A little over a week ago, Australia suffered the deadliest terrorist attack ever committed on our soil. It was an antisemitic attack on our Jewish community, but an attack on Australian values and on Australian society. Which is why for many of us, Christmas this year will feel a bit different. What is normally a time of celebration and family and faith will this year be coloured by grief and sadness. But in the weeks since the attack, we've also seen the best of the Australian character and the best of Australian spirit. We saw courage on that dreadful evening. We've seen kindness, we've seen compassion and we've seen Australians wanting to come together in the spirit of unity across faiths, across different backgrounds as well. I hope Australians can really take heart from that as they spend time with their loved ones over coming days. I've just come from another meeting of the National Security Committee, the tenth meeting that we've had since last Sunday's attack. At all of these meetings we receive updates from the Australian Federal Police Commissioner, from the heads of our security agencies, ASIO and ASIS, as well as from departments as well. Today, also, we received updates from Minister Rowland and Minister Burke about the work that's progressing on law reform, including the discussion with the States about progressing gun reform. The terrible events at Bondi show that we do need more guns off our streets. The fact there are more guns in Australia today than there were at the time of the Port Arthur massacre is of real concern to Australians, it needs to change. One of the terrorists, of course, held a firearm licence and had six guns. There is no reason why someone living in Bonnyrigg needs six heavy arms, which is what we saw to commit this crime. Minister Burke also updated the Committee as well with Minister Rowland about the work that's commenced on cracking down on hate speech. My government is determined to address these issues with unity and urgency, not with division and delay. We're continuing to get on with the work that is necessary and I thank the officials, the agencies, including the AFP, ASIO, ASIS, others who are all working around the clock since that dreadful Sunday evening, around the clock to do as Chanukah promises us to ensure that light succeeds over darkness.
TONY BURKE, MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS: Thanks, Prime Minister. The nation in response to the horrors of the attack at Bondi has been a nation filled with grief, with anger and with a determination to make every change that is required to be able to deal with the horrific attack. In dealing with that we need to look at both the motivation and the method. The motivation deeply immersed in antisemitism and the method, a horrific example of gun violence. Yesterday, the Senior Officials Group, which has been established federally dealing with Home Affairs and Attorney-Generals and across various police and justice portfolios and Premier's departments of the States and Territories, met for the first time. They're now commencing work on implementing the decisions which had been made at National Cabinet. That work is consultative and ongoing. We'll now be drafting instructions for the Commonwealth components of legislative changes. Some of those drafting instructions will be issued tomorrow. Others will be immediately after Christmas. The Commonwealth firearms reform package includes the gun buyback scheme, intelligence sharing, import controls for firearms related goods, new offences relating to 3D printed firearms and consideration of removing merits review at different parts of the application process. The Hate Crimes Database and the National Firearms Register are both being accelerated to be able to provide the best possible information both to the public generally and to the authorities that issue gun licences. That deals with the method of guns. In terms of the motivation, consultation is occurring in earnest with the leadership of the Jewish community of Australia. Hate speech is horrific, hate speech is debilitating and hate speech is the precursor to hate violence. The work that's being done in that consultation with the leadership of the Jewish community will feed directly into the drafting which will take place. But people should be in no doubt about where the target is as this drafting is done. We want to make sure that those hate preachers who have managed to keep themselves just on the legal side of Australian law, that the threshold is lowered so that those statements that we have seen that every reasonable Australian has viewed as horrific and as having no place in Australia will become criminal. Similarly for organisations which for a generation, organisations like Hizb ut-Tahrir and the neo Nazis, for a generation have managed to keep themselves just on the legal side of Australian law, but never on the side of the Australian community. Organisations which by definition hate modern Australia, that the thresholds will be lowered to allow them to be listed organisations under a new regime, so that even if you don't satisfy the definition of terrorism, you can still be listed as an organisation which is not able to operate in Australia.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, Richard Marles said this morning that the report that Dennis Richardson will be working on, a version of it will be public. And he couldn't say if Mr Richardson would have public hearings as part of his work. What guarantee can you give as to the transparency behind this, noting some things will be obviously unable to be public, but how much of it can be?
PRIME MINISTER: The guarantee I can give is that Dennis Richardson, in appointing him, has a lifetime of service going back to the Howard Government, the Hawke Government, the Rudd Government, the Abbott Government, right through every government here for 30 years. He is someone of integrity. He will have enormous power. He will make whatever is appropriate, can be made public, will be made public. Obviously, as you've seen as well yesterday, I note that a range of, because of the police documentation was made public as well - about the work that has been done to not just identify the perpetrators, of course, but to go through the detail of the timeline. All of that is public. I would suggest as well that media organisations, just caution about some common sense being applied here as well about the way that things are published, including pictures. What we don't want is to see motivations that are not appropriate encouraged either.
JOURNALIST: On the regime for listing hateful organisations, mindful like you've said that it's early stages, you're still drafting instructions and so forth, but could you give us an idea of early thoughts about how that might operate? Is it going to be quite similar to how the terrorist proscribed list works, a penalty if you were a member, sending money, giving material support to that sort of organisation? And you've noted I think two organisations, two sort of groups that might be caught up in that. Would you see this scheme as being relatively tight, a small number of groups, say, on it? Or will it be a larger sort of scheme that grows over time?
