Director-General's Address
Attorney-General's Department - Staff Function
16 August 2006
Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I will be pleased to take questions at the end.
Over the past year the threat of terrorism from the broad al-Qa'ida network has continued to be the defining feature of the security environment in a number of countries, including Britain, Canada, Egypt, India, Indonesia, the United States and Australia.
At its simplest, over the past year ASIO has had two key challenges:
to ensure we continue to deliver on our mandate to provide advice to government on security threats to Australians and Australian interests to enable the
prevention
of harm; and
to negotiate a period of unprecedented growth.
Any organisation having to cope with a period of rapid growth while continuing to deliver operational outcomes would find the task demanding enough.
When the organisation concerned is a security intelligence agency and the deliverables essentially involve preventing harm to Australia and its interests, the challenges become more acute.
The world of security intelligence will never be one in which there is complete knowledge.
Dealing with the known security threats is difficult enough.
But the need to identify and respond to the 'unknowns' and the unexpected sources of threat brings into sharper focus the seriousness and complexity of the task.
The post 11 September world of security intelligence and counter-terrorism has undergone a fundamental transformation with more people in more agencies focussed on the threat of terrorism.
While our collective capability to prevent terrorist attacks from occurring or, where necessary, manage the consequences of an attack has increased, the nature of the threat we face has not been static.
The events in London that unfolded on 9 August highlighted another menacing dimension to the threat.
And they reinforced further the requirement on all of us to adapt and refine our approach to the problem to ensure that what we do remains relevant and effective.
The British experience in July 2005 and in August 2006 also emphasised the absolute importance of staying ahead of those who would do harm, including in large-scale catastrophic attacks.
Even with highly professional and capable security and law enforcement authorities in Britain in July 2005, a group of suicide bombers was able to plan and conduct deadly attacks without warning.
The recent British Intelligence and Security Committee report on the London bombings commented on the sheer scale of the problem the British agencies faced and their capacity to cover it.
The committee noted that if more resources had been in place sooner, the chance of preventing the 7 July attacks would have been greater.
Indeed British authorities had disrupted planning for other attacks before they could be carried out.
But even with additional resources there can be no guarantees that it will be possible to stop all attacks.
The alleged planning in the United Kingdom for large-scale coordinated attacks using liquid explosives that were intended to defeat security measures, underlines the persistence of those who would do harm.
And it underlines the necessity for ASIO and others to be creative and imaginative, as well as energetic, in undertaking our work.
By definition, preventing harm to Australians, wherever they are, requires anticipating the behaviour of those seeking to carry out terrorist attacks.
Canada's experience further underlines the extent and pervasiveness of the threat to Western countries from extremists who would seek to conduct deadly attacks against innocent civilians.
In June 2006 Canadian authorities arrested individuals, including juveniles, who were taking steps toward conducting a terrorist act.
Our understanding of the magnitude of the problem of extremism, including from unexpected quarters, has increased substantially.
But the identification of future extremists who have been fully integrated members of the community prior to becoming radicalised will continue to be a complex matter.
Future extremists will continue to learn from the experience of those who have come before them and refine their own actions accordingly, including how to avoid coming to the attention of the authorities.
This learning process is aided by the amount of information that is available publicly and modern communications, particularly the Internet, which makes extremist literature readily accessible and easily disseminated.
Through the Internet, those espousing hate can have a vast, anonymous audience to whom they can spread their rhetoric.
The Internet also provides a source for anyone wanting to find information on anything from bomb-making to recipes for poisons.
Another dimension of the work of ASIO that preceded my appointment as Director-General but which continues to increase is our involvement in judicial matters, particularly in relation to counter-terrorism proceedings.
In this regard I am encouraged by ASIO's close and productive working relationships with the
Attorney-General's Department;
Australian Government Solicitor;
Commonwealth Department of Public Prosecutions; and
Law enforcement agencies.
Countering the threat of terrorism is not something that can be done effectively by any one agency. It requires a collaborative, whole-of-government approach in Australia and good cooperation internationally.
As the Attorney-General has said publicly, the 'unfinished canvas' of legislation will continue to evolve to meet the reality of the security environment.
ASIO and the Attorney-General's Department have worked well together in developing the current suite of legislation and we will continue to do so in the future.
Of course, ASIO involvement in the judicial sphere has brought with it a number of challenges for the way in which ASIO goes about its business and protects its officers, capabilities and methods.
The importance of protecting the identity of ASIO officers in this context is not always readily apparent to others.
But it goes to the heart of protecting ASIO's ability to continue to operate against subjects of investigation who are increasingly adept at masking their activities in clandestine and deceptive ways.
These few examples serve to illustrate the multi-faceted and complex nature of the role of Director-General of Security and the challenges facing security and intelligence agencies here and abroad.
They also are a very stark reminder that the risk-management decisions and prioritisation of investigative tasks that ASIO has to make every day can have life and death consequences.
Let me turn now to the parallel challenge for the leadership group of ASIO, not just me as Director-General - growing the Organisation in a planned and coordinated manner so it remains an effective and capable security intelligence service now and into the future.
It is important to note at this point that while ASIO's resources certainly had been stretched since 2001, it was not an organisation in crisis or one which needed radical corrective action.
The recommendations of the
Review of ASIO Resourcing
, undertaken by Mr Allan Taylor AO, were accepted by Government in October last year.
ASIO already has grown to around 1110 staff - almost double what it was five years ago.
This growth in staff will be complemented by strengthening capability in all areas relevant to ASIO's functions, including increasing technical capability.
The growth that has occurred so far has been planned and systematic and future growth will be managed carefully over the next five years.
All our growth targets are on track.
Taking on so many new people so quickly imposes stresses and strains on corporate structures and the people already in the Organisation.
With an unavoidable large experience gap, one aspect that will continue to be a particular focus is the comprehensive accountability regime of checks and balances that is in place and working well.
Importantly, this internal accountability regime is not just driven by external oversight
It is embedded in the culture of ASIO and is something that we consciously reinforce at all levels.
I mention the cultural dimension to this accountability framework to provide reassurance that there are mechanisms and values in place to ensure that ASIO will continue to operate strictly within the legislation and with due regard to human rights and civil liberties.
And I remain confident that the external oversight and accountability frameworks, particularly the Inspector-General and the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security will continue to provide assurance that this is the case.
I will conclude on this note.
The last 12 months has been an interesting and challenging time to be head of ASIO and I expect this to be the case for the duration of my time in this position.
The work of ASIO will continue to be central to the wider national effort to protect Australians and Australian interests from a range of complex and lethal threats.
As ASIO grows in size its capability to fulfil its functions will continue to increase.
ASIO also will continue to adapt and refine its analytical and investigative methodologies to ensure we remain effective as a security intelligence agency that retains the trust of the Government, the Parliament and the Australian community.