Anthony Albanese announces AFP's first female commissioner
Revealing for the first time that AFP Commissioner Reece Kershaw will resign, the government has confirmed it's known for weeks that he was planning to retire.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese announced the changes today at a press conference in Canberra, revealing that 20-year policing veteran Krissy Barrett was the 'obvious choice' for the role.
'Krissy Barrett brings more than 20 years of law enforcement experience to the position of AFP Commissioner,'' Mr Albanese said.
'Krissy has expertise in community policing and operations counter terrorism, first response, serious financial crime and transnational serious and organised crime in her most recent position as a Deputy Commissioner with the AFP, Ms Barrett has managed the national security portfolio.
'She is highly renowned for her leadership capability, and I've certainly seen that first hand in the dealings I've had with Ms Barrett, as well as the way that she has represented the AFP on matters before the National Security Committee for her distinguished service to the sollies and the Bali bombings investigation.'
News.com.au reported last week that the future of the Australian Federal Police Commissioner Reece Kershaw was uncertain after speculation within the rank and file that he was planning to leave.
The straight-shooting chief of police would not confirm last week that he planned to give four weeks' notice.
The AFP gave a statement saying: 'Commissioner Kershaw has not submitted his resignation and the AFP has no further comment at this stage.'
Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke revealed in the press conference that he first learned Mr Kershaw planned to resign last month but it was kept secret until now.
'A couple of weeks ago, Commissioner Kershaw asked to meet with me with no staff present,'' Mr Burke said.
'And, in the meeting, to my surprise, he went through – as he may say a bit later – where he was up to, both with family and grandchildren, and said that he had set October 3 as the date that he was intending to retire. I wasn't expecting the conversation.'
'I wasn't expecting the announcement from him, but he leaves with his head held high and on the best possible terms for the government.'
Commissioner Kershaw said he was looking forward to spending more time with his family and grandchildren.
Commissioner Kershaw was besieged by intense political pressure in recent months over his handling of the January 19 Dural caravan terror saga, with some accusing him of stonewalling and contributing to a public over-reaction to what was later found to be a bogus terror plot.
Commissioner Kershaw refused to confirm when Mr Albanese was briefed on the alleged plan to use a caravan in a terrorist act targeting Sydney's Jewish community.
Commissioner Kershaw told a Senate committee in February that providing further details could compromise operational integrity: 'I will not provide updates in public forums.'
'Details provided, whether it seems innocuous or not, can have an impact on investigations,' he said.
The opposition seized on Kershaw's silence, suggesting the Albanese government may have delayed disclosure for political reasons.
'This is looking more and more like a political cover-up,' former opposition leader Peter Dutton said, calling for an independent inquiry.
'It is inconceivable that the Prime Minister was not briefed on a matter of this gravity at the earliest opportunity.'
Commissioner Kershaw has also faced criticism for inconsistencies in briefing protocols.
Liberal Senator James Paterson questioned why ministers were informed immediately in previous security incidents but not in this case.
'The public deserves transparency and the reassurance that our security agencies are acting without fear or favour,' he said.
Commissioner Kershaw declined to respond directly, saying only, 'I briefed ministers at the appropriate time … I'm not going to speculate – it's not helpful to our investigation.'
The pressure intensified after AFP Deputy Commissioner Krissy Barrett confirmed in March that the caravan plot had been 'a criminal con job' rather than a legitimate terrorist threat.
