MEMBER for Indi Cathy McGowan has come under fire for not backing a new law supported by the federal government and opposition aimed at protecting Australia from a terrorist attack.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
Ms McGowan told parliament she would not support the Australian Citizenship Amendment Bill 2015 and sided with the Greens in not supporting the legislation which strips citizenship from dual citizens involved in terrorist conduct overseas or are convicted of a terrorism offence in Australia.
Immigration and Border Protection Minister Peter Dutton said Ms McGowan had previously failed to support a tranche of national security legislation.
“Ms McGowan needs to explain to the people of Indi why she is soft on terrorism,” Mr Dutton said.
“Most Australians support the Coalition's measures to do all it can to prevent terrorist activity in Australia and to stop those who commit terrorist acts overseas from coming back to Australia.
“That’s what this legislation aims to do, yet the member for Indi does not think it is worth supporting.
“We have seen over the last year frightening acts of terrorism in Australia and witnessed even worse overseas.
“After such disturbing events it is more important than ever to put in place legislation to safe guard Australians.”
Ms McGowan said her opposition was based on her belief the government must pass strong and reliable laws and not be subjected to legal challenge.
“Our processes and procedures work to ensure that we have the highest possible standards of government and the best outcomes for the people of Australia,” she said.
“Retrospective laws make the law less certain and reliable, and a person who makes a decision based on what the law is today will be disadvantaged if the law is changed retrospectively."
Ms McGowan said Sydney University constitutional law professor Anne Twomey and constitutional lawyer George Williams have raised concerns about the retrospective aspect of the Bill.
"The shadow Attorney-General raised concerns with the constitutional viability of the Bill in his speech on the Bill on November 12," she said.
"The initial Bill was roundly criticised by legal and constitutional experts.
"It raised significant questions relating to human rights, statelessness, citizenship and the limits of executive power.
"Many of the criticisms have been addressed.
"A number of necessary amendments were made based on joint committee on intelligence and security recommendations."
