The latest revelations from the Prime Minister over ISIS and its adherents here raise some interesting questions about the value and effectiveness of the succession of anti-terror laws the country’s seen passed over the last decade.

We have a Terrorism Suppression Act, first passed in 2002 and then amended in 2007, which gives authorities wide ranging powers to deal with those that engage in, lend support to, and have financial dealings with terror groups.

We also have the 2012 Search and Surveillance Act which extended the power and scope of authorities to look into our activities, as well as changing the right to silence.

And in 2013 we had amendments to legislation governing the GCSB which allow it to now use its resources to help the police and SIS in their investigations.

Yet despite all these extensions of powers, the broadening of scope of authorities, and the extra intrusions into our privacy, not a single person has been prosecuted in our Courts since the 2001 terror attacks in the USA for terrorist related activities.

The Urewera Raids fiasco notwithstanding.

Now our Prime Minister tells us there are people in New Zealand that are associated with ISIS, have a desire to commit acts of terrorism, and that there are a small number of people under constant surveillance by our authorities.

Let’s set aside for a moment the fact John Key has given a surprisingly frank insight into the actions of our intelligence agencies and ask the fundamental question that’s staring us all in the face.

Why haven’t these people been prosecuted? What has been the point of all these additional national security laws, the ones we were told were needed for public safety, if they’re not being used? Have we sacrificed our civil liberties for nothing?

The Prime Minister has said it’s because authorities aren’t positive they have enough evidence to get a prosecution that would see these people, alleged to have terror links, locked up for long enough, and that to take action could tip them off to the fact they’re being watched.

There is logic in this. Information is the key ingredient authorities need in combating potential attacks.

Rounding up rank and file terrorist wannabes could very well eliminate an ability to keep an eye those who pose a major threat when they come along.

However some clarity is needed. If these people are the serious threat that the Prime Minister has made them out to be, and to be in favour of committing acts of terrorism surely fits within this category, then they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent.

The public deserves to know if there are those in our midst that fall within the category of evil. Political claims along these lines have to be tested and our justice system’s the place to do it.