Senator FAULKNER (Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (2:14 PM) —My question is also directed to Senator Ellison, in this case representing the Attorney-General. Is the minister aware that the Attorney-General, when asked on Lateline last Monday night about the comparative powers of security agencies, said:

Did the Attorney-General also say, in a doorstop on the same day:

I ask: exactly what powers does the government of France have that the Australian government does not, and which of these additional powers that the French government has does the Australian government aspire to have?

Senator ELLISON (Minister for Justice and Customs) —I am no expert on the domestic laws of France. I will take that aspect of the question on notice. What I can say is that I am aware of reports of what the Attorney-General has said and I understand that the Attorney-General said France has much stronger powers in relation to its intelligence agencies than has Australia. In fact, if I recall, I think he said that their periods of detention were much longer than those we have provided for in our legislation. The Attorney-General is on record as saying that we want to provide our intelligence agencies with the necessary powers to carry out their duties and that this is something we will continually monitor. I think he was making the point that if people think our laws are draconian there are certainly other jurisdictions which have much stronger powers in relation to their intelligence agencies. He mentioned France by comparison because of the Brigitte matter—Mr Brigitte being a French national—and the fact he had been deported to France, was now in French custody and could be detained for a very much longer period under French law than he could be under Australian law.

Senator FAULKNER —Mr President, I have a supplementary question. I thank the minister for offering to take that matter up, as he should, with the Attorney-General, and I will be interested in his response. Given the answer the minister did give, can he indicate to the Senate whether the government intends to forgo the current questioning regime on the basis that another country has a more draconian process? Could he also indicate whether the government has given any instructions for legislation to be drafted that would increase the current powers to detain and question people suspected of having information relating to terrorist offences? Again, if the minister does not know the detail, I think the Senate would appreciate an urgent report back on those matters.

Senator ELLISON (Minister for Justice and Customs) —The Attorney-General's comments were self-explanatory—

Senator Faulkner —You don't know what they mean. You just said they were self-explanatory.

Senator ELLISON —I did. He said that France has a regime which we do not have in Australia and it provides for lengthier periods of detention. That was the sum total of his comments. He did not say, `France has it; therefore, we're going to have it.' He pointed out the situation in France by way of comparison.