Bruce in West Oz
New member
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Transcript
10/08/00
New laws to give soldiers controversial powers in domestic emergencies
KERRY O'BRIEN: As authorities start stepping up security measures for the Sydney Olympics -- now only 36 days away -- Australia's defence forces are set to receive new powers that could put them on a collision course with the host city's police.
The Federal Government is trying to introduce controversial new laws that will allow soldiers a range of sweeping powers, including the discretion to shoot civilians, if the military is called out to assist the police in an emergency.
The 7:30 Report has learned that senior defence officials urged that the new laws be in place by October last year.
But the law is now being pushed through the parliament in a last-minute scramble before the Olympics.
Matt Brown reports.
MATT BROWN: If terrorists strike during the Olympic Games, these soldiers could be the Government's last hope.
Last-minute attempts to make their powers clear are running into serious trouble.
PAUL BARRATT, FORMER HEAD, DEFENCE DEPARTMENT: The question has always been if they shoot other than in their own self-defence, have they committed murder?
MATT BROWN: By the time of the Olympics, these soldiers will have the clear legal power to shoot civilians on Australian soil.
JOHN MOORE, DEFENCE MINISTER: The bill was put into place with the agreement of the Opposition.
It's done so to place Australian ADF members in a position where they can't be legally challenged if they are carrying out their legal duties.
MATT BROWN: But the proposed new laws would also give soldiers the sorts of sweeping powers usually reserved only for the police.
MARK FINDLAY, INSTITUTE OF CRIMINOLOGY, SYDNEY UNI: Under these laws, the soldier could stop, he could search, he could apprehend an arrest.
He could detain.
There is a shoot to kill possibility in this legislation.
Reluctant as the legislation is for it to occur, it's still there.
MATT BROWN: Ever since the Hilton bombing, the powers of soldiers in a civilian environment have been left uncertain.
PAUL BARRATT: When the Fraser Government called out the soldiers in the wake of the Hilton bombing, they were in a very uncertain legal environment.
I was briefed on this when I first became secretary of defence.
I just thought it was outrageous.
MATT BROWN: The new law attempts to define the powers and remove any confusion, but the law itself seems to be creating confusion.
After the Hilton bombing, defence and security officials created the national anti-terrorism plan.
It is today the crucial blueprint for combined action by the State police, intelligence agencies and the military.
The national anti-terrorism plan is at the heart of the Olympic security machine.
But the NSW Government is worried that the new Federal laws could override the plan because it would mean the Federal Government could make a unilateral decision to send in the troops.
The director of the State Cabinet Office has written to a Senate committee asking for the laws to be redrawn.
DOCUMENT FROM THE NSW CABINET OFFICE: This approach leaves open the possibility of conflict between State police and Commonwealth Defence Forces, which should obviously be avoided at all costs.
JOHN MOORE: There are limits to what can happen.
So for any State Government to say that means that they don't have faith in their own police force.
MATT BROWN: Both the commander of Olympic security in NSW and his police commissioner are aware of the concerns expressed by their Government and say they have nothing to add.
One of the crucial conditions on sending in the troops is being faced with terrorism, or what security officials call domestic violence.
But the NSW Government says the Federal Government could be about to weaken that crucial threshold.
DOCUMENT FROM NSW CABINET OFFICE: The provision applies that where it is considered that domestic violence is merely "likely to occur."
Again, this broadens the scope of the Commonwealth's power in a manner which gives rise to doubts about its Constitutional basis.
MATT BROWN: And in WA there are similar concerns.
RICHARD COURT, WA PREMIER: There is no need to bring about these changes.
We are very concerned that a change would mean that the Commonwealth would have unfettered powers to bring the defence forces into the State without any consultation.
MATT BROWN: And consider what might happen once Australian soldiers do start getting into contact with civilians in tense situations.
The Victorian police force says the military are not up to dealing with the public.
They've also written to a Senate committee asking for the law to be redrafted.
VICTORIA POLICE DOCUMENT: Cross-training during operation safety and tactics training conducted by Victoria Police revealed that members of the Defence Force are ill-equipped in this area.
The legislation does not adequately deal with the accountability to the criminal justice system.
