Senator welcome to the
program good morning David so let's just
start by clearing this up Peter Dutton
says we heard there repeatedly these
people should go back into immigration
detention you've argued indefinite
immigration detention is not the
solution
why David when the high court handed
down its decision on Wednesday last week
the Senate was sitting and I gave my
first metor interview about this on
Thursday and I said the government
should be ready with legislation to intr
in the Senate and it should consider the
highrisk terrorist offenders regime as a
possible solution to this problem that
includes things like preventative
detention orders continuing detention
orders extended supervision orders and
control orders and the government was
not ready and they did not do that those
could have been used to detain at the
very least the highest risk among this
cohort of now 93 people which by the way
the government has not explained the
solicor general told the high court
there were 92 people who needed to be
immediately released we've now hit 93
and the question is open have we started
to move into that cohort of 340 who are
they what offenses have they committed
and when and where were they released
into the community they're all
interesting questions but can I come
back to the one I asked you Peter Dutton
is saying put them back in Immigration
detention is that
possible well David we're the opposition
and we've tried to be constructive about
this we've tried to suggest a range of
options of dealing with this including
as I said the high-risk terrorist
offenders framework which critically
would allow the government to apply to a
court for a court to detain someone on
the basis of the risk that they pose to
the community it's a well accepted and
well tested area of law that could be
applied at the very least to the highest
risk defenders in this cohort the
government doesn't appear willing to
test that at least not until they have
the high Court's advice but in the
meantime we've got people out in the
community who may POS a risk to the
community I think that's very
unfortunate okay but just one more time
when Peter Dutton says putting them back
in Immigration detention are you saying
that's
impossible no David I'm saying that the
government should investigate all lawful
options we've all been really clear
about this imigration DET the you
yourself have said uh that they cannot
go back into indefinite immigration
detention David we're the opposition
we're trying to be constructive about
this we don't have the benefit of the
legal advice that the government does
but what we're saying is they need to
look at all the lawful options and I
think it's very clear that they haven't
done that it's very clear that they were
called on the Hop when the high courtt
handed down its ruling on Wednesday it's
very clear that they didn't have
legislation ready to introduce to the
Senate which was sitting which could
have passed on Thursday of last week and
could have been introduced into the
house on Monday of this week and this
all could have been avoided so let's
look at your idea then of preventative
detention I think you just said for the
highest risk offenders so you're not
saying everybody locked up how would it
work what you're
suggesting well we have a very mature
Hest terrorist offenders framework in
this country which recognizes that some
types of offenders including terrorist
offenders are not able to be easily
rehabilitated in prison and doose a
continuing reach to the community if
they are released after the end of their
custodial sentences and so the police
can apply through the courts for them to
be detained on a continuing basis they
can even apply to the courts to have
them detained preventatively before they
are convicted and this offers the
community some measure of protection
that they are not out in the community
and can't cause harm to the community
and I really think the government should
be looking that as an option because for
at least some of these cohort we know
they are very serious violent offenders
I mean in the government's own words in
a document that we obtain through an
order of production of documents in the
Senate which was handed to the court a
month ago they described these offenders
as very serious offenders and ranging
from sexual crimes to murder to child
sex abuses uh this really should have
been considered uh well before the court
handed down its decision and this new
regime that you're suggesting here a
preventative detention regime would it
only apply to those on these uh what are
they called removal pending visas that
have now been set up or would it would
it more broadly apply to all
noncitizens
well I think this is a special cohort
because they normally would be detained
and the only reason that they're not
detained is that there's no reasonable
Prospect of them being either sent back
to the country that they originally came
from or being resettled in a third
country and that's important it's either
because they are stateless it's either
because they do have a well fear
well-founded fear of persecution back in
their home country and it is often
because no Third Country will take them
because of the severity of the crimes
that they have committed so ordinarily
they would be removed from the country
their visa would be canceled they would
be deported or they remain in detention
because that's not an option I think we
do have to look at measures like this
and just to clear up what has passed
through the parliament uh the other day
this this question about ministerial
discretion for the ankle bracelets and
the curfews and so on what's your
understanding of how much discretion
there
is David we proposed six amendments to
the government which they accepted in
principle and it was our intention that
most if not all of these conditions
would be mandatory the government came
back to us after receiving legal advice
and they said said that that would be
problematic and it would risk the uh
validity of these laws so instead what
they have introduced in their amendments
which they drafted for the opposition
was a presumption a presumption that
these measures do apply unless the
minister believes these people do not
pose a risk to the community now that's
a pretty high bar you have to be
convinced that there's no risk to the
community if you are to not impose for
