Latest news with #DuralIncident
News.com.au
29-05-2025
- General
- News.com.au
Bombshell inquiry into Dural ‘terror' caravan referred to ethics committee
An inquiry into the relationship between the Dural 'terror' caravan incident and the passing of controversial anti-hate laws in NSW is an 'incursion upon the privilege' of parliament that 'breaches one of the fundamental bedrocks of parliamentary democracy', a Labor MP has claimed. Local Government Minister Ron Hoenig slammed the Legislative Council inquiry during question time on Thursday morning as the government seeks to refer the terms of reference of the inquiry, established in March, to the Standing Committee on Parliamentary Privilege and Ethics. The Legislative Council inquiry, chaired by independent MLC Rod Roberts, was established earlier this year following criticism over the passage of sweeping anti-hate and anti-protest laws in February after a spate of anti-Semitic attacks in Greater Sydney over the summer. In January, police discovered an explosives-laden caravan in Sydney's northwest that Premier Chris Minns claimed could have resulted in a 'mass casualty event'. The Australian Federal Police later determined it to be part of a criminal conspiracy, sparking questions about who knew what and when. Mr Minns last week expressed concerns that the parliamentary privilege of the Legislative Assembly, where he spoke about the caravan on March 18, might be infringed, including by the calling of key staffers as well as the 'observance of comity' between the two houses. In his address, Mr Hoenig claimed the probe – launched by the Legislative Council, not the Legislative Assembly – 'breaches one of the bedrock of parliamentary democracy', which was the ability of either house of parliament to have exclusive control over its own members and debate. 'Broadly, what happens within parliament is a matter for control by parliament alone,' Mr Hoenig said. 'The prerogative of this House to set out the rules, conduct, and regulate its own affairs – its exclusive cognisance has not been disputed. 'That is why the resolution of the Legislative Council was so egregious. 'It expressly seeks to scrutinise the discourse of the House, the conduct of its members, be it backbencher or a member of the executive government, while undertaking the primary function entrusted upon them by their constituents which is to legislate.' Mr Hoenig also warned that 'courts will never sit by idly and allow powers to be unconstrained if abused' but admitted 'certain principles have become diminished over time' that 'may well be as a result of the disagreements we have with the other place (Legislative Council)'. The motion to refer the inquiry passed following a division 47 to 27. Inquiry changes 'don't go far enough': Labor On Wednesday night, Mr Roberts, moved amendments to the inquiry to 'narrow the focus on the passage of bills concerned through the Legislative Council', which Mr Hoenig said 'dismisses the very fundamental issue I have raised'. Noting the amendments, Mr Hoenig said it was the House of Representatives 'and this House alone that will be arbiter of its actions and that of its members, whether they also be members of the executive or not' and Mr Roberts' amendments 'did not go far enough'. Wahroonga Liberal MP Alister Henskens said the opposition was concerned about issues of privilege but would not support the motion following the amendments and instead claimed it was 'a transparent attempt to frustrate and delay the upper house inquiry'. Mr Henskens also noted that the only remaining witnesses were executive employees, including ministerial staff. 'The terms of reference were intentionally changed to exclude any infringement upon the privileges of this House by reason of the terms of reference, and I think that's a very important matter which was not highlighted to members of this place in the address,' Mr Henskens said. 'So, the inquiry in the other place is essentially directed towards a very narrow scope. There's been no public submissions invited, and the scope of the inquiry is simply whom knew that the Dural caravan incident was not a mass casualty event and when did they not?' Greens MP Jenny Leong did not say whether the party would support the referral but noted that if they did it would be 'critical' that the Legislative Council was not 'prevented from doing their work' and that the issues of privilege were 'probably dealt with by the amendments'. If there was an 'unreasonable delay' to the inquiry, Ms Leong warned that 'it would raise further concerns and questions about whether this is being used as a way for the Premier and the executive to avoid and subvert the ability of the council to inquire into these matters'. Speaker Greg Piper said the change of the terms of reference was 'not done on the basis of a change of view' but to advance an 'important inquiry' and agreed with the Greens that the inquiry would not be referred as a way of obstructing its progression. 'I say to the members of this House, this is an opportunity for us to actually examine the issue, the rights and privilege, the exclusive cognisance of the Legislative Assembly. And if we do not do it now, then we will no doubt be doing it again,' Mr Piper said. 'This is an opportunity to actually examine this and to make a stand as to the rights and privilege of the assembly.' Mr Piper said he stood by his advice to Mr Minns when he was advised about the potential breach. Last week, the inquiry heard evidence from key staffers behind the scenes at Mr Minns' office and at cabinet.
