ABC RADIO SYDNEY
MONDAY, 23 FEBRUARY 2026
SUBJECT: ISIS BRIDES
HAMISH MACDONALD, HOST: It is time to talk politics. Sam Maiden is here, the political editor for news.com.au. Susan Templeman, the Federal Labor MP for Macquarie. Good morning to both of you.
SAMANTHA MAIDEN, POLITICAL EDITOR FOR NEWS.COM.AU: Good morning.
SUSAN TEMPLEMAN, FEDERAL MEMBER FOR MACQUARIE: Good morning.
MACDONALD: Susan, the opposition is proposing a new criminal offence for those who help associates of terror groups return to Australia. This obviously relates to the cohort of women and children in Syria, what’s your reaction to that proposal? Because the government has said that it’s working within the limits of the law.
TEMPLEMAN: Well, part of me says yep, they want this story to keep running and to get it another front page, so you know, well done, good job Angus, but this is a complex situation and we will continue to look at what the legal constraints are and what more might be needed. Right now, we can see, and I have heard from your listeners, the real care about the children who have been caught up by shocking decisions by their parents. If there are changes that need to be made to facilitate care for those children, you know, I think your listeners are certainly indicating it’s in Australia’s best interest to be doing something there.
MACDONALD: But what do you think should be done with those children? The Prime Minister was on this programme at the end of last week saying he has nothing but contempt for these people.
TEMPLEMAN: Well, for their parents, absolutely. They went knowingly to a place where they were told not to go to and knowing the risk that they were putting their children in, those who were born and those that were unborn. So, what I am saying is you can hear that there are complex situations here. We have been really clear, we don’t want these people back in Australia, but there are also laws, passport laws and citizenship laws that mean that Australians do have access to it, And the minister was very clear yesterday, Tony Burke, that our intelligence on this group, which is not a homogenous group, is very good. And that has led to the decision to do a two-year suspension on one of the cohorts. So, you know, it isn't a black and white thing. There's not a simple thing. Seriously, is the opposition talking about criminalising charities like Save the Children? If there are things that our security agencies say need to be done to protect Australians, and after all, protecting Australians in our own country is our number one priority, then we will take advice from that. And that's been made very clear by all our ministers, Tony Burke, Michelle Rowland as Attorney-General and the Prime Minister.
MACDONALD: Sam Maiden, this is clearly a vexed issue, but in the end, isn't it inevitable some of this cohort will end up back in Australia?
MAIDEN: Well, I think it is. And my observation of this situation is twofold. One is I think that the government is being very disingenuous and tricky and relying on semantics to pretend that somehow, it's some sort of mystery surrounding these people returning and coming home. Obviously, they needed to issue them passports. Obviously, they have very deep intelligence about this cohort. They took their DNA, not even this government, I think it was the previous government and sorted out who was who about four years ago. They knew they were coming. They'd been working with the New South Wales government for some time. Now, you can have a word game about the use of the term repatriation, but the bottom line is that they knew that they were coming. Now, in terms of the coalition, I think that the coalition is proposing ideas that are legal nonsense. I think that the idea that a law to ban any group like Save the Children doing anything about basically trying to get Australian kids potentially home who are not over there of their own volition would not withstand legal challenge. And I think that the whole idea that it's very simple to not issue a passport to an Australian citizen is also something that would be very open to legal charges. So, you know, choose your fighter here. Do you want to refuse these people people a passport, end up in the courts and lose to the ISIS brides? I don't think any government wants to do that. But it's easy pickings for the coalition right now to say things like that because they're not going to be in government anytime soon.
MACDONALD: Susan Templeman, do you want to respond to the first part of that about the government being tricky with words?
TEMPLEMAN: Well, I think I'd reject the language of that sort of thing, but it is really detailed and complex with multiple acts involved and multiple ministers. And what I've heard is each minister sticking to their lane because only they have access to that information. But this is also national security stuff. So there are also constraints about what the ministers in the National Security Council are able to share. So I know as an ex-journo, I would love for them just to give chapter and verse. And I thought Tony Burke yesterday went into a lot of detail about what he had first-hand knowledge of as Minister for Immigration and Home Affairs.
