Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Disclaimer: The Parliamentary Library does not warrant the accuracy of closed captions. These are derived automatically from the broadcaster's signal.
Beattie cautious over anti-terror laws -

View in ParlViewView other Segments

(generated from captions) actually bring in new legislation.

Are you inclined to agree to this?

In general terms, yes. And the

reason for that is that we have a

responsibility to protect Australia

as well and the important thing

as well and the important thing from our point of view is that we

actually get the balance right.

actually get the balance right. Now at this point Tony there's still

at this point Tony there's still not enough detail around. But there

enough detail around. But there are some things that we are prepared to

agree to immediately. For example,

having a look at the definition of

terrorism, to work with the

Commonwealth to tackle money that's

used to finance terrorism. We've

already been working on that, but

we're happy to tackle those sorts

we're happy to tackle those sorts of things. We're also prepared to

things. We're also prepared to look at some of the other measures. But

our overriding concern is to tackle

terrorism head-on, but to ensure that there are appropriate

safeguards and accountability in

place. We can get this right Tony,

we just don want to throw the baby

out with the bath water otherwise

out with the bath water otherwise if we destroy our way of life then

terrorists win anyway. So we've

just got to bring in tougher

measures. We accept that. We'll

work with the PM, we'll do that,

work with the PM, we'll do that, but we need to get the balance right.

Well let's look at some of the

specifics. The PM says that using

the full extent of the

Commonwealth's powers it can only

detain suspects for 48 hours. The

new laws envisage holding people

for up to 14 days. Now would you

legislate to allow that to happen?

Well normally you wouldn't agree to legislate to allow that to happen?

that in a fit, to be honest. But

bearing in mind that the world has

changed and bearing in mind what's

happened as a result of terrorist

attack we have to seriously

it. But the issue for us Tony is attack we have to seriously consider

what sort of accountability

mechanisms are in place? What sorts

of checks and balances? I know -

argument is very simple - if you're of checks and balances? I know - the

dead you don't have any civil

liberties. That's a matter that

weighs on our mind. We're prepared

to seriously examine that but I

to hear from the PM what sort of to seriously examine that but I want

safeguards are in place what sort accountability mechanisms are in safeguards are in place what sort of

place. Otherwise if you do some of

these things which are a serious

departure from the normal laws that

apply and safeguards you can erode

our wonderful way of life and our

system. In other words, the

terrorists win. We're prepared to

look at it and consider it. I'm

going to slam the door on it. I look at it and consider it. I'm not

want to know from the PM where are

the safeguards, the accountability

mechanisms to protect ordinary

Australians? Those are good

questions. Would you, for example, trust the Federal Government to

trust the Federal Government to have its own safeguards, or would

Queensland want its own safeguards

or its courts for that matter to

or its courts for that matter to say who is detained and why they are

detained or would you ╝white╛I bow

to an order from the Federal Police?

Oh we'd want to have a fair say in

this. We're not going to be silly

and put State's rights ahead of the

national interest. We are prepared

in certain circumstances to obviously assist the Commonwealth

obviously assist the Commonwealth as part of a team effort. I want to

make that really clear. We'll go

into any of these discussions from

the point of view of being positive,

constructive and helpful but we

constructive and helpful but we want to ensure there are checks and

balances in place. If we can reach

that well fine, but we'd need to

ensure that that was done and ensure that that was done and we

wouldn't be giving up any powers

under any circumstances unless

under any circumstances unless those safeguards were in place. Do you

know then what safeguards you'd

expect exactly? Well, two weeks is

expect exactly? Well, two weeks is a long time and, therefore, we'd need

to work out all sorts of things.

Well two weeks incidentally

Well two weeks incidentally without charge? That's right, that's what

I'm saying. You'd never agree to

that in a fit normally, but we're

not in normal times, that's why

not in normal times, that's why we'd be prepared to seriously look at it.

We'd want to know what the charges

were, what the circumstances of

detention were, what access to

lawyers were available, what

lawyers were available, what access to family were available, what sort

of questioning would take place in

that time, what sort of rights

people would have to answer

questions - all those issues. I've

only touched the top of them.

They're the sorts of things you've

got to deal W we need to ensure we

don't destroy our way of life as a

result of this terrorist threat but

we need to protect that way of life.