example an electronic bracelet or a
curfew and so it's my expectation that
all or almost all of those offenders
will have these conditions applied to
them even those who may not have been
convicted of an
offense well the government will be in
possession with a range of information
in relation to these detainees let me
tell you these visas are not canceled
without good reason it's because they've
either committed a crime or they've
violated the character provisions of the
migration act and so they all do pose a
degree of risk but of course some are
more risky than others and Only The
Minister's in possession of that
information it's not something that
they're sharing with the opposition or
the public and so they have to make that
decision and the burden falls on them
look let's turn to the incident uh
between between h tumba and a Chinese
vessel uh in international waters of
Japan as we mentioned some Australian
Navy personnel have been left with minor
injuries you said yesterday this is not
the actions of a friend how then would
you describe China if not a
friend well it's certainly a strategic
competitor I agree with the Biden
administration's assessment of that and
the actions that we have seen uh this
week are totally contrary to the spirit
of friendship that we saw at the Great
Hall of the
when the Prime Minister was in Beijing
only a few weeks ago I think when it
comes to our very complex and important
bilateral relationship with the People's
Republic of China that we really have to
look at the actions of the Chinese
government not just their words it's
very easy to get caught up in the uh
platitudes and the praise the handsome
boy rhetoric uh when the Prime Minister
was in Beijing but actually it's pretty
fundamental things like this which was
an active decision by The People's Liber
Liberation Army Navy to put Australian
Navy personnel In Harm's Way and cause
harm to them that we should be really
really judging the Chinese government by
so what should happen serious concerns
have been expressed uh government to
government is that
enough well the first and most important
thing David is we have to understand
whether or not the Prime Minister raised
this with Xi Jinping or Wang Yi when he
met with them at Apec in San Francisco
he's boasted about the length and the uh
depth of the conversations that they had
when he met them there he would have
known before he left Australia that this
incident has occurred the question for
the prime minister to answer today now
that he's back in the country is is did
he raise this and take this up on the
behalf of the Australian people and our
Navy personnel I mean this is a serious
incident harm has been caused injuries
have been a cause to Australian Navy
Personnel in what appears to be a
deliberate act by the Chinese Navy do
you accept and the government points out
it take some days for the checks IM
balances to be absolutely clear this is
what happened under the Morrison
government when a Chinese warship um
targeted a laser beam into an Australian
surveillance vessel of 5 days before
that could be cleared and
announced I I guess David it's possibly
just a coincidence that the government
waited until Saturday morning after the
Prime Minister had done his press
conference in ape and after he boarded
his plane back home to Australia that
they decided to publicly release this
information online it's up for them to
uh explain but the most important thing
is the prime minister did know while he
was in San Francisco so did he raise it
with Shu Jinping or did he not let's
turn to the war in Israel and Gaza uh
you're a staunch supporter of Israel is
that support unqualified unconditional
or or you know what sort of limits or or
guard rails should there be around how
far Israel can
go David I support Israel because Israel
is a liberal democracy and I've said all
throughout this conflict that we expect
Israel to behave as a liberal democracy
but let's not forget the assault that
happened on Israel on the 7th of October
if that happened here in Australia in
per capita terms it would be about 3,000
Australians that lost their lives how
would we expect our government to
respond if we were on the receiving end
of an attack like that Hamas said that
they intend to repeat the events of 7
October again and again and again that
is their political and military
objective and so I think it's completely
understandable that the state of Israel
doesn't want to live with that
existential risk and wants to remove
Hamas as a military threat to its people
but does that mean Israel needs to
follow international
law uh of course uh All Nations all
parties to conflict have to follow the
international rules of conflict David
and you're confident Israel
is it's not easy for me to judge from
12,000 km away and in the fog of War
there's been a lot of misinformation
including earlier on in the conflict
when Hamas claimed and the many in the
media including the ABC reported that
Israel had bombed a hospital it later
emerged that it was a Palestinian
Islamic Jihad rocket which had misfired
and fallen on the hospital so I think we
do need to be careful about casting
judgment from this far away in the
middle of a conflict so does that mean
you're not willing to cast judgment on
whether it's following international
law uh judgment will be cast David but
it will be cast after this conflict is
over and through the normal appropriate
processes of international law as it
should be what about uh the the rights
of the people of Gaza the civilians in
Gaza what rights do you think they
have well they have a right not to be
treated by Hamas as human Shields they
have a right not to be held as hostages
by Hamas it's not just 239 Israelis it's
2 million gazin who have been used by
Hamas as hostages in their conflict they
deliberately borrowed themselves in
civilian infrastructure including
Apartments including schools including
hospitals including refugee camps and
they use those civilians both as a human
shield to protect them but also as a
propaganda weapon against Israel when
inevitably civilian casualties occur so
Israel must do everything it can to
minimize those civilian casualties but
Hamas has options here too David the war
would end tomorrow if Hamas released
those citizens the the captives the war
would end tomorrow if the Hamas
leadership uh gave
up