A Sydney caravan laden with explosives was a ‘fake terrorism plot'. Here's what we know
The discovery of a caravan packed with explosives earlier this year led to concerns about a possible terrorism attack, criticism of the police and media, and a fierce political debate about the federal government's response to antisemitism.
On Monday, Australian police said the caravan was part of 'fake terrorism plot' allegedly orchestrated by organised criminals for personal gain.
What do we know about who is behind it?
In January, a caravan containing explosives was discovered in Dural on the outskirts of Sydney. Inside the caravan were threats directed towards the Jewish community.
An investigation was launched by state and federal police, along with the domestic spy agency, given concerns the caravan could indicate a looming terrorist attack.
Ten days after the investigation was launched, the caravan's existence was first revealed by the Daily Telegraph, prompting criticism of police for not immediately disclosing its discovery. That criticism has been rejected by senior police, who have alleged media reporting undermined its investigations. The newspaper's crime editor said that criticism was 'unfair' and that it would 'never compromise an investigation'.
After the investigation became public, the Coalition accused the Albanese government of being too slow to request a briefing on the discovery. Senior Coalition figures accused the prime minister of being 'out of his depth' on national security and antisemitisim.
On Monday, the AFP said the caravan was 'never going to cause a mass casualty event' and was a 'fake terrorism plot'. It said there was no detonator inside the caravan.
The force's deputy commissioner Krissy Barrett said this was known by police at a very early stage of the investigation.
'Almost immediately, experienced investigators within the joint counter-terrorism team believed that the caravan was part of a fabricated terrorist plot, essentially a … con job,' Barrett said.
Police allege the 'con job' was fabricated by organised crime figures for personal benefit. It said these undisclosed figures were based in Australia and offshore.
Guardian Australia understands authorities believe there is one individual pulling the strings at the top of a chain of command, with a second layer below them of other individuals involved in organised crime, who are soliciting people to carry out acts.
The motivation is understood to be to distract police and divert their resources away from organised crime, as well as to create plots that incarcerated criminals can use to tip off law enforcement in order to reduce their sentences.
It is not clear why people further down the chain carried out acts on behalf of those orchestrating the plot.
The New South Wales premier, Chris Minns, and his police minister, Yasmin Catley, said that despite the revelations the caravan plot was concocted, it had struck fear in the Jewish community.
The federal home affairs minister, Tony Burke, accused the Coalition opposition of politicising the government's response. In a post on X, he said the opposition leader, Peter Dutton, had 'played directly into the hands of organised crime figures who have been trying to profit from dividing our community'.
But the shadow home affairs minister, James Paterson, stood by the Coalition's criticisms that the prime minister should have been briefed on the caravan at an earlier stage.
'Organised crime concocting terrorism plots targeting the Jewish community is an extremely serious matter,' Paterson said.
David Ossip, the president of the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies, said confirmation the caravan incident was a 'con job' should not in any way diminish the summer of fear and anxiety that the Jewish community experienced.
'The criminals who allegedly arranged and carried out these violent attacks sought to take advantage of already-strained social cohesion and unprecedented levels of antisemitism by targeting the Jewish community for their own personal benefit,' Ossip said. 'This is reprehensible and had a chilling effect on the Jewish community.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Statesman
4 hours ago
- New Statesman
Australia is no model for assisted dying
Photo by Kelly Barnes / AAP Image via Alamy Australian laws on voluntary assisted dying (VAD) are deemed so similar to the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill that three quarters of overseas witnesses invited to give evidence to MPs were from Australia. 'This is not a revolutionary law reform,' Alex Greenwich, a politician from New South Wales, told the bill's scrutiny committee earlier this year. 'It has been tried and tested, we have appropriate safeguards in place throughout Australia, and they work.' Although Australian states extend the six-month life expectancy requirement to a year for those with neurodegenerative conditions, in terms of eligibility, process and safeguards, their laws are similar to the UK's bill. The two differ only in that self-administration of life-ending drugs would be permitted here, and a multidisciplinary panel would review cases. So when Kim Leadbeater, Labour MP and the bill's sponsor, responded with a heart emoji and '#ChoiceAtTheEndOfLife' to a Guardian article published on 7 June that showed the Australian system being abused, eyebrows were raised. An elderly couple had been granted VAD when neither were terminally ill; medics in New South Wales effectively greenlit their suicide pact. 'Looks like the safeguards didn't work,' Mark Taubert, an NHS consultant and the vice-president of the European Association for Palliative Care, responded on X. According to the palliative care doctor Rachel Clarke, the story 'could not highlight more starkly the dangers of the law we are currently debating'. MPs hearing evidence on the bill had little time with six Australian witnesses, all of whom were supportive of VAD. Their arguments didn't always stand up to scrutiny. 'The medications are completely effective. I have not experienced any failures,' said Chloe Furst, a palliative care doctor from South Australia and board member of Voluntary Assisted Dying Australia and New Zealand. But, MPs pointed out, there is no requirement that a doctor be present when someone self-administers, nor is there provision for reporting complications. In Western Australia, where this information is collected, complications were recorded in 4.3 per cent of deaths in 2023-24. Asked if it was a concern that a 'large proportion of people who opted for assisted dying cited being a burden as their reason', another witness, Meredith Blake from the University of Western Australia, replied this was 'not the evidence that we have got'. Except it is. Official state figures showed 35 per cent of those seeking VAD cited being a burden on family, friends or carers as their reason for doing so. Blake replied: 'If there are people who are saying they are a burden, that does not mean that their decision is not voluntary.' While MPs were told Australian palliative care doctors had 'embraced' VAD, I have spoken with medics in Australia who are troubled by how the legislation operates. Academics and politicians are, too. Robert Clark, a former attorney-general and MP in Victoria wrote to the committee twice with his observations: the second time after his fellow Australians had addressed MPs. Numerous aspects of their evidence were 'factually incorrect or incomplete', Clark claimed. There was not adequate palliative care available to all terminally ill patients in Australia. Evidence didn't show any reduction in non-medically assisted suicide. The right of doctors to object to VAD was not respected. Many doctors 'feel unable to raise concerns about VAD… lest they suffer adverse professional or career consequences, or else they are leaving the hospital system altogether', he said. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe British palliative care doctor Alex Hughes recently relayed his experience of assisted dying while working in Australia. Hughes, who is neutral on VAD in principle, described a borderline case in which it seemed the patient had chosen to die because of poor alternative care options. In another, he suspected the man may have been influenced by depression, but this had gone unexplored in assessment. Were assisted dying to come to the UK, doctors would be 'at a heightened risk of unconscious bias… [and] may lean towards giving patients the 'benefit of the doubt', granting assisted dying to individuals who, in reality, have more than six months to live.' The events described in the Guardian confirm that risk is not merely hypothetical. Ahead of its return to the Commons on 13 June, 1,000 doctors urged MPs to vote against the assisted dying bill. They argued it is 'deeply flawed' and unsafe. Similar statements have been made by the Royal College of Physicians and the Royal College of Psychiatrists, which say they cannot support the legislation as it stands. Such concerns are not 'noise', as Leadbeater has suggested. Many critics have no issue with the principle of safe VAD. But the passage of the bill has revealed law-making at its worst: rushed debate, the views of the vulnerable ignored or downplayed, and crucial information on how the bill would work absent. Supporters say there will be time to iron out details later. That is too risky. Under current plans, some vulnerable people will be helped – in Hughes's words – to have 'an inappropriate assisted death'. He now poses two critical questions for MPs: how many vulnerable people slipping through the net is acceptable? And can adequate safeguards be put in place 'without creating a system so cumbersome that it becomes unworkable'? It's time for MPs to be honest with themselves and the public: enabling some an autonomous death through assisted dying will inevitably put others at risk of harm. [See also: Has any Chancellor faced a challenge this daunting?] Related
Scottish Sun
6 hours ago
- Scottish Sun
Donald Trump reveals huge new plans for Aberdeenshire golf course
The golf courses will combine to create 'The Greatest 36 Holes in Golf' on the Aberdeenshire coast TOP TRUMP Donald Trump reveals huge new plans for Aberdeenshire golf course DONALD Trump has unveiled huge new plans for his Aberdeenshire golf course. The site is currently undergoing an expansion, with a new 18-hole course set to open later this summer. 2 Donald Trump has revealed new plans for his Aberdeenshire golf course Credit: AFP 2 Trump and his Scots mum Mary Anne MacLeod Credit: Getty Known officially as the Old and the New, the golf courses will combine to create 'The Greatest 36 Holes in Golf' on the Aberdeenshire coast. And as part of the upgrades, the 47th US President is creating a memorial garden to his late mum Mary Anne MacLeod at the golf resort. The main feature of the garden will be a tribute carved in stone, specially imported from her birthplace and original home, the Isle of Lewis. Trump's mum was born and brought up in the fishing town of Tong on the Hebridean island of Lewis but emigrated to New York to live a very different life. She was one of tens of thousands of Scots who travelled to the US and Canada in the early years of the last century, looking to escape economic hardship at home. She first left Lewis for New York in 1930, at the age of 18, to seek work as a domestic servant. Six years later, she was married to successful property developer Frederick Trump, the son of German migrants and one of the most eligible men in New York. The fourth of their five children, Donald John, as he is referred to on the islands, is now US president for the second time. Mary Anne died in 2000 aged 88 and is buried in New York. Sarah Malone, executive vice president of Trump International, said: 'With the New course opening now fast approaching, we are delighted to share the final layout of this extraordinary links and the completion of The Greatest 36 Holes. Watch the supercringey moment Donald Trump gets a rocking bagpipe welcome to his first Scots golf course 'It has been a phenomenal journey to create two truly exceptional world-class championship golf courses, across this magnificent stretch of North Sea coastline. 'The Trump family has a deep affection for Scotland – not only as the home of golf – but as the ancestral home of President Trump's beloved mother, Mary Anne MacLeod.' We told previously how a man who claims a farmer's hedge has ruined his views of Donald Trump's Aberdeenshire golf course has taken his fight to the government.
New Statesman
6 hours ago
- New Statesman
Inside Trump's Oval Office
Donald Trump with the British ambassador to the United States, Peter Mandelson, in the Oval Office. Photo by Jim Watson / AFP via Getty Images To foreign visitors, walking into President Trump's Oval Office has become akin to entering the Colosseum. My fellow ambassadors spend days trying to persuade the White House to allow their incoming head of government to forgo the thrill of the Oval media spray, or at least have the closed-door lunch beforehand as an early barometer of what may be on the president's mind. None succeed. The president is eager for the fray, and the visitor's secret of success is to leave him to it, stay relaxed, speak when spoken to and never take the bait. Keir Starmer's Oval appearance is viewed across Washington's diplomatic corps as the model. It's just a shame that not all of them have a popular king from whom to deliver a state visit invitation. Art of the deal The US-UK trade deal was smart, nimble diplomacy by my embassy and London officials – met by an equal measure of professionalism and goodwill from President Trump's team. When I entered the anything-can-happen Oval Office and picked my way past the Churchill bust and gilt adornments to take my place behind the Resolute desk for the trade deal's launch, the White House protocol officer issued me with clear instructions to stand behind the president and say nothing. I was there in a purely supporting capacity, while the Prime Minister was poised to be dialled in from Jaguar Land Rover's West Midlands HQ to give his endorsement to the VE-Day deal. President Trump was enjoying himself. The conversation and the cameras rolled on, and I was gazing around, soaking in the atmosphere when suddenly he looked over his shoulder and asked if I had anything to say. Luckily my political skills kicked in, my Rolls-Royce gag worked, and I was praised for my 'beautiful accent'. More than an hour (which seemed like a week) later, the press were herded out. The president brandished his trademark Sharpie and presented me with a signed copy of his talking points, plus a stash of signed Maga caps for my staff. They had earned them. No contest My conclusion from listening to the president on this and other occasions is that the secret of his political success is that he always knows what he wants to say, means it when he says it and is never lost for words. He is not gun-shy. The discipline of the administration – Elon Musk notwithstanding – is impressive. Compared with Trump 1, when freelancing secretaries and congressional revolts were widespread in the party, Republicans now are remarkably careful not to show any difference from the president. I regularly commute to the Hill to see House and Senate members, who may not all be cut from the same Trumpian cloth, but have nonetheless heard the views of their electoral base. The Maga movers and shakers who were instrumental to the Trump victory, and now form the DC establishment, are not ideologues. Nonetheless, like Trump and his forceful vice-president, JD Vance, they have clearly formed instincts and deeply held beliefs. They want to see these reflected in pioneering, radical domestic and foreign policies, unfettered by more conventionally minded civil servants and others they refer to as 'the Deep State'. They are impatient and ruthless, and leave those with more moderate politics flailing, unable to decide whether to stick up for their centrism or outflank them to the left. Democrats are, so far, at a loss to know how to oppose Trump. They hold on to the hope that history rhymes, the pendulum will swing and they will regain the House, if not the Senate, in the 2026 midterms. They may well be right, but hope, as they say, is not a strategy. Dog days There is no doubt that for my husband, Reinaldo, and me, living in a historic residence with such a beautiful garden is both a privilege and hard work, with all the hosting and entertaining that comes with the job. It is expected that 18,000 visitors will join us at receptions, events, dinners, salons and roundtables this year. Unfortunately, I cannot compete with my predecessors who conducted a lot of their diplomatic work on the residence's tennis court, but I do have another asset: Jock, the universally popular Ambassa-Dog, who is shortly to make his Instagram debut. He has all the wonderful qualities you associate with a collie and visitors queue up to throw his ball for him, which he retrieves and leaves at other guests' feet. But he is best not startled after he has turned in for the night, as Dame Emily Thornberry, the warm and redoubtable chair of the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee, discovered when she strayed into our flat rather than her bedroom when returning to the residence after an evening of networking on the Hill. [See also: How Russia became a franchise of the Wagner Group] Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Related