MARK FINDLAY: It might be that Aboriginal people are demonstrating about a reconciliation issue which has been settled in a State, but is a problem for the Commonwealth.
It might be that the PM is going to a university campus and wants a military escort.
I think there are a wide range of situations where we think we should have the opportunity to express ourselves in public and that we wouldn't necessarily want the military controlling that.
MATT BROWN: Officials here at the Department of Defence in Canberra have been working on the new laws for two and a half years, but it's only recently that the Defence Minister, John Moore, got his bill through the House of Representatives and it's yet to clear the Senate.
It's all supposed to be in place in time for the Olympic Games, but more than 20 years after the Hilton bombing, questions are now being asked, why has it taken so long?
PAUL BARRATT: Here we are, a few weeks ahead of the start of the Olympics.
You have State Governments expressing Constitutional concerns about the legislation which is in the Senate.
MATT BROWN: Paul Barratt was the head of the Defence Department.
Then he had a bitter dispute with the minister, John Moore, and he left.
PAUL BARRATT: I became very concerned by the middle of last year that there was one very obvious event approaching which could lead to a terrorist incident, that was the Olympics.
So, in about the middle of last year, the chief of the Defence Force and I started jumping up and down, saying, "We've got to get on with this.
We've got to get the legislation passed.
We need a clear 12 months."
JOHN MOORE: I wouldn't comment on that.
That's a matter within the department.
Departments make all sorts of suggestions here on a daily basis, sometimes on an hourly basis.
The only thing that matters is the Government decision.
PAUL BARRATT: It's a pretty poor performance.
Mr Moore never tires of telling us he'll accept nothing less than the highest standards of performance from the defence organisation.
It would be nice if he would apply those same criteria to his own performance.
JOHN MOORE: I'm not aware of any particular advice, and if I was, I wouldn't be disclosing it.
MATT BROWN: The new laws are presently before a Senate inquiry.
With support from the ALP all but guaranteed, they'll be in place for the Olympic Games and beyond.[/quote]
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/s161830.htm
I can't even comment!
B
[This message has been edited by Bruce in West Oz (edited August 11, 2000).]
10/08/00
New laws to give soldiers controversial powers in domestic emergencies
KERRY O'BRIEN: As authorities start stepping up security measures for the Sydney Olympics -- now only 36 days away -- Australia's defence forces are set to receive new powers that could put them on a collision course with the host city's police.
The Federal Government is trying to introduce controversial new laws that will allow soldiers a range of sweeping powers, including the discretion to shoot civilians, if the military is called out to assist the police in an emergency.
The 7:30 Report has learned that senior defence officials urged that the new laws be in place by October last year.
But the law is now being pushed through the parliament in a last-minute scramble before the Olympics.
Matt Brown reports.
MATT BROWN: If terrorists strike during the Olympic Games, these soldiers could be the Government's last hope.
Last-minute attempts to make their powers clear are running into serious trouble.
PAUL BARRATT, FORMER HEAD, DEFENCE DEPARTMENT: The question has always been if they shoot other than in their own self-defence, have they committed murder?
MATT BROWN: By the time of the Olympics, these soldiers will have the clear legal power to shoot civilians on Australian soil.
JOHN MOORE, DEFENCE MINISTER: The bill was put into place with the agreement of the Opposition.
It's done so to place Australian ADF members in a position where they can't be legally challenged if they are carrying out their legal duties.
MATT BROWN: But the proposed new laws would also give soldiers the sorts of sweeping powers usually reserved only for the police.
MARK FINDLAY, INSTITUTE OF CRIMINOLOGY, SYDNEY UNI: Under these laws, the soldier could stop, he could search, he could apprehend an arrest.
He could detain.
There is a shoot to kill possibility in this legislation.
Reluctant as the legislation is for it to occur, it's still there.
MATT BROWN: Ever since the Hilton bombing, the powers of soldiers in a civilian environment have been left uncertain.
PAUL BARRATT: When the Fraser Government called out the soldiers in the wake of the Hilton bombing, they were in a very uncertain legal environment.
I was briefed on this when I first became secretary of defence.
I just thought it was outrageous.