MINISTER BURKE: We're obviously operating within the limits of the Constitution and our constitutional limits are more restrictive than what they are for state governments. That's just the nature of what we have to deal with here. This is a step which for years governments have said they would like to be able to get rid of these organisations, but legally haven't been able to. And I've heard those comments made for close to 20 years, but no government until now has said, "Well, we're going to lower the threshold to be able to deal with them." The intention of the legislation is to be able to stop them from operating. That's the intention. So, a number of the consequences that currently apply to organisations that are listed as terror organisations would effectively be a very close to exact match here. We want those organisations to not operate. They hate Australia. We don't see why they should be operating in Australia.
JOURNALIST: You've announced more funding for national security agencies. How much are each of them actually going to get and is it going to include fast-tracking IT systems so there's better information sharing?
PRIME MINISTER: What we've been doing in each and every Budget that we have presided over is to provide increased funding for our security agencies, and we provide them with whatever it is that is requested.
JOURNALIST: What do you make of comments from Sussan Ley that yourself and senior ministers haven't shown sufficient grief and emotion from the attack? And do you regret the politicisation that has occurred following the massacre?
PRIME MINISTER: I certainly do regret the politicisation of this issue. This is a time where the nation needs to come together in unity and with that sense of purpose. This is not a time for people to look for political product differentiation for the sake of it. And I'll continue to argue for unity. I'll continue to conduct myself in a way that's consistent with that call for national unity, with being focused on making a difference, with providing support for the agencies who are conducting their investigations. I would hope that other people do that too. That is what happens at a time of national crisis and mourning. That is what national leaders do. That is what has happened in the past. And I must say, I thank those people from across the world, but across here as well. I've had leaders from across the political spectrum, former leaders reach out saying that that is what we should be seeing in Australia right now.
JOURNALIST: Minister, just for you, you gave more information on your gun reforms package. You met with state officials yesterday. Are they all moving at the speed that you would like to see your reforms introduced and what's your timeline there? When would you like to see your package put to Parliament?
MINISTER BURKE: I expect we'll be in a situation where the Commonwealth legislation to enable everything happens before the state legislation happens in some jurisdictions. Obviously, New South Wales legislation's been happening immediately, some of that. So, what we have from the states, we're at early times in terms of their bureaucratic work, but no jurisdictions are preventing the work from being progressed. And I think every government in Australia is in the same position at the moment in terms of, Australians - one of the questions which was asked, which the Prime Minister referred to a moment ago, was how does someone living in the suburbs have six firearms like that? How on earth does that happen? And then there's been the extra questions that have been asked in terms of, how can you have a firearms licence if you're not an Australian citizen? There's a series of measures that have been taken, every one of which goes to the specific circumstances that we saw there, but there is goodwill still across all jurisdictions, and I think that's because it's backed so strongly by the Australian people.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, thank you. Understandably, you've put a lot of focus on the action that can be taken now in the days after the massacre. Christmas is also a time of reflection, I'm sure for yourself and for many other Australians too. And I'm wondering if you'll use that time at all to reflect on some of the calls for a national Royal Commission, the sentiment for why people are calling for that and whether you feel there would be anything to fear from that process, whether at New South Wales or national level?
PRIME MINISTER: Christmas is a time for reflection. I'll be reflecting on faith. I'll be reflecting on the year that's been and the year to come. And it is a time where family and friends can come together and I certainly wish that everyone has the best Christmas possible. I'll be conducting myself in the usual way as well of the events in my electorate that I go to. I just note that there was no Royal Commission called by the Howard Government after Port Arthur. There was no Royal Commission called by the Abbott Government after the Lindt Siege. We provided on both those occasions as the Opposition, and I was a part of that Opposition, we provided support for national unity at that time. And we have now, New South Wales has said that they're going to have a Royal Commission. We've said we'll cooperate with that and we certainly will. And the Richardson Review will be completed by April.
I note the clauses, the 25 clauses with subclauses, add up to more than a hundred. More than a hundred areas of investigation have been called for in a Royal Commission by the Coalition if you go through them all. That would report in many years to come. And there hasn't been a Royal Commission held recently that has not had an extension of time. We know who the perpetrators are here. One of them is dead and one of them has now been transferred to Long Bay jail. We know what the motivation is, that they are motivated by the evil ideology of ISIS and a perversion of Islam. We are continuing to investigate whether any other connections can be made and the amount of work that has been done by police and security agencies in a relatively short period of time is quite extraordinary.
JOURNALIST: There are some in the national security community who fear they're being thrown under the bus to deflect from the Government's mistakes on antisemitism. Dennis Richardson also did an extensive review of the intelligence framework in 2020. Have you enacted all of those recommendations, even the classified ones?
