What if they decide the Aboriginal Tent Embassy poses a threat?
'Domestic violence' is not defined.

Trudy

THE AGE
Anger at emergency plan
  
EXCLUSIVE

By PAUL DALEY
DEFENCE CORRESPONDENT 
CANBERRA
Monday 21 August 2000

Serious conflict between police and soldiers could result
from new legislation giving the Federal Government
sweeping powers to deploy troops to the states, Canberra
has been warned.

The legislation - timed to be in place for next month's
Olympic Games and the World Economic Forum in
Melbourne - would give the Federal Government legal
discretion to deploy troops, without consulting the states, to
protect "Commonwealth interests" even if there was merely
a threat of violence.

The Age has learnt that the Victorian and New South Wales
governments strongly oppose the legislation, arguing in
previously unreported submissions to a Senate inquiry that it
unnecessarily intrudes
on states' rights.

In a submission to the inquiry, Victorian Premier Steve Bracks has
expressed
irritation that the Commonwealth did not consult Victoria on the bill,
"which I find
concerning given that the bill directly affects the states' roles and
responsibilities
when responding to terrorist and emergency scenarios".

The legislation - Defence Legislation Amendment Bill 2000 - proposes
that the
Commonwealth would have legal authority to unilaterally deploy troops to
the states
and territories to free hostages, detain suspects, erect barricades and
search and
recapture buildings when "domestic violence occurs".

It is believed that the Federal Government is keen to have the
legislation in place in
time for the World Economic Forum Asia-Pacific Economic Summit 2000,
which
runs from September 11 to 13 in Melbourne. Protests are threatened at
the forum,
following the rowdy demonstrations that at last year's World Trade
Organisation
meeting in Seattle.

Mr Bracks said in his submission: "Confusion and conflict could arise
between state
agencies and the Defence Force, as the boundaries between the
jurisdictional powers
of Commonwealth and state lack clarity. It is unclear how powers such as
the ability
to erect barriers and issue directions affecting the flow of traffic
will affect the ability
of a state's police and emergency vehicles such as ambulances or fire
trucks to attend
an emergency."

Under sections 51 and 61 of the Constitution, the Commonwealth can
already deploy
troops to the states, but critics claim the proposed legislation wrongly
codifies that
power and does not adequately specify the threats it is designed to meet
or include
adequate safeguards.

The Labor Party has foreshadowed broad amendments to the legislation so
that it
includes greater safeguards - including enforced Commonwealth
consultation with the
states before troops are deployed - when the bill returns to the Senate
next Monday.

Australian Greens Senator Bob Brown will oppose the legislation.

In another submission to the inquiry, Victoria Police's acting Deputy
Commissioner
Peter Nancarrow said "there is no demonstrated need for the legislation"
and that
"legislation should not be enacted which gives the Commonwealth power to
intervene
in the affairs of the state without the consent of that state".

"The proposed automatic power to provide a military intervention where
`Commonwealth interests are threatened' represents an unreasonable
intrusion on the
rights of the states," he said.

"It is not appropriate that the first a state government might be aware
of a
deployment of troops is when they actually arrive."

Mr Nancarrow said the legislation did not make Defence Force personnel
adequately
accountable to the criminal justice system "when their actions exceed
acceptable
limits".

In a submission on behalf of NSW Premier Bob Carr, the NSW Cabinet
Office
expressed concern that the legislation "may operate to override the
National
Anti-Terrorist Plan" - a scheme involving state and Commonwealth law
enforcement
resources designed for the Olympics.

"The plan involves consultation with relevant states at all stages
throughout the
call-out process," the NSW Cabinet Office said.

"The bill, however, contemplates unilateral Commonwealth action, without
any state
consultation or agreement." 
-- 
**********************************
'Click' to protect the rainforest:
Make the Rainforest Site your homepage!
http://www.therainforestsite.com/
**********************************
------------------------------------------------------
RecOzNet2 has a page @ http://www.green.net.au/recoznet2 and is archived at 
http://www.mail-archive.com/
To unsubscribe from this list, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and in the body
of the message, include the words:    unsubscribe announce or click here
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=unsubscribe%20announce
This posting is provided to the individual members of this group without permission 
from the
copyright owner for purposes  of criticism, comment, scholarship and research under 
the "fair
use" provisions of the Federal copyright laws and it may not be distributed further 
without
permission of the copyright owner, except for "fair use."

RecOzNet2 is archived for members @ 
http://www.mail-archive.com/recoznet2%40paradigm4.com.au/

Reply via email to