During his address at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, a leading Washington foreign policy think tank, Senator Brandis spoke about the tension between protecting civil liberties and combating terrorism using surveillance.

He said that as the minister responsible for Australia’s homeland security, the more intelligence he read about the capacities of terrorists, the more he believed governments had the responsibility to use surveillance even at the expense of some personal privacy of their citizens.

He said intercepting and analysing global communications was “at the heart of the global counter-terrorism response”.

But he said that during what he called the “post-Snowden environment”, data interception and collection were more controversial than before.

“Some, usually those with a better informed appreciation of the capabilities and danger of sophisticated modern terrorism, would wish for fewer limitations on intelligence gathering in the name of public safety,” he said.

“Others most commonly, those who do not bear responsibility for the protection of the public, and who have the luxury of approaching the question from a largely philosophical or legalistic perspective, argue that there should be much wider limitations.”

Senator Brandis said it was crucial that as criminal and terrorist networks grow, the capabilities and powers of security and law enforcement agencies must also evolve, along with oversight of those agencies.

The Australian government was determined that its national security agencies were given the resources necessary for that, he said.

Senator Brandis said that the close collaboration between Australia, the US, Canada, Britain and New Zealand under the controversial “Five Eyes” arrangement remained critical, and during a short question and answer period after the speech he described the agreement as “very satisfactory indeed”.

He was also asked to respond to the United Nations assessment that Australia’s immigration detention policies breached international law. Senator Brandis said he was aware that “one individual” in the United Nations had come to that conclusion, but said the policy had prevented drownings by disrupting people smuggling.

He dismissed one of the policy’s critics, University of Sydney law professor Ben Saul, as a polemicist.

At the start of the event, Senator Brandis was introduced to the audience of about 100 by the group’s president, John Hamre, who described the senator as a true intellect, remarking on his dual responsibilities as Attorney-General and Minister for the Arts.

Dr Hamre described how, on meeting Senator Brandis, he asked him “How the heck do you become attorney-general and the head of the arts in a country, and he said, ‘Well I get to do real work during the day and I have something to look forward to at the end of the day.’ ”