Are you worried at all that the Federal Government is trying to Federal Government is trying to

steam roller the States on this?

steam roller the States on this? Well in a sense I am, although I'm

not going to object too much F you

ask me bluntly the answer is yes,

but I'm not prepared to complain

but I'm not prepared to complain too much because frankly we have a

responsibility to work with the

Commonwealth to protect the nation

and we'll do that and all the

Premiers and Territory leaders have

shown a strong tendency to work

shown a strong tendency to work with the PM when it's in the national

interest. And we will always be

positive, it's just that when these

things are released publicly and

we're short of detail we're in a

position where we're asked to

comment and we need to be careful

comment and we need to be careful we don't commit ourselves where later

on we've got to say, "There are not

enough checks and balances in place.

" Our attitude is this, we're

prepared to look at a range of

matters because it's in the

matters because it's in the national interest but we will insist on

appropriate checks and balances in

place. Does that include, for

example, the 12-month control

example, the 12-month control orders on suspects which apparently the

Federal Government also needs State

coordination for. These people

would be subject to travel

restrictions, restrictions on who

they meet and associate with.

They'd have to wear tracking

They'd have to wear tracking devices for a year. You see the difficulty

with that question is we don't know

the definition of who is going to

fit within that category. For an

ordinary Australian you wouldn't

agree to that in a fit, but if the

person is someone who is likely to

threaten the lives of others then

the community would say yes. But

the community would say yes. But we need to work out how do you define

that? Australians have got to be

really careful about this Tony.

They've got to remember, hang on

these law also apply to everyone,

not just to a special category of

people. They will apply to

people. They will apply to everyone and, therefore, what we need to do

is ensure that the definitions are

such that it only catches people

such that it only catches people who it's intended to catch. It also

raises a very important question,

would the States, your state in

particular, be demanding that

particular, be demanding that sunset clauses apply to these new laws?

Well, we wouldn't want them to go

Well, we wouldn't want them to go on forever. A sunset claws is one way

to deal with it, that is you bring

the laws in for a period of time,

you perhaps give them a trial, see

what the response is see how they

work. We want want to make certain

we would reserve the right if the

powers didn't work to obviously

revoke them. We want to do that

revoke them. We want to do that and if they worked you would continue

them. The sensible thing is to

them. The sensible thing is to give them a triecialtion give them a go,

perhaps have a sunset time. If

perhaps have a sunset time. If they work and Australians support them

then continue them. If they don't,

revisit them, reshape them, sharpen

them and make them more appropriate.

In general terms with these powers,

do you accept that Australian

Muslims, particularly young

Australian Muslims are going to

Australian Muslims are going to bear the brunt of the new laws and are

going to feel that they are the

targets of them? Well I think it's

up to the PM and the State leaders

to convince the Muslim community

to convince the Muslim community and all Australians in fact, that

all Australians in fact, that no-one should be victimised as a result of

these laws that these law also

these laws that these law also apply equally to anyone involved in

terrorist activity. I know because

of what's happened in the world

obviously the Australian Muslim

community is going to feel to some

extent or sections of it to some

extent are going to feel they are

being targeted. These law also

apply to anyone and terrorism may

change. Who knows, the terrorists

of the future if it continues - and

hopefully it won't - but if it did

maybe it will cover terrorists from

other parts of the world. It

actually deals with conduct rather

than a particular group of people

and the way we would look at it

and the way we would look at it Tony is we would say, "Anyone that fits

within this conduct of terrorist

activity, they would be caught by

the law regardless of whether

they're Christians, Muslims or any

other faith. " Peter Beattie we

other faith. " Peter Beattie we have to leave it there. We thank you

to leave it there. We thank you for coming in to join us tonight.

Thank you, Tony. Well, how is Australia's Muslim community reacting to the new anti-terror laws? Waleed Aly is a Melbourne lawyer and a member of the executive of the Islamic Council of Victoria. He joins us from our Melbourne studios.

Thanks for being there. Thanks,

Thanks for being there. Thanks, Tony. How do you believe the Muslim

community is going to react to

new laws?

community is going to react to these new laws? Well I think like any

community there's going to be a

community there's going to be a fair degree of suspicion about this.

They're clearly very controversial

laws. We've seen that already even