A five year review period for the new anti-terrorism laws is not good enough, according to the Australian Democrats.
"This is precisely the type of policy and legislation that requires regular review and assessment," Democrats Attorney-Generals Spokesperson Senator Natasha Stott Despoja said.
"The Governments proposals are extreme and unprecedented.
"We should not be handing over civil and human rights without significantly greater protections and safeguards. The United Kingdoms Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 upon which the Government has apparently based its control order proposals requires review every 12 months.
"The State and Territory leaders have agreed to laws they have not even seen.
"The Government has failed to provide sufficient detail regarding how many of these measures, such as the proposed control orders, would operate.
"We need to know exactly what constitutes a terrorist risk and exactly what criteria would govern how the AFP would exercise these new powers.
"In relation to preventative detention powers there is a disturbing lack of detail and a great deal of ambiguity. What, for example, does the Prime Minister mean by a terrorism situation and would such a situation exist even without a specific threat?
"The Government must reveal exactly what it means by judicial review and what oversight powers will provide for accountability and transparency.
"By agreeing to the detention powers, the Premiers have allowed the federal Government to circumvent constitutional safeguards against non-punitive detention," Senator Stott Despoja said.