Questions were raised about the AFP and its inaction regarding the public alarm over the alleged threat, which went unchecked for weeks.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News.com.au
2 hours ago
- News.com.au
Former Superman star Dean Cain announces he's becoming an ICE agent
Superman actor Dean Cain announced on Tuesday that he joined the US' Immigration and Customs Enforcement to support President Donald Trump's mass deportation plans. He said he wanted to 'help save America.' Cain, 59, who played Clark Kent on Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman alongside Teri Hatcher's Lois Lane from 1993 to 1997, shared the news in a recruitment-style video on social media while urging others to join him in removing people from the US. The actor first met Mr Trump in 2009 and has been an ardent supporter even going as far to say said he 'loves' the now president. Mr Trump's mass deportation policy is celebrated by many of his supporters. But there have also been accusations that due legal process has not been followed in some of the cases, that people with no criminal record have been deported to harsh overseas prisons and people have been picked up simply for having views the administration disagrees with under the guise of national security issues. 'For those who don't know, I am a sworn law enforcement officer, as well as being a filmmaker, and I felt it was important to join with our first responders to help secure the safety of all Americans, not just talk about it, so I joined up,' the conservative media personality said in a nearly two-minute clip on X, reported the New York Post. 'Since President Trump took office, ICE has arrested hundreds of thousands of criminals, including terrorists, rapists, murderers, pedophiles, MS-13 gang members, drug traffickers, you name it — very dangerous people are who are no longer on the streets.' However, analysis by the Associated Press of the US government's own data disputed those figures. 'The majority of people currently detained by ICE have no criminal convictions. Of those who do, relatively few have been convicted of high-level crimes,' it stated last month. ICE figures showed that up to the end of June, 57,861 people had been detained by ICE with 72 per cent having no criminal convictions. Cain went on to tout the agency's 'great benefits and pay,' along with a $US50,000 ($A77,000) signing bonus announced last week by US Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. He also boasted that no college degree is required, meaning 'you can get to work right away'. 'So if you want to help save America, ICE is arresting the worst of the worst and removing them from America's streets,' said Cain, who was sporting a black American Sniper tee. 'I like that. I voted for that. They need your help, we need your help, to protect our homeland and our families. So check into it and join today if it's something that tickles your fancy because we can use you.' Commenters were quick to note that Cain is 22 years over the federal agency's maximum recruitment age of 37, casting doubt on the legitimacy of his latest public reveal. Cain, in response to one critic who snarked about the age limit, said, 'Perhaps we'll get that changed …' Another user chimed in, writing that 'Superman himself would be disappointed'. ICE did not immediately respond to The Post 's request for comment regarding Cain's enlistment. The actor's endorsement comes a week after DHS launched 'Defend the Homeland,' a nationwide recruitment campaign aiming to hire 10,000 new agents following the passage of Trump's massive funding bill. The agency is offering a signing bonus, student loan repayment and forgiveness options, enhanced retirement benefits and more to recruits and retired agents who return to service. 'Your country is calling you to serve at ICE,' Ms Noem said in the July 29 announcement, blasting the Biden administration for its 'failed immigration policies.' 'This is a defining moment in our nation's history. Your skills, your experiences, and your courage have never been more essential. Together, we must defend the homeland.'
ABC News
2 hours ago
- ABC News
Can Trump sack his way to better jobs data?
