So Jason this story. It's quite a scoop.
Thanks, Ruby, It certainly is, and just one of those things where someone called me said they had a story they wanted to brief me about and suggested we meet for a beer.
So we did, And so what did this source say to you?
So what they told me is that there's been a complete breakdown between the states and territories and the federal government. I've a how to handle counter terrorism, which obviously is a huge deal, and I was pretty blown away and wondered if this really had happened, So I started digging into.
It from Schwartz Media. I'm Ruby Jones. This is seven am. There's a greater than fifty percent chance that there'll be a terrorist attack or a planned attack in Australia in the next year. That's the reality behind the head of Azio's decision recently to upgrade the terror threat level to probable. So the need for all states and territories to be working hand in hand for the federal government is greater
than ever. But that's not what's happening. The states and territories have taken the unprecedented step of abandoning the Albanese government's planned counter terrorism strategy in favor of figuring it out themselves. Today, special correspondent for the Saturday paper, Jason Cotsukus on why they're doing that and what it means for our safety. It's Friday, October fourth, So, Jason, after you got this tip about a breakdown in counter terrorism planning, tell me what you discovered.
Well, firstly that yes, there had been a breakdown between the States and the territories and the Commonwealth, and that the federal government was now pursuing its own carter terrorism strategy without the States and territories. This strategy has been underway for the.
Past two years. The last one was released.
I think in February twenty twenty two. But given the fast changing nature of the threats that we face, it's really important that these carterterrorism strategies are updated to counter that evolving threat. And this decision by the Commonwealth to pursue its own strategy really contradicts this principle of national unity, and I think senior people in the government know this is a big problem. One senior Albanesi government official told me that at all levels this is a classifact.
Right, Okay, that's a federal government official saying that to you. So who is responsible then for the breakdown, the clear breakdown in this working relationship.
So I think for this particular strategy, government insiders are pointing to the Center for counter Terrorism Coordination. This is a unit within the Department of Home Affairs and they described it as being ground zero for the problems surrounding
the development of this new strategy. The same advisor told me that really there's a lack of trust in the CCTC and its leadership, and it's got so bad that key national security agencies such as AZO and the Australian Federal Police, we're no longer exchanging the vital information with the Coordination Center that is needed for it to function properly, and that this lack of trust is really undermining its
ability to lead Australia's counter terrorism framework. Another national security policy expert that I spoke to who's got very close tied the government, so that making matters worse is the fact that this department is really distracted by the issue of immigration, that immigration is burning a hole in Home Affairs.
And I think another.
Complication here is that there are rumors of a tense relationship between the head of the department and the new Minister Tony Burke.
Okay, so you have this center for counter Terrorism Coordination that's within the Department of Home Affairs and people say that it's not working as it should and then you also have what seems like a breakdown in the relationship between the minister and the head of the department. So how important is Home Affairs and what role does it play in our national security?
This is actually the heart of a ruby.
There is a big problem with Home Affairs as a department right now, and that is that there is a lack of trust from the Albanezy government towards this department. Now, I should mention I actually worked for Clara O'Neill when she was Home Affairs Minister before this reshuffle. I was her media advisor for nearly two years. And while it isn't really relevant to how I came to this story, it did give me an insight into how that department
operates and how it has changed over time. So Home Affairs as we know it it is basically the brainchild of Mike Pizzolo. Mike Pizzolo was the longtime boss at Home Affairs and he's the person who turned it into this powerful ministry, encompassing ASO, the AFP, immigration and cybersecurity.
Policy, Australia's security agencies are getting their biggest shake up in decades. The Prime Ministers announced he'll give the Immigration Minister Peter Dutton a new super portfolio with responsibility for Australia's spy Agency ASIO and the Federal Police but Labor.
He was the department head when Peter Dutton was the Minister, and he had a pretty spectacular fall from grace last year when it was found that he had acted improperly in the role as Secretary of Home Affairs.
Breaking news out of camera this morning, the Prime Minister has confirmed that Mike Bizzolo has been sacked from his role as the Home Affairs Secretary Large atreaty MACANDALT.
Now Mike Bizulo has gone, Peter Dutton is gone, but Labour are now in charge and they have been very keen to change the shape of this department. The Attorney General macdrethus in particular has been keen to lessen its power. First they took the AFP out of Home Affairs and put it under the control of the ag and then they removed ASIO too, also putting it back in the
AG's portfolio. So that really just leaves immigration, cybersecurity policy and national security as the big things that Home Affairs does. And I think the big problem is that if you are responsible for national security but you don't also have oversight of AZO and the AFP, that's a recipe for
a communication breakdown. And you know, one of my key sources for this story told me, and i'll just quote this person from the point of view of the States, it's a frustration with the Commonwealth and particularly Home Affairs over the way this strategy has been developed, which has been backwards and forwards, on again, off again, that sort of thing, and I think eventually the States and territories just thought, well fuck it.
Coming up after the break Australia's threat level and how the States and territories should be working with the Commonwealth. So, Jason, you've been reporting on the troubles at Home Affairs and how that relates to this extraordinary decision states and territories have made to essentially go their own way when it
comes to planning for counter terrorism. This seems like it could become a big problem when you take into account what we're hearing from Asio about possible threats to our national security.
Well, it's more important than ever for the States and Commonwealth to be on the same page, especially after the Director General of Security, Mike Burgess recently raised Australia's national terrorism threat level from possible to probable.