The Guardian
22-05-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
No official notes of caravan ‘terror' plot meetings between NSW police and premier's department, inquiry told
Top-level briefings about a potential terrorist plot involving a caravan of explosives were not documented, with some treated as 'pens-down' meetings, a New South Wales parliamentary committee has been told. The second hearing of the inquiry examining the relationship between the Dural caravan incident – subsequently determined to be a 'fake terrorism plot' – and the passing of hate speech and anti-protest laws in late February was held on Thursday. Witnesses from the premier's department and cabinet office gave evidence. Some crossbench MPs argue they were 'misled' when the laws were rushed through state parliament to criminalise people making racist remarks and give police broad powers to restrict protests 'near' places of worship. The legislation was passed on 21 February – the same day the police internally, but not publicly, ruled out the incident being a potential terror event. Police announced the caravan was a 'con job' on 10 March. The secretary of the premier's department, Simon Draper, said on Thursday that minutes were not taken during police briefings with the premier's department regarding the caravan – found by police on 19 January – because they were 'not decision-making briefings'. Liberal MLC Susan Carter asked Draper: 'So everybody relies on their memory, and there's no notes taken of briefings about something as important as a caravan full of explosives?' Draper replied that the briefings were not 'being held to record a decision … they're for information, that's all'. He said it was not the practice to produce minutes for every discussion within the government. When asked by Carter when a meeting was important enough to be minuted, Draper said it depended on the 'formality of the discussion'. The inquiry wasn't told which premier's department staff attended police briefings on 3, 4, 5 and 7 February – other than that some were attended by the premier's chief of staff. 'There's no Teams meeting records or … could you ask the premier to provide that information?' Greens MP Sue Higginson asked. When asked if the premier, Chris Minns, could ask his staff who might have been in attendance, Draper said: 'I'm happy to take it on notice.' During the inquiry's first hearing in April, Hudson said he had raised alternatives to the caravan being a terrorist plot at a press conference and in a radio interview the day after it was revealed publicly on 29 January. Kate Meagher, a deputy secretary of the premier's department, was at a meeting on 23 January with Minns and Hudson. The meeting contained 'closely held information' and was 'pens-down', she said. When asked what was said in the meeting about potential alternatives to the caravan being terrorism-related, she said she could not recall a discussion about alternatives. Sign up to Morning Mail Our Australian morning briefing breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion 'It was being described as early in the investigation and being considered multi-jurisdictionally and under the joint counter-terrorism arrangements,' Meagher said. She could not recall whether the premier sought any advice about what he should do about informing the public. Draper said he was not involved in any discussions about alternatives to terrorism and that he did not know the caravan was a 'con job' until 10 March, when police revealed publicly that the caravan was part of a 'fake terrorism plot' allegedly orchestrated by organised criminals for personal gain. A 17 February report in the Sydney Morning Herald stated the police, from the outset, 'said that there were puzzling elements to the case and raised the possibility it was a set up by criminals to negotiate jail time', Libertarian MLC John Ruddick told the inquiry on Thursday. 'It was well known there were murky details around these laws,' he said. 'I'm guessing there wasn't any discussion because we just wanted these laws passed.' Twenty-one days after the caravan was made public, the new laws were introduced to parliament. The laws were passed a few days later, 'which is quite quick in my view', Ruddick said. Briefings on the proposed laws in response to a spate of antisemitic attacks were first held in December, a month before the caravan laden with explosives and a list of Jewish targets was found, the cabinet office secretary, Kate Boyd, told the committee on Thursday. The committee chair, independent MLC Rod Roberts, told the hearing he had 'serious and grave concerns' about some witnesses attempting to avoid appearing before the committee. 'It is apparent there has been attempts by some to hinder and frustrate the work of this committee by declining to attend using spurious and tenuous arguments. 'One would think that an accountable government would willingly cooperate with a legislative council committee and not proffer weak and insubstantial assertions as reasons not to attend and cooperate.'
