GLOBAL PANEL - Australia

The Global Panel Events focusing on the Transatlantic Drift have been held since 2003, taking place in London, Berlin, Prague, Washington and Bratislava. Participants have included Madeleine Albright, Václav Havel, Lord George Robertson, Baroness Cox and Colin Powell among others.

The Global Panel Foundation and the Prague Society for International Cooperation will host these processes in Sydney which will comprise the following events:

Public Policy Lunch / Dinner
Proposed guest speakers are Prime Minister John Howard, Premier Morris Iemma and Attorney General Philip Ruddock.

Student Panel
"Is there a role for Australia and New Zealand in US/Asian relations"
Special Guest and Moderator will be the Hon. Bob Carr MP, former Premier of New South Wales.

2nd Track Announcement
This event will be hosted over a two-year span in five different countries around the world, in order to facilitate a well-rounded approach to the issue. The dialogue will begin in Wellington, New Zealand, and then move through Prague, Czech Republic; Berlin, Germany; and finish in Ottawa, Canada.

Please click here for a detailed agenda.

THE ORGANISERS

Since 1989, Global Panel has meant “meeting the world in person.” The list of guests is distinguished, including Margaret Thatcher, Mikhail Gorbachev, George H.W. Bush, Helmut Kohl, Simon Perez and H.R.H King Hussein.

The Prague Society has since 1999 created and maintained a network of leaders from business, public policy and academia. Our events provide an opportunity for decision-makers to influence and act upon each other’s thinking. When Central European leaders want information they can trust, they come to the Prague Society.

The Global Panel Forums focusing on the Transatlantic Drift have been held since 2003, taking place in London, Berlin, Prague, Washington and Bratislava. Participants have included Madeleine Albright, Vaclav Havel, Lord George Robertson, Baroness Cox and Colin Powell, among others.

---------------------------------------------------------

Speech of The Hon Philip Ruddock MP
Attorney-General, Australia
Public Policy Lunch
Prague Society
University of Sydney
12.00pm, 12 November 2005

Firstly, may I acknowledge the traditional owners of the land we meet on — and pay my respects to their elders, both past and present.

I had the pleasure of speaking to the Prague Society a couple of weeks ago in London, so I am pleased to have the same opportunity here in Australia.And of course, the Global Panel is a well known and well-respected forum for public dialogue, so it is a double pleasure to be here today.

Ladies and Gentlemen.
Earlier this week Australians awoke to the realisation that terrorism was a possibility on our home soil. I do not want to say too much about these events because the alleged offenders are before the courts, and they are entitled to the presumption of innocence and a fair trial. But I’m sure we all agree that Australians cannot afford to be complacent about the possibility of a terrorist attack on home ground. Two weeks ago, I introduced into the Parliament new laws designed to strengthen Australia’s counter-terrorism regime. These laws were developed following the London bombings in July. The London attacks give us a hint of what might occur should a terrorist attack occur in Australia. 52 people were killed in London, including Melbourne man, Sam Ly. The terrorists were indiscriminate in their killing. Those 52 victims came from many different countries, and religions – one of the first to be buried was a 20 year old Londoner, and devout Muslim, called Shahara Islam. A statement from her family said: "She was an Eastender, a Londoner and British, but above all a true Muslim and proud to be so”. But her faith did not save her from the terrorists bombs. The terrorists made no allowance for race, religion or nationality. Their target is our western democratic values and our western way of life. The Australian Government is determined to do everything possible to keep all Australians safe. However, it is vital that we do not throw away the important human rights and virtues such as fairness, and tolerance that have made our society one of the most welcoming to people of all cultures. Approximately 23% of our population was born overseas and more than 200 languages are spoken across the nation. These policy tensions means this is a challenging time, perhaps uniquely so, to be the Australian Attorney-General! Within my portfolio lie not only national security, counter-terrorism and criminal law responsibilities, but also human rights, privacy and international law matters. Only a few years ago, these areas would have seemed unrelated, but in countering terrorism they must now be mutually reinforcing. The agencies in my portfolio that are working at the frontline in the fight against terrorism are not only security agencies such as ASIO and the Australian Federal Police. They also include, for example, the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. And the Acting Race Discrimination Commissioner, Tom Calma, is taking a lead in forging the strong relationships with our Muslim community. These links are essential to combat the hatred and intolerance that extremist ideologies feed upon.

The new anti-terrorism laws will build on Australia’s existing counter-terrorism regime. These measures are contained in the Anti-Terrorism Bill (no.2) 2005 and include:
• Updating the existing sedition offence and developing new offences of inciting violence against the community.
• A new regime allowing the Australian Federal Police to seek from a court, 12-month control orders on people who pose a terrorist risk to the community.
• A new preventative detention regime, allowing for detention for up to 48 hours in a terrorist situation, and
• A new ‘notice to produce’ regime which will facilitate lawful Australian Federal Police requests for information that will assist with the investigation of terrorism and other serious offences.

