Matter of Public Importance

National Security

House of Representatives · Tuesday 3 March 2026

Official Hansard for this day (APH) · Read this debate on OpenAustralia

At a glance

The debate centred on whether the Albanese government was facilitating the return of ISIS sympathisers to Australia. Opposition members argued that the government was passive and complicit in allowing these individuals to return, citing passport issuance and meetings with NGOs as evidence of assistance. Government members maintained that they were not repatriating anyone, were following security agency advice, and that any returns were self-managed by individuals exercising their legal rights. The opposition introduced legislation to criminalise assistance in such returns, which the government criticised as flawed and unconstitutional.

Outcome

The debate concluded without a vote, as it was a Matter of Public Importance.

Summary in reported speech - not a transcript. AI-generated, so check the official record before quoting.

How the debate unfolded

Opened the debate

Andrew Hastie (Canning) (Liberal Party) Liberal

Hastie argued that the government was actively assisting the return of ISIS sympathisers, citing secret meetings with Save the Children and the issuance of passports by a political supporter. Hastie contended that the government was lying or incompetent for failing to use temporary exclusion orders to prevent these returns, despite having the legal power to do so. Hastie emphasised the threat posed by radicalisation, referencing the Bondi attacks and the atrocities committed by ISIS, and called for a complete ban on the return of those who betrayed Australia. Hastie also criticised funding provided to an association linked to Iran's former leader, suggesting it supported militant political Islam.

Government response

Julian Hill (Assistant Minister for Citizenship, Customs and Multicultural Affairs) ALP Bruce

Hill denied that the government was assisting in the repatriation of ISIS-linked individuals, stating that the government's position was clear and longstanding. Hill argued that the opposition's claims were based on falsehoods and that the government followed the law and security agency advice. Hill pointed out that the opposition's private member's bill was flawed, as it would criminalise airline staff and aid workers rather than the fighters themselves. Hill also noted that male fighters had returned under the previous government and that the current legal framework was established by the coalition.

Opposition response

Ben Small (Shadow Assistant Minister for Electoral Matters) Liberal Forrest

Small argued that the government was obstructing transparency and failing to protect national security by not using temporary exclusion orders. Small highlighted the atrocities committed by ISIS and the risk of radicalisation within Australia, particularly following the Bondi attacks. Small criticised the government for holding secret meetings and for not acting decisively to prevent the return of individuals who had supported terrorist organisations. Small supported the introduction of legislation to close loopholes and prevent third-party assistance in repatriation.

Luke Gosling (Solomon) (Australian Labor Party) ALP oppose

Gosling described the opposition's debate as dishonest and unethical, asserting that the government followed security agency advice and the law. Gosling stated that one individual had been issued a temporary exclusion order and that further orders would be made if advised by agencies. Gosling criticised the opposition's private member's bill as incompetent and full of holes, arguing that it did not address the actual security risks.
Alison Penfold (Lyne) (National Party) Nationals oppose

Penfold argued that the government's position was a betrayal of Australian values and security, particularly in the wake of the Bondi attacks. Penfold contended that the women and children involved were not helpless but had made conscious choices to support ISIS. Penfold urged the government to use all available powers, including temporary exclusion orders and citizenship rescission, to prevent their return and to support the opposition's legislation.
Claire Clutterham (Sturt) (Australian Labor Party) ALP support

Clutterham stated that there was no government plan to repatriate individuals from Syria and that the government was not providing assistance. Clutterham emphasised the importance of following security agency advice and the law, noting that ASIO had been well-funded and given expanded powers. Clutterham confirmed that a temporary exclusion order had been issued for one individual and that the government would act on further advice if necessary.
Tony Pasin (Barker) (Liberal Party) Liberal oppose

Pasin argued that the government was indifferent to the return of ISIS sympathisers and was softening public opinion on the issue. Pasin detailed the atrocities committed by ISIS and warned against reintroducing such extremism into Australia. Pasin supported the introduction of legislation to criminalise assistance in the return of these individuals, framing it as a critical national security issue.
Julie-Ann Campbell (Moreton) (Australian Labor Party) ALP support

Campbell criticised the opposition for engaging in political theatre rather than serious national security management. Campbell argued that the opposition's bill was flawed and would criminalise innocent workers such as pilots and aid workers. Campbell asserted that the government followed the law and security advice, and that the opposition's actions were driven by disunity and a desire to mimic far-right politics.
Leon Rebello (McPherson) (Liberal National Party) LNP oppose

Rebello argued that the government was failing to provide clarity and honesty regarding the return of ISIS-linked individuals. Rebello cited evidence of government involvement, including passport issuance and meetings with NGOs, and criticised the policy of self-managed returns. Rebello called for the use of existing powers and supported the coalition's bill to require ministerial authorisation for any assistance in repatriation.
David Smith (Bean) (Australian Labor Party) ALP support

Smith reiterated that the government was not assisting in the repatriation of individuals from Syria and was following security agency advice. Smith noted that the legal framework was established by the previous government and that the opposition's bill was flawed and would criminalise innocent parties. Smith emphasised the dangers in Syria and the government's commitment to acting on security advice to protect Australians.