asked— (Time expired)

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Immigration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Has the government requested that ASIO conduct a comprehensive national security risk assessment of the individual identified as a convicted jihadist terrorist by ASIO and the AFP in August and November of last year and, if so, when was that request made?

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Prime Minister has asked the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security to conduct an independent inquiry examining the management of these issues. Further, I am advised that, after review of current holdings, the AFP is satisfied that appropriate measures are in place to manage those persons subject to DIAC processing who may also be the subject of Interpol red notices.

We have seen yet again in recent days that those opposite are all about short-term politics based on fiction rather than sound policy based on facts. That is why the Leader of the Opposition is dressing up his proposed tough line on foreign criminals. We saw that trotted out on the weekend, when in fact what he is proposing is a watering down of current laws. That is right—a watering down of current laws. (Time expired)