Carter David: Terrorism Suppression Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee Third Reading 
Carter David: Terrorism Suppression Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21644] 
Hon DAVID CARTER (National) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to take a call this morning on Part 2. I just wonder whether the Associate Minister of Justice can help me with my understanding of the legislation. As I understand Part 2 it is about providing an extension of time to a schedule of organisations that have been identified as terrorist organisations. If the Minister can confirm that for me I would be grateful. I then would like him to explain to me how organisations are recognised and placed on that schedule. That is the second question I would certainly be grateful for his help with. I see he is busily digging out the original Act which will be helpful. 
 But the third and most vital point is that Part 2 extends as I understand it the principal Act’s original expiry date for the list. 
Hon Rick Barker 
: Quite right. 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: The Minister in the chair Rick Barker will then be well aware that in the original legislation the House determined that the list once developed would expire. I assume it takes considerable time to develop a list of terrorist organisations. I would hate to think that organisations doing good work around the world perhaps for humanitarian causes are inadvertently or incorrectly placed on this list. But the surprising thing to me—and I would certainly appreciate the Minister’s help on this—is that the list having been developed the original legislation has an expiry date so that at the end of 3 years suddenly that list effectively just evaporates. It seems to me a nonsense that an organisation like al-Qaeda could be placed on a schedule as a recognised terrorist organisation—and there can be no doubt— 
Hon Maurice Williamson 
: They turn good. 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: I think it will be a long long time before Osama bin Laden turns good. Keith Locke may well believe that and he is welcome to explain why he thinks Osama bin Laden might turn good. But the important thing for the Minister to explain is why the Government ever developed the notion that the original list would suddenly reach an expiry date. I would certainly appreciate the Hon Rick Barker seeking a bit of advice rising to his feet and answering that. 
The final point I want clarification on is why we are extending the date in this amendment bill that is now being rushed through under urgency to cover up the original mistake made by the Labour Government for a further 2 years only. I know that member will not be in Government or in Parliament then but why will we on the expiry date in the amendment legislation we are passing today have to look at passing another bill? These organisations are placed on the list after due diligence and a lot of hard work and we will suddenly find that they reach an expiry date after which the list effectively evaporates. It just seems to me— 
Hon Rick Barker 
: Ask your colleague next to you. 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: I have certainly taken the opportunity of asking my colleague next to me the Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith and there would be no doubt in my mind having listened to his contributions and the odd contribution from the likes of the Hon Steve Maharey last night that Lockwood Smith knows more about this legislation than anyone else in the Chamber. There would be no doubt about that. But I fail to see how the Minister can suggest that it is his responsibility to sit there not be prepared to answer questions throughout the Committee stage and expect that those questions should be satisfactorily answered by an Opposition member Lockwood Smith. If the Minister is acknowledging that he does not really understand— 
Hon Rick Barker 
: If the member had listened to Lockwood Smith’s speech he would have got the answers. 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: The Minister says I should have listened to Lockwood Smith’s speech. I was not here in time to hear it but if the Minister is really suggesting that he and Lockwood Smith should change position maybe that is the most satisfactory solution. Well that will happen shortly. But if the Minister intends to answer in that way the questions that I have legitimately raised—the Minister has acknowledged that; he says they are good questions— 
Hon Rick Barker 
: Very clear. 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: Even the Minister can understand them so they must be particularly well espoused by myself. 
Hon Rick Barker 
: Clause 22 answers your question. 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: There is no clause 22 in Part 2. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: It’s in the principal Act. 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: He is now suggesting we go back to the principal Act. Well the Minister should really explain that himself.