A radical reorganisation of national security agencies, such as the creation of a US-style Department of Homeland Security, is not necessary because existing arrangements are working well, experts and former officials say.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Fairfax Media has confirmed with government sources that two of Australia's major security agencies, the Australian Federal Police and ASIO, have told senior members of the Turnbull government they do not support such an amalgamation.
A majority of the permanent members of the powerful National Security Committee of cabinet are also understood to oppose the move, including Foreign Minister Julie Bishop, Defence Minister Marise Payne and Attorney-General George Brandis.
Ms Bishop and Senator Brandis spoke publicly against the idea when it was raised in 2014 under the then-prime minister Tony Abbott, and it is understood their positions have not changed. The ministers' offices were contacted for comment.
Top experts said there was no compelling reason for such a dramatic overhaul, after Fairfax Media reported the Turnbull government was considering creating a super-department like that set up in the US after the September 11, 2001 attacks.
Peter Varghese, former head of both the Department of Foreign Affairs and the Office of National Assessments, said if there had been "an obvious deficiency" then it would make sense to look at alternatives, but the present system "works pretty well".
"I don't think there's a compelling reason to look at a radical change," he said.
Mr Varghese said a super-department at the federal level would not necessarily improve co-ordination with state agencies, which came under scrutiny for instance after the Lindt Cafe siege.
"If you are looking at federal-state relationships, I'm not sure a department of homeland security would be a solution," Mr Varghese said.
Ric Smith, a former Defence Department head and senior diplomat who led a review of homeland security in 2008, said a large, new department would not necessarily improve co-ordination and carried its own risks of increased lethargy.
"I recommended against this [one large department] in 2008 because I considered that maintaining smaller, fully accountable, more nimble organisations that are thoroughly well-joined up was a better way to go," he said.
"That remains my view. The emphasis has to be on ensuring they are well-connected."
Peter Jennings, a former senior Defence official and now executive director of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, expressed a similar view, saying the Turnbull government should take a conservative approach to any changes.
"What's broken?" he said. "I don't get the impression that co-ordination on counter-terrorism is a problem right now. I think our system is working very well."
Under the homeland security plan that is under consideration, agencies that deal with national security, including ASIO and the Australian Federal Police, would be taken out of the Attorney-General's portfolio and instead fall under the new super-department that would be responsible for border security, domestic counter-terrorism and federal law enforcement. It would be comparable to Britain's Home Office or the US Department of Homeland Security.
Sky News quoted an unnamed Turnbull government minister who warned public support for Australia's spy agencies would "collapse" if Immigration Minister Peter Dutton were put in charge of the amalgamated super-agency.
The plan is being pushed by Mr Dutton and the secretary of his department, Mike Pezzullo, Fairfax Media understands. Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull on Tuesday sidestepped a question about the overhaul.
A less radical alternative would be to alter cabinet portfolio responsibilities, perhaps creating a senior minister for national security and counter-terrorism.
But to take this responsibility away from the Attorney-General could cause difficulties, given the Attorney-General as the nation's first law officer signs ASIO warrants and provides oversight of their sometimes extraordinary powers. Several past reviews have recommended against this.
Australia has had four incidents defined by the government as terrorist attacks since September 2014 when the alert level was raised to "probable". Over the same period, 57 people have been charged as a result of 25 counter-terrorism operations.