MACDONALD: But does Sam Maiden have a point?
TEMPLEMAN: I think we really need to remember too that the...
MACDONALD: Can I just say, sorry, does Sam Maiden have a point about the way the government is practically handling this versus the rhetoric and the language? You know, the Prime Minister stepping up his angry rhetoric around it towards the end of the week, the government denying that it's actively repatriating, yet at the same time there's a pretty significant body of evidence that shows the practical steps that the government has been engaged in at various levels to facilitate the return if even if you're not calling it explicitly a repatriation
TEMPLEMAN: Well, I think what's clear is we are following the law because that's what we do you know we're following what we are bound to do by law.
And Sam's quite right. Otherwise, you end up in court, and you lose if you haven't followed the law. It gets considered by every decision gets considered by either a former judge or in the current legal system. So, no, I think it's sensible to have care and precision about what we can say. And there are some things that I'm sure the security agencies would be giving advice on that no one is privy to talk about.
You know, if only it was simple, and if only it were as simple as the opposition would like it. Now, when they brought back 40 ISIS fighters and partners and children, you know, they had an opportunity then to make changes if they thought that the laws were not adequate. So, you know, we are following the law, and it's very easy for an opposition to suddenly now decide that things could be better. But, you know, they didn't think that when they were in government.
MACDONALD: New South Wales Liberal Leader Kellie Sloane spoke to us here on Mornings this morning. She said the state government also needs to be more transparent about their role in this.
[AUDIO GRAB]
KELLIE SLOANE, NSW LIBERAL LEADER: If people leave our country, break our laws, betray our country and our trust, why should we be supporting measures to return them to this country we need to make sure communities in New South Wales safe, particularly at a time when social cohesion is fracturing. We want communities that are tolerant, that are respectful, that align with our values in this country. And when people are returning to our country that don't meet any of those objectives, we need to be asking questions.
[AUDIO GRAB ENDS]
MACDONALD: Sam, do you think that ultimately all of the politicians are just playing to community concern, which does exist? There's clearly some people that have a very high degree of caution about what happens if these people are back here in Sydney and other cities in Australia.
MAIDEN: Yeah, look, of course there's community caution, but I mean, you know, what is there? I'm more than willing to hear it, that the people that have been brought back have been involved in problems. Have we heard anything about that?
MACDONALD: I did ask Kellie Sloane about that this morning. She says that's a question for the state government.
MAIDEN: So in terms of the wives, right, now the government has said that they're, you know, not a homogenous cohort, which is obviously the case. Now, some of them now claim that they didn't necessarily go willingly, right? Now, I have a pretty healthy dollop of scepticism about that, right? Like, I mean, it's convenient for those women to now say that they didn't go willingly. But it's not 100% clear that that all of them knew exactly what was going on, right? Nor is it necessarily clear that some or all of them are necessarily a danger to the Australian community. ASIO has looked at these people with a very fine tooth comb, right? I would have a natural concern that they or their children could be very traumatised and sometimes that can lead to radicalisation later on, right? Like, I'm not suggesting that these people are sort of, like, going to be, you know, making egg sandwiches down at the CWA. But, like, I don't think that, like, if they were a clear and present danger to national security, ASIO would have more of them under these orders. Now, the for those orders is quite high, but not all of them are on them. And are we really going to say that Australian citizenship is something that we will throw in the bin forever if you make a decision like this at a very young age, that you can't be rehabilitated? I just don't think that is a concept that the courts are necessarily going to uphold.
MACDONALD: Sam Maiden, Susan Templeman, we know this is an incredibly complex issue. We appreciate your time, both of you, this morning.
MAIDEN: Thank you.
TEMPLEMAN: Thank you.
END
