Fighting Fire with Fire
The Opposition and elements of the media kept asking for the business case for the NBN, but where is the business case for the continuing onslaught on our freedoms by Parliaments at all levels?
In November 2010 the Government and the Opposition teamed up, in a rare example of collaboration, to enact new measures to “fight terrorism”. Here is how the official media release describes what Parliament enacted:
Attorney-General, Robert McClelland, today welcomed the passage of key national security legislation through the Parliament. ‘The National Security Legislation Amendment Bill 2010 seeks to achieve an appropriate balance between the Government’s responsibility to protect Australia, its people and its interests and instilling confidence that our national security and counter-terrorism laws will be exercised in a just and accountable way,’ Mr McClelland said. The Bill implements the recommendations of a number of independent and bipartisan reviews of Australia’s national security and counter-terrorism legislation dating back to 2006, including the: Inquiry by the Hon John Clarke QC into the Case of Dr Mohamed Haneef (November 2008) Review of Sedition Laws in Australia by the Australian Law Reform Commission (July 2006) Review of Security and Counter-Terrorism Legislation by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security (PJCIS) (December 2006) and Inquiry.
The appropriate balance includes:
· new powers for police to enter a premises without a warrant in emergency circumstances relating to a terrorism offence where there is material that may pose a risk to the health or safety of the public;
· extending the expiration period of regulations proscribing a terrorist organisation from two to three years;
· amending the National Security Information (Criminal and Civil Proceedings) Act 2004 so that national security and counter-terrorism court proceedings may be expedited; and
· extending the time available for police to re-enter a premises under a search warrant from one hour to 12 hours in emergency circumstances.
I don’t know about you, but I have not noticed a sudden outbreak of terrorist activity in Australia that requires the police to be given new draconian powers to act outside long-established principles of Australian law, especially when they seem to be quite capable of pushing the limits already, as illustrated by this The Canberra Times report:
A university student who filmed a classmate in a Power Rangers costume near the ASIO construction site at night had a rude shock when police knocked on his door later to check his bona fides. The student said it was a media studies assignment, not a prank, and that police seemed embarrassed to be sent to find him, using his car’s registration. But the Australian Federal Police defended the late-night check, saying the students were reported filming at night near a restricted area and may have been intending to spray graffiti.
This is the sort of police behaviour you expect to see in Beijing or Moscow, where the police are little more than an appendage of the regime, but how and why is this happening in our nation’s capital? doesn’t the AFP have enough to taking care of real criminals? Apparently not and if I were the relevant Estimates Committee, I would start framing a few questions now on why this happened and what the AFP hierarchy is going to do to prevent it from happening again.
Both sides of politics seem to have engaged in a war of words and legislation to out-muscle the other, in a race to claim the hairy-chested Laura Norda award for anti-terrorist posturing, much as state governments have been doing over the bikie issue. Thankfully, the High Court seems to have put the brakes on that one (and finally called the John Howard bluff on offshore processing of refugees), but so far no litigation has put the Federales to the test in the only forum where independent thought continues to thrive.
The first principle of good government is that governments should use the coercive power of the state only when it is necessary. The Opposition and elements of the media kept asking for the business case for the NBN, but where is the business case for the continuing onslaught on our freedoms by Parliaments at all levels? Why is the so-called Liberal party turning into the Tea Party, sponsor of populist causes and destroyer of liberty? Why is the Labor Party turning into the DLP, seeing a terrorist under every bed?
When are the politicians on both sides going to understand that repression breeds revolution?
Patrick Callioni is a former senior public servant, with the Queensland and Australian Governments, and is now the Senior Executive Advisor, Domestic and International Markets, with the Sustain Group www.sustaingroup.net. His books Compliance and Regulation in the Financial Services Industry & Waves of Change: Managing Global Trends in the Financial Services Industry are available at Amazon
Ian McAuley
December 21, 2010 at 11:04 pm
Great to read your latest
Great to read your latest entry on the threat to our freedoms posed by populist reactions to terrorism. In 200 years historians will write about the most successful military campaign ever – how with just 19 casualties, a tiny army of imbeciles managed to evoke in so many counties a hysterical and costly reaction. Like the Jujitsu warriors, they have used their enemy’s strength to their own advantage.
Even from a hard headed economic perspective there are huge costs. The added costs of air travel, the visa restrictions in developed countries depriving them of human capital, and the more pervasive erosion of trust – which is central to your work.
I cannot understand it. I lived in the Middle East in the 1970s, and travelled throughout the region and through Europe. In comparison with the present age, there was far more terrorism, but we managed to keep it in perspective. Now, as then, there are far more serious dangers than “terrorism”.
I also wonder why clear thinking, as you have shown in your writing, finds it so hard to change behaviour. You must feel at times you have been afflicted with the curse of Cassandra. But do keep at it; you’re one of a small handful of hard thinkers who can see what is happening and communicate it with clarity.