MATT BROWN: The new law attempts to define the powers and remove any confusion, but the law itself seems to be creating confusion.
After the Hilton bombing, defence and security officials created the national anti-terrorism plan.
It is today the crucial blueprint for combined action by the State police, intelligence agencies and the military.
The national anti-terrorism plan is at the heart of the Olympic security machine.
But the NSW Government is worried that the new Federal laws could override the plan because it would mean the Federal Government could make a unilateral decision to send in the troops.
The director of the State Cabinet Office has written to a Senate committee asking for the laws to be redrawn.
DOCUMENT FROM THE NSW CABINET OFFICE: This approach leaves open the possibility of conflict between State police and Commonwealth Defence Forces, which should obviously be avoided at all costs.
JOHN MOORE: There are limits to what can happen.
So for any State Government to say that means that they don't have faith in their own police force.
MATT BROWN: Both the commander of Olympic security in NSW and his police commissioner are aware of the concerns expressed by their Government and say they have nothing to add.
One of the crucial conditions on sending in the troops is being faced with terrorism, or what security officials call domestic violence.
But the NSW Government says the Federal Government could be about to weaken that crucial threshold.
DOCUMENT FROM NSW CABINET OFFICE: The provision applies that where it is considered that domestic violence is merely "likely to occur."
Again, this broadens the scope of the Commonwealth's power in a manner which gives rise to doubts about its Constitutional basis.
MATT BROWN: And in WA there are similar concerns.
RICHARD COURT, WA PREMIER: There is no need to bring about these changes.
We are very concerned that a change would mean that the Commonwealth would have unfettered powers to bring the defence forces into the State without any consultation.
MATT BROWN: And consider what might happen once Australian soldiers do start getting into contact with civilians in tense situations.
The Victorian police force says the military are not up to dealing with the public.
They've also written to a Senate committee asking for the law to be redrafted.
VICTORIA POLICE DOCUMENT: Cross-training during operation safety and tactics training conducted by Victoria Police revealed that members of the Defence Force are ill-equipped in this area.
The legislation does not adequately deal with the accountability to the criminal justice system.
MARK FINDLAY: It might be that Aboriginal people are demonstrating about a reconciliation issue which has been settled in a State, but is a problem for the Commonwealth.
It might be that the PM is going to a university campus and wants a military escort.
I think there are a wide range of situations where we think we should have the opportunity to express ourselves in public and that we wouldn't necessarily want the military controlling that.
MATT BROWN: Officials here at the Department of Defence in Canberra have been working on the new laws for two and a half years, but it's only recently that the Defence Minister, John Moore, got his bill through the House of Representatives and it's yet to clear the Senate.
It's all supposed to be in place in time for the Olympic Games, but more than 20 years after the Hilton bombing, questions are now being asked, why has it taken so long?
PAUL BARRATT: Here we are, a few weeks ahead of the start of the Olympics.
You have State Governments expressing Constitutional concerns about the legislation which is in the Senate.
MATT BROWN: Paul Barratt was the head of the Defence Department.
Then he had a bitter dispute with the minister, John Moore, and he left.
PAUL BARRATT: I became very concerned by the middle of last year that there was one very obvious event approaching which could lead to a terrorist incident, that was the Olympics.
So, in about the middle of last year, the chief of the Defence Force and I started jumping up and down, saying, "We've got to get on with this.
We've got to get the legislation passed.
We need a clear 12 months."
JOHN MOORE: I wouldn't comment on that.
That's a matter within the department.
Departments make all sorts of suggestions here on a daily basis, sometimes on an hourly basis.
The only thing that matters is the Government decision.
PAUL BARRATT: It's a pretty poor performance.
Mr Moore never tires of telling us he'll accept nothing less than the highest standards of performance from the defence organisation.
It would be nice if he would apply those same criteria to his own performance.
JOHN MOORE: I'm not aware of any particular advice, and if I was, I wouldn't be disclosing it.
MATT BROWN: The new laws are presently before a Senate inquiry.
With support from the ALP all but guaranteed, they'll be in place for the Olympic Games and beyond.[/quote]
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/s161830.htm
I can't even comment!
B
[This message has been edited by Bruce in West Oz (edited August 11, 2000).]