Mr DREYFUS (Isaacs—Attorney-General, Minister for Emergency Management, Minister for the Public Service and Integrity and Special Minister of State) (14:43): What a disgrace this opposition is. They are a disgrace because they seek to make a political plaything out of national security. We know that they are seeking to make a plaything out of national security because of this question. Mr Pyne: Speaker, on a point of order: in spite of the ham overacting, the minister was asked a very serious question about what action he took about national security. He has to answer the question and you should make him do so. The SPEAKER: Order! Everyone will sit down. The Attorney-General has the call and will be relevant to the question. Mr DREYFUS: Thank you, Speaker. I was briefed by the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation on 24 April this year in relation to this matter. I say again that the ongoing attack on our national security agencies by this opposition is outrageous. It is further indication that the only interest that this opposition has in national security is to use it as a political football. And rather than second-guessing our security agencies, rather than attacking our security agencies, which is what they are seeking to do, rather than second-guessing the briefings that they receive on our national security activities, they should explain how their cuts to the bone and their cuts to national security would affect the national security of our country. The SPEAKER: The Attorney-General will return to the question. Mr DREYFUS: The recent review of the administration and expenditure of our security agencies and our intelligence agencies, tabled just last Monday by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, found that when it comes to visa security and to security checking the joint parliamentary committee was: … satisfied that the current regime for visa security assessments is the correct one. The fact is that this government has increased the resources that ASIO has to meet an increasing caseload. ASIO is managing those resources in an effective and efficient manner and it does this by determining, through a triage process, which cases should undergo a full security assessment. I want to quote someone else. This is what the Director-General of ASIO said at the recent Senate estimates hearing: In the circumstances— this is the Director-General of ASIO— I would submit that the triaging process is the most effective and efficient way of enabling the greatest resources to be applied to the greatest potential risk. He went on to say: With a properly managed risk management system you can reduce the risk very considerably by focusing on real problems. If the opposition is saying that it knows how to manage national security assessments better than ASIO, then it should say how it would do it differently and what it would cost. It is very clear I cannot and will not comment on individual cases, but I would say it is important to note that the individual in question has been in detention at all times since he arrived in Australia. (Time expired)