PRIME MINISTER: I actually sit on the National Security Committee. That consists of the leadership of the national security community, and we are working in lockstep with the national security leadership of this country. We provide every support for them and no one should undermine them.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, you will adopt the IHRA's working definition of antisemitism. What does that mean in practicality? And will you be putting it in legislation, for example, any of the upcoming hate speech draft laws?
PRIME MINISTER: We have done that. I indicated that on the day that we launched -
JOURNALIST: In legislation?
PRIME MINISTER: No. Well, I indicated that on the day that we launched the antisemitism envoy's report. But that was something that was longstanding as well here in Australia. Had been done previously.
JOURNALIST: No further legislation?
PRIME MINISTER: Had been done previously.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, would that hate speech crackdown also capture phrases like from the river to the sea and globalise the intifada? Do you support the New South Wales government's push to ban the latter phrase? What do you interpret it to mean?
PRIME MINISTER: One of the things that I've said consistently when it comes to these issues is that Australians want two things. They want killing to stop in the Middle East, but they also don't want conflict brought here. I've said that repeatedly over recent years, and that is overwhelmingly what Australians want to see.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, you've called for bipartisanship, but Sussan Ley says you've only called her once since the attack. Is there a reason for that? And would you work with her to bring Parliament back in January?
PRIME MINISTER: I called her on the Sunday night. I spoke to her again on the Monday morning. I think people will judge whether Sussan Ley and others have been engaging in bipartisanship or not since then. We have engaged constructively. We've provided briefings for the Leader of the Opposition. We've provided appropriate briefings and we'll continue to engage constructively, and we'll continue to engage right across the Parliament as well.
JOURNALIST: When can we expect the terms of reference for the Richardson Review to be finalised? And can I just get your reaction to the New South Wales Shooters' Party saying that it will run candidates against all MPs who've supported gun reform?
PRIME MINISTER: Well, the issue on the former, we wanted to make sure Dennis Richardson himself has input into the terms of reference. And so, that meeting took place, the first meeting, yesterday morning. But the terms of reference will be made public. On the Shooters' Party. I just make this point. There are legitimate uses for guns in this country, in a country like Australia. The legitimate purposes from my perspective do not come to people like this terrorist having access to six high-powered weapons. I think that's where Australians are. And I just say that this is a time where partisanship of any level should be not appropriate in my view. They will advocate their position in a democracy, but I think that Australians overwhelmingly want to see a bit of common sense apply here.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, on politicians' expenses, you sought advice from the Independent Parliamentary Authority? Will you be making any changes to the rules, then?
PRIME MINISTER: I did receive that advice from IPEA. I received that advice on the weekend nine days ago, nine or 10 days ago, and determined then that we would write to the Rem Tribunal. There's been some misreporting here. To be clear, the changes that were made by the Special Minister of State prior to the election were regulatory changes to the Parliamentary Business Resources Determination that he had the power to do. It related to staff and where the staff could go from the political parties - could work effectively in the campaign headquarters. That was what it was about. I do not have the power at a stroke of a pen to change entitlements. The Rem Tribunal has the power and we have written to the Remuneration Tribunal. We have recommended a number of changes as a result of the consideration by the Independent Parliamentary Expenses Authority. And those proposed changes would be, firstly, that all family reunion travel must be booked in economy class. Secondly, to remove access to Australia-wide family reunion travel and restrict it to Canberra and within a parliamentarian's local area or electorate - in a senator's case, of course, that's a state - by removing access effectively to Australia-wide travel. In relation to travel for the spouse or partner of a senior officeholder, we would restrict travel to events where the following elements exist: the spouse or partner has got an invitation as part of the official invitation to the senior officeholder, and that the events are connected with either the senior officeholders' portfolio - that is if you're an environment minister, it's connected to the environment, or Parliamentary responsibilities as well. We also have indicated in the correspondence to the Remuneration Tribunal that careful consideration be given to new mothers or fathers, but to children essentially who are dependents as well, to make sure that we don't disadvantage parents. We want a Parliament that reflects Australia in all its diversity, and that includes the fact that this Parliament looks very different from what it did when I came here in 1996. That's a good thing. The Remuneration Tribunal will consider the letter that has been given by ministers in early January of next year when they meet. We made an obvious decision that we would not make that public last week because we have been focused very much on these events.
JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, given what you've just revealed, are you confident that all of your ministers who need to refer to IPEA have done so, and do you anticipate any other ministers having to respond?
PRIME MINISTER: No, there is a process here, and I've said it, and there was some criticism from some in the media about arm's-length processes. That's what we have. The Remuneration Tribunal will give consideration to this. That's appropriate. And that is what we're doing.
JOURNALIST: Those recommendations to the Rem Tribunal, is that an acknowledgement that the rules didn't align with the much-discussed pub test? And do you think that those recommendations now will bring the rules into more community expectations of what is appropriate travel and family travel?
PRIME MINISTER: I asked IPEA for advice. I received that advice. We then have acted to refer to the Remuneration Tribunal. They will give consideration to it. That's their job, at arm's-length, and then the process is they then come back to the Government. But it is appropriate that we have an arm's length process on these matters, as I've said consistently. Thanks very much.