Sam Hawley: Donald Trump didn't like the numbers, so he sacked the messenger. So what are the implications of the US President's decision to get rid of the nation's chief statistician who dared to release revised job figures? Today's staff writer at The Atlantic, Tom Nichols, on the sledgehammer Trump is taking to democracy. I'm Sam Hawley on Gadigal land in Sydney. This is ABC News Daily. Sam Hawley: Tom, we know that Donald Trump has trouble dealing with the facts, but wow, he really has gone a step further this time, hasn't he? Tom Nichols: Yeah, although I think that this is more of a warning to the next person rather than Trump really believing that the facts are wrong. I think he is lashing out because he's angry and by firing this person, he's trying to send up a flare that says, from now on, give me the numbers that I prefer. Sam Hawley: Oh, yes, all right. So last week, these new job figures came out and they weren't fantastic. Trump didn't obviously like them, so he sacks the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Erika McEntarfer, because he says her numbers are wrong. Donald Trump, US President: I think her numbers were wrong, just like I thought her numbers were wrong before the election. Days before the election, she came out with these beautiful numbers for Kamala. Tom Nichols: Well, he was very happy with those numbers earlier in his term when they were reflecting job growth. What happened, of course, is that the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which does a lot of this work by reporting, by self-reporting from American companies, has to do revisions as they get more information coming in from those companies over time. And ever since the pandemic, those companies have been a bit slower about reporting and kind of getting that data together to get it to the Labor Department. So, of course, every so often, BLS comes out and says, OK, now we're going to revise the jobs report that we put out. And Trump decided that revising the jobs numbers downward, that this was some kind of act of political sabotage. Donald Trump, US President: We're doing so well. I believe the numbers were phony, just like they were before the election. And there were other times. So you know what I did? I fired her. And you know what? I did the right thing. Tom Nichols: Now, again, whether he really believes that after glorifying the good numbers that he got is, I think, questionable. And so he's doing the thing that he likes to do as a former business owner, which is firing people who annoy him. And the quickest way to annoy him is to give him bad news. Sam Hawley: And others in the White House are also now trying to explain this sacking, aren't they? Like Kevin Hassett, who's Trump's economic adviser. He was on Fox News echoing Trump's doubts about the job figures. Kevin Hassett, Director of the National Economic Council: If I were running the BLS and I had the biggest downward revision in 50 years, I would have a really, really detailed report explaining why it happened so that everybody really trusted the data. And so I think what we need is a fresh set of eyes at the BLS. Somebody who can clean this thing up. Sam Hawley: Alright, well, Trump's accusing her of being a Biden stooge. Tom Nichols: Yeah. Sam Hawley: I mean, she's not, obviously. Tom Nichols: Yeah. I mean, these are career, you know, civil servants in the American system. At a certain level of seniority, you have to be nominated by the president, who is the head of the executive branch, and then confirmed by the Senate. And this woman was confirmed overwhelmingly in the Senate, including by two US senators whose names happen to be Marco Rubio and JD Vance, who, of course, are now the secretary of state and the vice president. So there was no issue with her being some sort of political stooge. It's pretty hard to find lifelong statisticians who are also political stooges hiding in the American bureaucracy. Sam Hawley: Wow. OK. Because these revised figures, which showed that job growth wasn't what Donald Trump wanted it to be, it doesn't fit with his narrative, I assume, especially as he rolls out these global tariffs. Tom Nichols: Right. You know, Trump creates his own reality. When reality collides with his promises, he says that the reality is fake. The numbers are fake. The reports are fake. The news is fake. People are out to get me. Everything is rigged. And there's a real danger here, because it's not just the president, you know, being annoyed by these numbers. If you undermine the stability and trustworthiness of BLS, of the statistical organisation, businesses across America count on these numbers, as do foreign governments. So basically, Donald Trump is saying, I don't like bad news, so I'm going to basically blind us about what's actually going on at any given moment in the American economy, which suits him just fine, because he will tell his own story about it. But for the rest of us, it's quite dangerous. Sam Hawley: All right, so Tom, let's look further then into what else Donald Trump has been doing when it comes to the American bureaucracy and, of course, truth and facts. We always knew he wanted to get rid of anyone who was critical of his thinking, right? That was part of so-called Project 2025. Just remind me about that. Tom Nichols: Well, Project 