You’ll be aware that the draft legislation was under close scrutiny by State and Territory leaders and they have now agreed to the legislation.

These proposals reflect the critical importance of law enforcement and security agencies having sufficient, targeted powers and being accountable for the exercise of those powers. However, we should always remember that strong powers are only part of a comprehensive response to terrorism — based as it is on hatred, ignorance and misunderstanding. It is also through educating the community, raising awareness of human rights and responsibilities and engendering an attitude of respect and tolerance that we can truly achieve social harmony. In formulating the new anti-terrorism laws, we were not targeting any particular religion or nationality. Our counter-terrorism arrangements are aimed at terrorists, whatever their faith and whatever their race. However, we recognise that this is a particularly difficult time for the Muslim community. Not only are members of the Muslim community as likely as any other Australian to be the target of terrorists, but, unfortunately, some Muslims also feel that other members of the Australian community now view them with suspicion. We are taking special measures to address this understandable concern. The Statement of Principles agreed at the Prime Minister’s Summit with Muslim community leaders in August says: “In confronting the challenges of terrorism...[we] commit ourselves to work together with all Australians to produce positive outcomes which protect Australia against violence, terrorism and intolerance and promote our common goals of harmony and understanding.” The heads of all Australian Governments have requested the Ministerial Council on Immigration and Multicultural Affairs to work closely with Muslim leaders to develop a national action plan to build on these principles. The measures being developed will help combat extremism and promote tolerance.
They will engage the Muslim community in a genuinely collaborative approach to managing possible crises, including in the event that there is a terrorist attack on Australian soil. As part of this approach, I have agreed to develop a crisis management plan to assist the Muslim community to build its resilience and positively address issues, incidents and crises as they arise. The crisis management plan will involve a cooperative effort by the protective security, emergency management and human rights areas of my Department, the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission and, of course, Muslim community leaders. The plan will engage the Muslim Community in educative measures, and emergency and national security planning initiatives, to enable the community to respond to emerging issues, including law enforcement issues, discrimination and intolerance and media stereotyping. The plan ensures that the particular issues and needs of the Muslim community are appropriately considered and provided for in the preparation, prevention, response and recovery for a possible terrorist attack. I am pleased that all Australian jurisdictions are pursuing initiatives to strengthen links with Australian Muslim communities and promote mutual respect and understanding.

Before concluding, I must just comment on the popular suggestion that the new anti-terrorism laws would not be possible if we had a bill of rights. This is a dangerously misconceived argument. Firstly, I must emphasise that the laws are entirely consistent with our international human rights obligations which allow for special measures to protect national security. We understand that our national counter-terrorism policies must embody the democratic values we are seeking to protect. And overall, because our counter-terrorism legislation is proportionate, its security objectives are not so much in conflict with human rights but supportive of them. I challenge those who call for a Bill of Rights in Australia, to demonstrate that countries that do have a bill of rights are less discriminatory, fairer, more just or free than Australia. It is simply not the case that our system somehow lacks by comparison. Specific legislation provides better protection of human rights than do general statements, such as are typically contained in bills of rights. Indeed, a Bill of Rights may omit certain rights or express them in a limited way, to the detriment of some individuals. And the Government is not alone in holding this view. Only this week the Head of Deakin Law School, Professor Mikro Bagaric, stated in the press regarding a Bill of Rights that, “the best protector of important human interests is not signing up to abstract ideals, but a robust democracy..." Many people tend to think a Bill of Rights would overturn actions or policies they disagree with. However, despite lionising by their proponents, many Bills of Rights, including the most championed recent example in the ACT, have no capacity to override inconsistent legislation. Rather, such a Bill of Rights has the much less dramatic effect of identifying human rights issues before the Parliament. Although not a Bill of Rights as such, a similar mechanism already exists at the federal level in Australia through the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act. Under this Act, the Commission has the power to inquire into Government actions or legislation that may be inconsistent with international human rights obligations– the very rights that generally underlie statutory Bills of Rights. Reports of such inquiries are tabled in Parliament. It is appropriate that any future action is determined by the Parliament, not the judiciary. I make the observation that the Commission has, rightly, never been shy in its reporting and holding the actions of the Executive arm of government accountable to human rights standards.

Terrorism is a problem facing all Australians. None of us is immune. But if we allow the threat of terrorism to turn Australian against Australian then the terrorists will have achieved one of their aims. If we are to defeat terrorism, then we must do so together, with effective counter-terrorism capabilities and a profound sense of our duty to uphold the human rights and democratic values that underpin our tolerant and vibrant society.

in cooperation with:

	Hill Young & Associates