The new move by the Rudd Government to eliminate the warrant requirement for searches is a disgraceful assault on civil liberties from a government that really should know better.

Since September 11 governments around the world have been amassing increasing numbers of counter-terrorism powers, from the Patriot Act in the United States to the battery of laws passed here by the Howard Government. Where these have proved inapplicable we have seen abuses of other powers, as in the Haneef case.

These new powers, established in the name of national security and frequently operating with very little to no oversight or public accountability, have largely been accepted as a necessary evil, although grounds certainly do exist for a thorough parliamentary review of those powers already in place.

The power to engage in arbitrary break-and-enter searches of private homes without warrant, however, represents a step too far in the powers being amassed by the executive and our police forces, especially where we have seen a susceptibility within the police force, in such cases as the Haneef affair, to government interference in alleged terrorism offences.

If the Government has evidence to suggest that an individual is planning a terrorist attack, and that a search of their home is required, they should put that evidence before a judge, get a warrant and then do the search.

I fail to see any need for these powers unless either the Government has insufficient evidence or does not trust the judiciary.

As I am pretty sure we can trust the discretion of Australia's judges, and because searches should not be conducted without probable cause, the Government should not have these new powers.

Joshua Smith, Gordon

After listening to Attorney-General Robert McClelland outline Labor's overhaul of our security laws, all I can say is it is a case of more of the same with the razor-sharp edges rounded off it to make it look like we are moving away from a police state.