We are seeing an increase in extremism. More Australians are being radicalized and radicalized more quickly, More Australians are embracing a more diverse range of extreme ideologies, and more Australians are willing to use violence to advance their cause.
At the time, Mike Burgers said that asio's decision to raise the threat level reflected the degrading security environment.
The threats are becoming harder to predict and identify. The drivers of dalization for events, extremism are growing and interacting in ways we've not seen before.
A threat level of probable means that, in asio's assessment, there's a greater than fifty percent chance of an onshore terrorist attack or terrorist attack planning occurring within the next twelve months, and Mike Burgess said that we are seeing increase in extremism and that more Australians are being radicalized and radicalized much more quickly.
Okay, So given that, then how should the federal government and state governments be working together on this? What would it look like if this was going well.
Yeah, it's a great question. And I spoke to Lydia Khalil about this. She's the program director for Transnational Challenges at the Lowe Institute, and she told me that while it's often the case that these high level documents tend to be removed from the general publics awareness, they are
incredibly useful for helping governments prioritize programs and spending. Now, the main argument for a national counterterrorism strategy that is fully inclusive of state and territory governments is based on the fact that not only are state government law enforcement agencies the first responders when it comes to terrorism incidents, but they are crucial when it comes to identifying people who are displaying worrying behavior early on in their lives,
whether that be through secondary schools, psychology support programs, countering violent extremism programs, these are all things that are run by the states, and, as a national security policy expert told me, the people who are conceiving ideas linked to violent extremism, who are joining these movements actually don't often come to the attention of law enforcement through security processes.
They come to their attention through education, health and other programs that are all run by the states and territories. So you must be hardwired with the states and territories. You cannot have a commonwealth counter terrorism strategy.
The notion of.
Going it alone is absolutely nuts.
Okay. So there's this sort of looming disconnect between the state based agencies who actually in practice identified terror threats and then the federal government, who I suppose have the resources to act on those threats. So did you talk to the states about this, about why they won't take part in what the Commonwealth is proposing.
Yes, I did.
I spoke with the New South Wales Minister for Police and counter Terrorism, Yasmin Kutley, who told the Saturday Paper that the forthcoming counter terrorism strategy is a Commonwealth led strategy which all states and territories, including New South Wales, are involved in. She said, look, we all work collaboratively and will continue to do so on this very important issue. So I think, yeah, that sounds great, but I think what it really means is that this is a commonwealth strategy.
That's what one government advisor who I read that quote out to told me, and that person said, this is not a national strategy because the States don't want to be part of it. They are being consulted on its development, but they have not signed on to it. And that's why this strategy will not be called a national counter terrorism strategy. It's going to have this title of being a Commonwealth counter terrorism strategy. Victoria's Minister for Police, Anthony Carbines,
did not respond to requests for comment. I spoke to them quite early in the week, Minister Carbine's office, and they initially sam keen on providing a comment, but by Thursday afternoon they decided that wasn't wise.
And I think it's worth noting.
That almost all the state and territories are run by labor governments and the Commonwealth can't even get labor government agencies and labor governments across the line.
Yeah, it's telling so other than calling it a quote unquote clusterfug do you have a sense from anyone senior in the federal government about how they are thinking about this and what they might do about it.
Well, because this proposal to release a catecterism strategy without the States has not yet gone to Cabinet, so there's no formal government decision yet to go down this path. A senior government official told me that it was it's quite possible that the Prime Minister and other members of Cabinet's National Security Committee remain unaware that there is a problem, or even whether Tony Burke himself was even fully up
to speed with what's happening inside his department. But I think there's a big political risk here which has to be considered because if a major terrorist incident was to occur after Asio has raised the terrorism threat level from possible to probable, and this government has been found not to have put in place a proper national canterterrorism coordination strategy, then the Prime Minister Anthony Alvinezi is going to cop the blame for that from the opposition and Peter Dutton
and Opposition Home Affairs spokesman James Pattison, they're going to be all over this.
Jason, thank you so much for your time.
Thanks Ruby, great to talk.
Also in the news today, advocates say they're concerned about some of the new restrictions on how NDIS participants can spend their money that have come into effect the federal government has released lists detailing what people can and can't claim with costs including rent, fertility treatments, gaming therapy and
animal therapy not available. NDAs Minister Bill Shorten said the update would help return the scheme to its original purpose and ensure it wasn't paying for supports that should be covered by Australia's other care systems or shouldn't be covered at all. And Foreign Minister Penny Wong is urging Australians to take any available route out of Lebanon, with the government confirming it has secured five hundred extra seats on commercial flights for Saturday. There are estimated to be fifteen
thousand Australians currently in Lebanon. The announcement comes as Israel has renewed its bombardment of the capital Beirute, with air strikes yesterday, killing at least six people. Seven Am is a daily show from Schwartz Media and The Saturday Paper. It's hosted by me Ruby Jones and Daniel James. It's produced by Shane Anderson, Zultanfetcho and Zaya Tung. Our technical producer is Atachus Bastow. We're edited by Chris Ngate and Sarah McPhee. Derek Jensen is our editor in chief. Our
mixer is Travis Evans. Our theme music is by Ned Beckley and Josh Hogan of Envelope Audio. That's all for this week. Thanks for listening.