Political Leaks, Unpopular Legislation and Fighting Terrorism

I was in Melbourne this week when news of the arrest of the alleged terrorist conspirators hit the airwaves. It would appear John Howard was vindicated for his conveniently timed news that there was trouble brewing and a legislative change was needed. A lot of conservative commentators thought so.

But was he?

Apparently the authorities who were monitoring the activities of the alleged conspirators were less than impressed by JWH's very public revelations.

At the highest levels of the NSW Police, there was serious concern that the Prime Minister's remarks and the media frenzy they provoked would tip off the Pendennis suspects and compromise the operation.

This begs the question why JWH thought he needed to broadcast the news when he already had agreement from the Labor opposition that they would pass the amendments.

Howard went to bed that night knowing he'd tied up support for his amendment. The next day, just before question time, he called his extraordinary press conference announcing he had "specific intelligence" and police information which gives "serious concern about a potential terrorist threat".

Surely, in the light of the sensitive investigations that were happening at the time the whole legislative thing could have been done quietly?

Did JWH jeopardise the police operation for political ends, to divert attention from the universally hated IR changes?