Key Takeaways
- The National Intelligence Community’s budget rose 31 % from $10.9 billion in 2020‑21 to $14.3 billion in 2024‑25, yet the share devoted to counter‑terrorism fell markedly.
- ASIO chief Mike Burgess said his agency is prioritising foreign espionage over domestic terror threats, echoing the observed funding shift.
- Assistant Treasurer Daniel Mulino praised the Royal Commission’s interim report and confirmed the government will implement its recommendations, but he avoided specifying new counter‑terror money in the upcoming budget.
- Five of the report’s 14 recommendations remain classified, limiting public scrutiny of opposition claims that Labor is responsible for the funding shift.
- Australia has been on a “probable” terror threat level since August 2024, but the National Security Committee did not push for a stronger counter‑terror focus during the period reviewed.
- The Bondi‑area Chanukah By The Sea attack on 14 December 2023 left 15 dead and dozens injured; accused Naveed Akram faces 59 charges, including 40 counts of attempted murder.
- The royal commission’s first public hearings begin in Sydney on Monday, where further findings and recommendations will be examined and may influence the forthcoming federal budget.
Overall Funding Increase
The National Intelligence Community’s budget rose from $10.9 billion in 2020‑21 to $14.3 billion in 2024‑25, a 31 % increase. The Royal Commission on Anti‑Semitism and Social Cohesion cited this figure while examining classified allocations across NIC agencies. Although the overall sum grew, the report cautions that the headline increase does not automatically translate into stronger counter‑terrorism capacity.
Shift Away from Counter‑Terror
Despite the nominal budget growth, commissioner Virginia Bell observed that the proportion of funding earmarked for counter‑terrorism fell “significantly” across the NIC between 2020 and 2025. The decline occurred even as total resources expanded, suggesting that money was redirected to other intelligence functions. This reallocation became a focal point of the interim report, which warned that Australia’s ability to detect and disrupt home‑grown terror plots could be compromised if the trend continues.
ASIO’s Changing Priorities
ASIO director‑general Mike Burgess told the commission that his agency is placing greater emphasis on blocking foreign espionage rather than on domestic terror threats. Burgess argued that the evolving strategic environment, marked by heightened state‑sponsored cyber and intelligence activities, demands a shift in focus. His comments echoed the funding trend noted by the royal commissioner, reinforcing the perception that counter‑terrorism is receiving a smaller slice of the intelligence pie.
Government Response
Assistant Treasurer Daniel Mulino praised the interim report as “really high quality and thorough” and reiterated the Albanese government’s commitment to implement every recommendation that applies to the Commonwealth. When pressed on whether the upcoming federal budget would contain additional counter‑terror money, Mulino declined to discuss specific programs, saying only that the government’s swift acceptance of the findings is what matters. He left the final budgetary decisions to portfolio ministers and the Prime Minister.
Redacted Recommendations and Political Debate
Five of the report’s 14 recommendations remain redacted for national‑security reasons, obscuring the full scope of the commission’s advice. This secrecy fuels opposition allegations that the Labor government is responsible for the observed shift away from counter‑terror funding. Because the classified sections cannot be publicly scrutinised, it is difficult to verify whether the alleged cuts stem from policy choices, operational necessities, or external threats. The redactions thus limit transparent debate on the issue.
Agency Autonomy vs Government Direction
Intelligence agencies normally decide where to allocate their budgets and can submit bids for extra funding when they identify emerging needs. However, the sitting government retains the authority to direct agencies toward particular priorities, effectively shaping the national security agenda. The royal commission noted that while agencies have operational discretion, the ultimate steering wheel rests with ministers, who can influence whether counter‑terrorism receives a larger or smaller share of the NIC purse.
Current Threat Landscape
Australia has been operating under a “probable” terror threat level since August 2024, a designation that signals a credible risk of attack but not an imminent one. The sustained threat level underscores the continuing relevance of robust counter‑terror mechanisms, even as intelligence resources appear to be shifting elsewhere. The ongoing risk environment raises questions about whether the current funding distribution aligns with the prevailing security assessment.
National Security Committee’s Role
The National Security Committee, the peak ministerial body that coordinates Australia’s security policy, did not advocate for a stronger counter‑terror emphasis during the period examined by the commission. Despite the probable threat level and the observed funding shift, the committee’s minutes show no push to re‑prioritise resources toward terror prevention. This lack of ministerial direction may have contributed to the agencies’ drift toward other intelligence priorities.
Details of the Bondi (Chanukah By The Sea) Attack
On 14 December 2023, a gunman identified as Naveed Akram, accompanied by his father Sajid, opened fire at the Chanukah By The Sea event in Bondi, killing 15 people and injuring dozens more. Akram has yet to enter pleas on 59 charges, which include 40 counts of attempted murder, while his father was shot dead by police at the scene. The attack shocked the nation and prompted the establishment of the Royal Commission on Anti‑Semitism and Social Cohesion to examine both the incident and broader societal tensions.
Upcoming Royal Commission Hearings
The first public hearings of the royal commission are scheduled to begin in Sydney on Monday, where commissioners will hear testimony, examine evidence, and deliberate on the interim findings. These proceedings are expected to shed further light on the funding allocations, the adequacy of current counter‑terror strategies, and any additional recommendations that may emerge. The outcomes could directly influence the forthcoming federal budget and shape Australia’s national security posture for the next several years.