Subjects: Standing Council of Attorneys-General; Royal Commission on Antisemitism and Social Cohesion; National Gun Buyback Scheme.
MELISSA CLARKE, HOST: How to tackle hate speech has been a major concern for federal, state and territory governments in recent months. The nation's Attorneys-General will meet today with a focus on combating online hate speech, including antisemitism. The progress of the Royal Commission into antisemitism and social cohesion will be on the agenda, too. The federal Attorney-General joined me earlier. Michelle Rowland, thanks for joining me on AM.
MICHELLE ROWLAND, ATTORNEY-GENERAL: Good morning.
CLARKE: Why do you want to focus on hate speech online as priority for your meeting with your counterparts today?
ROWLAND: Well, we do have the meeting of the Standing Council of Attorneys-General today, which is the first full meeting for this year, which I chair. At our last meeting, in the wake of the Bondi terrorist attack, it was very important for states to bring forward not only initiatives that they wanted to focus on, but how we can renew our shared commitment to protect all Australians from the spread of hate, regardless of where they live. So, it was considered important to not only hear directly from the Special Envoy, Jillian Segal but also the eSafety Commissioner, Julie Inman Grant. So, it will be most beneficial today to hear directly from them because, of course, all states are looking at ways in which they can keep their citizens safe and it's important we do this in a coordinated way.
CLARKE: The Royal Commission is central to the government's efforts to tackle antisemitism. The Commissioner, Virginia Bell, has made it clear that the timeframes given to her to deliver a report by the end of April and a final report by mid-December are very tight and will effectively limit the scope of what she can do. Will you give any consideration to extending those timeframes?
ROWLAND: We are very pleased that Commissioner Bell has stated that she will meet those time frames. Yes, it is ambitious, but I also consider this an area where Australians want to have not only a thorough investigation, but also that there be closure, that there be recommendations, and that they be done consistent with the timeframe that was set out. So, Commissioner Bell has made it clear that whilst those timeframes are ambitious, they are going to be met.
CLARKE: And the limitation of scope is just a consequence that will have to be lived with by those who had hoped it might look more broadly?
ROWLAND: Well, I think we need to be clear, as Commissioner Bell even stated herself in the last 24 hours when she visited Bondi, this is a person with an unprecedented level of experience in the law, but also someone who is taking this very seriously from the point of view of being essentially an investigator into something that has very deeply impacted people's lives. So, I have absolute confidence that Commissioner Bell will be able to carry that out.
CLARKE: Commissioner Bell has said that there have been delays in getting information from intelligence agencies and that means it's unlikely the interim report due at the end of April will be able to address questions around the security of the Hanukkah by the Sea event and the effectiveness of police and intelligence agencies. Is that delay acceptable to you?
ROWLAND: Well, again, I think Commissioner Bell made it clear when she visited Bondi that she would be undertaking the most thorough exploration of these issues. With respect to those secrecy aspects, I would point out that the government has announced that we will be introducing legislation next week to expedite legal protections for those giving intelligence information to the Royal Commission. This is bringing forward work that was already slated, but also to ensure that there's that clear legal pathway to give information to the Royal Commission without being restricted by secrecy provisions.
CLARKE: On the timing, when the initial Richardson Review was announced, before the Royal Commission was established, the description of why that was set up was because of the urgency in dealing with the questions around security and police and intelligence information and processes. Obviously, that's been absorbed into the Royal Commission since it was established. But is that urgency that was noted by the government when the Richardson Review put in place urgency no longer as urgent anymore, that a response or findings by April is suddenly not a deadline that is necessary to hit anymore?
ROWLAND: No, there is no indication that the government has given for anything to the contrary. This is urgent. It is urgent to ensure that we have that thorough exploration of all those issues.
CLARKE: As you mentioned, you're putting forward legislation that will make it easier for intelligence officers to speak to the Royal Commission. How quickly can you get that legislation through Parliament. Have you been working with the opposition on this?
ROWLAND: Well, we are consulting across the Parliament and we've released the statement, as you would have seen, saying that we are going to bring this forward as a matter of urgency. I think it's the interest of all of the Parliament to support this. We've been working closely with the Royal Commission so that it's got all the tools that it needs to discharge its functions. You know, given the subject matter, it is really critical that our national intelligence community can provide that information to the Royal Commission, either voluntarily or compulsorily, without the concern that that's going to enliven criminal secrecy offences. Again, I just point out, I think every Australian wants this Royal Commission to succeed. I think every Parliamentarian does. So, I am hopeful that there will be constructive engagement across the Parliament to have this passed as a matter of urgency.
CLARKE. So, you don't want there to be an inquiry into this legislation, for example, because that could add weeks to its process through the chambers?
ROWLAND: We don't think there is a need for a separate parliamentary inquiry. But again, these are matters which we will discuss directly with counterparts right across the Parliament and prosecute that case.
CLARKE: Look, one of the other key elements of the government's response to the Bondi terrorism attacks was to establish the processes for a National Gun Buyback, but we've seen very limited support from states and territories to signing up to this. The government has a deadline of the end of March for states and territories to sign up, but some have made it very clear that they don't want to. Will you proceed with a buyback scheme if it is some states only, or is this an all-in or all out matter?
ROWLAND: Well, I think that the vast majority of your listeners, which is reflected right across every opinion piece that you see, is that there is widespread community support for having this scheme and for good reason. We have established a National Gun Buyback scheme that's going to purchase surplus or newly banned or illegal firearms and it's going to be the largest buyback since the Howard government.
CLARKE: Michelle Rowland, thank you for speaking to us on AM this morning.
ROWLAND: Pleasure.