2025, it never mentions Donald Trump. It was meant to be a handbook for the next Republican president. Now, of course, they knew that the next Republican president would be Donald Trump. And so this was a document produced at the Heritage Foundation that had an overarching scheme for essentially destroying entire pieces of the American government and its bureaucratic infrastructure. Of course, people always think that sounds good, because who likes the word bureaucracy, right? I mean, you think of bureaucracy and you think about the Department of Motor Vehicles or trying to get your license renewed or something. But here in the United States, as in every developed country, bureaucracy is how the mail gets delivered. It's how labour statistics get compiled and so on. What they really wanted to do, and this is at the heart of a lot of Project 2025, is to get rid of the apolitical servants in the bureaucracy and replace them with Republican conservative political loyalists. And specifically people, of course, by extension, who are going to be loyal to Donald Trump, which then makes the idea of an apolitical administration of a gigantic country of 350 million people impossible, because it's a return to cronyism and political hackery. But that's exactly what the project aims for in what they would call reforming the bureaucracy. Sam Hawley: So tell me, who else has the president deemed to be standing in his way? Who else has he been after? I know, Tom, the list is long, so you might just want to mention the highlights. Tom Nichols: The Department of Justice, which he is hollowing out and destroying piece by piece. The Department of Defense, which is now in the hands of a talk show host. Those are the two big ones that really could have been a problem. That along with, again, an apolitical civil service that says, well, we can't actually break the law. You know, we can't actually engage in politics in the office. But Trump is pushing to destroy all of those regulations. And he's mostly there. I mean, he has the Department of Justice. What he doesn't have are America's judges, who he's trying, of course, to replace through appointments. But even some of his own appointees are fighting him. And so now the Trump administration is really encouraging threats against American judges. I mean, we are really, you know, in the American judiciary is in the fight of its life here to maintain its independence. Unfortunately, a conservative majority on the Supreme Court has decided that Donald Trump is a king and can do whatever he wants. You know, we're in a pretty dicey situation here in the United States. Sam Hawley: And federal scientists too, right? That's really concerning. Tom Nichols: Oh, absolutely. I mean, climate scientists, you know, virologists, epidemiologists. If you had said to me five years ago that Robert F. Kennedy Jr. would be running the Department of Health and Human Services, I would have said that it's a comedy skit on Saturday Night Live. And I wouldn't have believed you. Authoritarian leaders don't like experts. Experts are the people who say, look, you can yell at me and threaten me all day long, but, you know, water is still wet and the sky is still blue. And, you know, people are going to die because of this. I mean, there is going to be real harm to the health and well-being of a lot of Americans because of this kookery that's infested the government now. And again, firing all those civil servants, firing all those government scientists and replacing them with people who want, you know, jobs and nice offices is an important step in that. Sam Hawley: Yeah. And not only sacking people, Tom, I also read that he's trying to change history, rewriting historical documents. Tom Nichols: Well, he was very upset that the Smithsonian Institution had an exhibit about impeachment that included him. And that was taken out. Now, apparently, because of the outcry around that, that he is going to be put back in there, whether he likes it or not, which tells you that if people get angry enough and they make enough noise that, you know, you can have some effect here. Yeah, Trump simply reorders reality whenever he speaks to his liking. And again, he may well know, I mean, at this point, it's so difficult to know what Trump believes and what he imagines or what he confabulates. But he knows that he's speaking to his loyal base. And that base right now is pretty angry with him about the whole Jeffrey Epstein business, which is a whole other drama here in America. So he's trying to throw them all kinds of red meat as fast as he can to try and get their minds off the fact that he didn't fulfill his promise to release all these files about one of his best friends. Sam Hawley: All right, well, Tom, Donald Trump, he's restructuring the bureaucracy to suit his view of the world. Project 2025 was, in essence, a wish list of ways to expand presidential power, if you like. So is that happening in your view? Is Trump becoming more powerful? Tom Nichols: It's hard to say. The best barometer of whether the Republicans and Donald Trump are stronger or weaker is this obvious panic that has overtaken them about losing the House next year. Is he personally more powerful? I don't think so. I think he was probably at the height of his power when he came into office and in