Royal Commission of Inquiry into security agencies

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has announced a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the country’s security agencies, in response to the Christchurch terror attacks.

RNZ:  Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announces details of inquiry into security services

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has announced details of a Royal Commission of Inquiry into security agencies after the Christchurch mosque attacks.

She said, while New Zealanders and Muslim communities were still grieving, they were also quite rightly asking questions about how the terror attack was able to take place.

The inquiry will look at what could or should have been done to prevent the attack, Ms Ardern said.

It will look at the Government Communications Security Bureau (GSCB), the Security Intelligence Service (SIS), police, Customs, Immigration and any other relevant agencies, Ms Ardern said.

The Government Communications Security Bureau (GSCB) and the Security Intelligence Service (SIS) have been criticised over an apparent lack of monitoring of right-wing extremists.

It may be that there was little or nothing that could have been done to protect against this month’s attacks, but it is good to check out the performance of the security agencies, the GCSB, the SIS and the Police. It should ensure that the chances of a repeat are lessened.

 

14 Comments

  1. Alan Wilkinson

     /  25th March 2019

    Agree, worth looking at but chances are as a lone wolf it wasn’t detectable until it happened. Focus probably has to be on prevention and deterrents.

    • Duker

       /  25th March 2019

      Nonsense ….he had his links emailed to various groups including The PMs office as he set out in his car.
      he would have been constantly online in the last few months- but of course the GCSB werent looking at white supremacists – nada , zilich , zero- because ….?

      • Corky

         /  25th March 2019

        ”Nonsense ….he had his links emailed to various groups including The PMs office as he set out in his car.”

        Crap. Here’s an analogy: It takes my uncle ten miles to slow his super tanker down before approaching port.

        ”He would have been constantly online in the last few months- but of course the GCSB weren’t looking at white supremacists – nada , zilich , zero- because …?”

        Yeah, the intelligence community has unlimited resources? You target the usual suspects first. That is common sense. White dudes talking crap without group affiliations probably didn’t raise a red flag.

        • Duker

           /  25th March 2019

          Yeah we found from the Dotcom case about their resources…spying NZs even though it was illegal. Now it was changed to do so we now it was just spending their resources on large companies protection as those companies too lazy to do so themselves…
          How many white supremacists are there in this country anyway…

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  25th March 2019

            Dotcom wasn’t expecting to be taken out or take anyone else out. This guy was. He would have been using all the technologies that make detection and tracing hard if not impossible. Also he would have just been one of a bunch of nasty talkers and he wouldn’t have said anything to suggest he was going to act until he did.

      • harryk

         /  25th March 2019

        ‘because ….?’

        Intelligence agencies aren’t self tasking. It’s the job of Govt of the day to task them. A political failure and an intelligence failure are not the same thing. Ministers of course are always keen to kick the blame can down the ladder. The terms of reference will show us if the pollies are deflecting from their own responsibility.

  2. Patzcuaro

     /  25th March 2019

    It should be a Royal Commission of Inquiry into why we didn’t have more stringent firearms laws. The attack happened because the Australian was able to legal obtain the weapons in New Zealand.

    • Duker

       /  25th March 2019

      A truck stop waitress thought she knew better than a bi partisan parliament committee

      • High Flying Duck

         /  25th March 2019

        A fish and chip shop worker thought legislating to allow online licencing without face to face meeting requirements was the way forward…
        What’s your point?
        Firearms were not an issue until they were.

        • Duker

           /  25th March 2019

          That was driven by the police – you do know politicians can’t interfer in police operational issues like this- and it wasn’t legislation , it was just paperwork signed by the Governor General with no parliamentary process.

          • Duker

             /  25th March 2019

            That should be truck stop waitress and welfare queen at the ATM….what was it now…a house…a degree..all while getting the DPB….imagine single mum’s are still now more reviled than Muslims were.
            Can’t say much more about the DPB years as media outlets have lawyers letters on file spelling out some legal warnings…

  3. NOEL

     /  26th March 2019

    What’s the average price for a Royal Commission? 28 million?
    Nah cheaper ways surely.

    • Duker

       /  26th March 2019

      This sort isnt a multi year , 100s of submssions , dozens of lawyers etc RC .
      It only needs to be 3 months tops and get into the the two spy agencies only, say 2 mill

  1. Royal Commission of Inquiry into security agencies — Your NZ – NZ Conservative Coalition