Terror suspects face long evidence wait
The Age November 11, 2005,
The lawyer representing nine men facing terrorism charges says he must wait an unacceptably long time for police to provide a brief of evidence.
Mr Houda said he faced a two-month wait for a brief of evidence.
"All we have is the allegations, a summary, a fact sheet from the prosecution which really doesn't tell us that much," he told ABC radio.
"Their investigation went for 18 months, they tell us, and on the first day of court we were informed that they require up to 10 weeks to serve us with a brief of evidence, and that's far from satisfactory." - http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/Terror-suspects-face-long-evidence-wait/2005/11/11/1131578184563.html [1]

PM won't back down on terror bill
The Advertiser, 11nov05
THE Federal Government would not water down its anti-terrorism bill and has no plans to scrap sedition provisions, said Prime Minister John Howard. - http://www.theadvertiser.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,17211341%255E1702,00.html [2]

Sedition laws essentially unchanged, says PM
ABC Online November 11, 2005
Prime Minister John Howard insists the media will not be prevented from criticising the Government under parts of the proposed counter-terrorism laws. - http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200511/s1503299.htm [3]

Georgiou, Turnbull voice concerns over counter-terrorism laws
Lateline ABC, 10/11/2005, Reporter: Dana Robertson
PETRO GEORGIOU, GOVERNMENT BACKBENCHER: As the Attorney-General indicated in his second reading speech these amendments were intended to modernise the language and not to comprise a wholesale revision of the sedition laws but the fact is that the revival of a law that was either unknown or generally considered to be a dead letter has generated a great deal of concern.
DANA ROBERTSON: Mr Georgiou says it would be utterly unacceptable if the new laws curtailed freedom of expression.
PETRO GEORGIOU: It's my view the sedition provisions in this bill are problematic and require serious review by the Senate Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee.
DANA ROBERTSON: And he's not alone.
MALCOLM TURNBULL, GOVERNMENT BACKBENCHER: There has been concern expressed by many people that these laws could muzzle free speech. Let me say, Mr Speaker, that I can well understand why people would be apprehensive about these provisions. The language is very old-fashioned and the offences are difficult to follow.
JOHN HOWARD: The thrust of the new sedition laws is essentially no different from what's already there, expressed in a somewhat more contemporary form. - http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2005/s1503115.htm [4]

Suspected terrorist 'flees Australia'
NineMSN, Friday Nov 11 07:16 AEST
A suspected terrorist believed to be the owner of a burnt-out car containing a drum of chemicals has reportedly fled Australia.
Police sources confirmed the owner had fled, possibly last week, when news of the impending terrorist raids were made public, The Daily Telegraph reported.
The suspect is considered a "major target" by police. - http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=71562 [5]

Minimise fear during terrorism raids, doctor urges
ABC Online, 11 Nov 2005
Muslim doctors are calling on enforcement agencies to consider how to reduce the fear created in suburbs during counter-terrorism raids. - http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200511/s1504569.htm [6]

No end to fight over surveillance law
The Age (Technology) November 11, 2005, Boston
With each new advance in communications, the government wants the same level of snooping power that authorities have exercised over phone conversations for a century. Technologists recoil, accusing the government of micromanaging - and potentially limiting - innovation.
Today, this tug of war is playing out over the Federal Communications Commission's demands that a phone-wiretapping law be extended to voice-over-internet services and broadband networks. - http://www.theage.com.au/news/technology/no-end-to-fight-over-surveillance-law/2005/11/06/1131211938319.html [7]

UK

BBC links selection

Blair Terror Defeat
Blair says MPs are out of touch [8]
Press reaction to Blair defeat [9]
Blair defeated over terror laws [10]
[Michael] Howard calls for Blair to resign [11]
Vote defeat 'disappoints' police [12]

Analysis
Robinson's view
What are implications for Tony Blair of his first Commons defeat as prime minister [13]
Blair's potential flashpoints [14]

Background
Terror Bill: How your MP voted [15]
Q&A: What defeat means [16]
In full: The rebel MPs [17]
Point-by-point: Terror debate [18]
At-a-glance: The terror plans [19]
In quotes: Ministers and 90 days [20]

In Depth
UK terror threat [21]