those first few months. But there have been so many screw ups and misfires and stumbles that I think, you know, if there was any kind of second term honeymoon, he's mostly squandered that away. And so I think he's still the president of the United States and he is still a force to be reckoned with. But I don't think he's looking quite as powerful as he was even, you know, two or three months ago. Which is not to underestimate him. Because he will do things that other presidents would not. Strangely enough, this Epstein business is the thing that's probably hurt him more than anything. I think he's really worried about his base turning on him. And the only time they've even threatened to turn on him has been over this Epstein business. Sam Hawley: Yeah, interesting. All right. Well, the concern for a long time, of course, has been that Trump will chip away at democracy and democratic norms over his four year term, which is rather long. How much damage could he actually do in that time? Tom Nichols: Oh, he's not chipping away at it. He's jackhammering away at it. The chipping away was in his first term, but that was held in check by people around him who would say things like, Mr. President, you can't do that. Or even more importantly, they would say, Mr. President, I'm not doing that. He learned from that. He has come into office with a bunch of careerists and opportunists and sycophants who are going to do whatever he tells them to do. He's calling for an investigation, for example, into Jack Smith, the special counsel who was looking into his various misdeeds in his first term. And the lawyer who will be the head of that office is a 30 year old guy who got his law degree last year. And he'll do whatever Trump wants him to do. Sam Hawley: Well, Tom, I don't want to be overdramatic, but could he actually succeed then in destroying or at least deeply wounding American democracy? Tom Nichols: Destroying, probably not. One of the strengths of the United States is that we are a sprawling, vast federal system. Donald Trump can say a lot of things, but, you know, New York and California and Illinois and Massachusetts all have their own governors and legislatures. What he can do is encourage the collapse of democracy in pockets. It's one thing to live in Boston. It's another thing to live in Alabama or Louisiana or Mississippi or Texas, where the governor and the legislature are straight up aligned with the president and have decided that if he doesn't like the way the Constitution is written, then they don't like it either. And so I've said in the past, I don't think American democracy collapses from coast to coast. I think it evaporates in pockets. That's where I think the real threats are going to come, is in this kind of cooperation with individual states and governors and legislatures. Sam Hawley: Tom Nichols is a staff writer at The Atlantic. This episode was produced by Sydney Pead. Audio production by Sam Dunn. Our supervising producer is David Coady. I'm Sam Hawley. ABC News Daily will be back again on Monday. Thanks for listening.
News.com.au
4 hours ago
- News.com.au
Latest poll shows Aussies support climate action to prevent risks from extreme weather events
A new poll has revealed a majority of Australians want the government to take stronger climate action and limit risks from extreme weather events such as bushfires. YouGov surveyed 1500 Australians, finding 77 per cent of respondents wanted stronger climate action, while 13 per cent thought the government should do less to prevent risks from extreme weather events. A report released by the Productivity Commission this week found the cost of ignoring climate risks would cost the economy an extra $26bn in the next two decades. The Commission found Australia was expected to experience more extremely hot days, longer fire seasons, heavy rainfall over short periods, rising sea levels, coastal flooding and intense tropical cyclones. It stated a harsher climate would increase costs for Australia from $9bn in 2023 to $35bn by 2050 if Australia did nothing to adapt. 'Disasters create lasting health effects for households, and negatively affect education outcomes and earnings,' the report stated. The government is expected to reveal its 2035 target by September with advice from the Climate Change Authority. Climate Council chief executive officer Amanda McKenzie said setting a strong 2035 climate target will help protect Australians from climate harm while driving new jobs and economic opportunities. 'Climate action and renewable power have been vote winners at the last two federal elections,' she said. 'Voters' concerns about extreme weather are justifiably growing more urgent. 'Almost eight in 10 want Australia's climate plans to reduce risk from climate-fuelled extreme weather, while more than six in 10 think the government should do more overall on climate.' The Climate Action Network program director Barry Traill said support for credible climate action and strong, science-backed pollution reduction targets are solidly mainstream positions in Australia. 'MPs can't afford to turn their backs on people losing their lives, their savings and their homes,' he said. 'Climate denial has and will continue to be punished at the ballot box. Australians want real action to protect lives and livelihoods.'
