This might be desirable for managing a coherent national security policy or for acting quickly, but it can easily suck oxygen out of an open policy process, limit other parliamentary voices and, on occasion, other ministerial voices. First, the Prime Minister’s authority in relation to national security continues to grow. The states are vital in protecting critical infrastructure.Īside from custom and convention, the dynamics of parliamentary involvement in national security continue to be shaped by four powerful realities of Australian political life. ![]() In natural disasters, it is the states that have primary responsibility. In counterterrorism, Joint Counter Terrorism Teams (JCTTs) consist of officers from the Australian Federal Police (AFP) and state/territory police, and work with the AFP and the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO). The states have an interest in the role of the Australian Defence Force (ADF) in domestic counterterrorism, countering violent extremism and natural disaster response. Many national security problems now directly impact on the states. ![]() Broadly, national security covers public policy concerning foreign relations, defence, intelligence, and relevant facets of counterterrorism, immigration and border protection. First, let me turn to national security and the parliamentary landscape.Ĭonstitutional convention declares that the power to make Australia’s national security policy is firmly in the hands of the executive branch of government. In this paper I will offer some suggestions for strengthening and deepening parliament’s engagement with issues of national security, and why this should not be left entirely to the Prime Minister and the leaders of our defence and intelligence agencies.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |