|
senate vote 2014-12-04#14
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2014-12-11 15:41:13
|
Title
Bills — Migration and Maritime Powers Legislation Amendment (Resolving the Asylum Legacy Caseload) Bill 2014; in Committee- Migration and Maritime Powers Legislation Amendment (Resolving the Asylum Legacy Caseload) Bill 2014 - in Committee
Description
<p class="speaker">Kim Carr</p><p>by leave—I move opposition amendments (1) to 13) and (20) to (26) on sheet 7636 together:</p><p class="italic">(1) Clause 2, page 2 (table item 8), omit the table item.</p>- The majority disagreed that [temporary protection visas](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporary_protection_visa) (TPVs) should be taken out of the bill. That is, they wanted to keep TPVs.
- ### Bill's main idea
- The bill's main idea is to speed up the management of [asylum seekers](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugee#Asylum_seekers)' claims and support the Government's policies that stop asylum seekers from coming to Australia by boat (for example, by intercepting the boats and turning them around). It also re-introduces [temporary protection visas](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temporary_protection_visa) "because the Government is of the view that those who arrive by boat without a valid visa should not be rewarded with permanent protection" (see the [bills digest](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1415a/15bd040))
- ### Human rights issues
- Some of the changes made by the bill may go against Australia's [international law](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_law) obligations. Particularly Australia's [non-refoulement](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-refoulement) obligations, which stop Australia from sending people to places where their lives or freedoms are threatened. Australia has these obligations because it signed up to the [Convention relating to the Status of Refugees](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_relating_to_the_Status_of_Refugees), the [International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Covenant_on_Civil_and_Political_Rights) and the [United Nations Convention against Torture](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Convention_against_Torture).
- For example, the bill will insert a provision into the *[Migration Act 1958](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_Act_1958)* that says that Australia’s non-refoulement obligations are not relevant to removing people who are not citizens and don't have a visa. The [bills digest](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1415a/15bd040#_Toc401816905) explains that this change would mean courts won't be able to stop the Government from removing people just because it is against Australia’s non-refoulement obligations. In other words, the Government wants to decide how to apply those obligations by itself, without any potential judicial oversight.
- For more about which changes may go against these obligations and how, see the [bills digest](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1415a/15bd040).
- ### Background to the bill
- The title of the bill says it is about "resolving the asylum legacy caseload". This refers to the asylum claims made by [asylum seekers](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refugee#Asylum_seekers) who arrived by boat without a visa between August 2012 and December 2013 and who have not been sent to be processed on [Nauru](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nauru_detention_centre) or [Manus Island](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manus_Island_Regional_Processing_Centre). The Coalition Government says this caseload of asylum claims is the result of the previous Labor Government's policies.
- During the 2013 election campaign, the Coalition said it would address this caseload and the changes made in this bill are part of their effort to do this.
- More information on the background to the bill is in the [bills digest](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1415a/15bd040#_Toc401816905).
<p class="italic">(2) Schedule 2, item 1, page 24 (lines 14 to 16), omit paragraph (c) of the note.</p><p class="italic">(3) Schedule 2, item 1, page 24 (line 17), omit "or temporary".</p><p class="italic">(4) Schedule 2, item 2, page 24 (line 23), omit "and temporary".</p><p class="italic">(5) Schedule 2, item 3, page 25 (line 3), omit paragraph 31(2)(f).</p><p class="italic">(6) Schedule 2, item 5, page 25 (lines 19 to 22), omit subsection 35A(3).</p><p class="italic">(7) Schedule 2, item 5, page 25 (line 24), omit "and temporary".</p><p class="italic">(8) Schedule 2, item 19, page 28 (after line 19), after subitem (1), insert:</p><p class="italic">  (1A) A valid application for a Protection (Class XA) visa made before the commencement of Division 1 of this Part and not finally determined immediately before that commencement is, at and after that commencement, taken to be, and always to have been, a valid application for a permanent protection visa.</p><p class="italic">(9) Schedule 2, item 20, page 29 (line 13), after "class", insert "(other than a protection visa)".</p><p class="italic">(10) Schedule 2, item 20, page 30 (lines 1 and 2), omit "protection visas and any other classes of visas", substitute "any classes of visas (other than protection visas)".</p><p class="italic">(11) Schedule 2, heading to Part 4, page 35 (lines 1 and 2), omit "and temporary protection visas".</p><p class="italic">(12) Schedule 2, item 26, page 35 (lines 13 to 15), omit paragraph (c) of the note.</p><p class="italic">(13) Schedule 2, item 26, page 35 (line 16), omit "or temporary".</p><p class="italic">(20) Schedule 2, item 53, page 49 (lines 18 to 20), omit "Temporary Protection (Class 18 XD) visa by the operation of paragraph 2.08F(1)(b) of these Regulations (as inserted by Division 2 of that Part)", substitute "protection visa by the operation of item 19 of that Schedule".</p><p class="italic">(21) Schedule 2, item 53, page 49 (lines 21 to 23), omit the note.</p><p class="italic">(22) Schedule 3, item 1, page 50 (line 12), omit paragraph 31(3A)(c).</p><p class="italic">(23) Schedule 3, item 6, page 52 (line 2), omit paragraph 46(5)(c).</p><p class="italic">(24) Schedule 3, item 7, page 52 (line 14), omit paragraph 46AA(1)(c).</p><p class="italic">(25) Schedule 3, item 12, page 55 (table item 3), omit the table item.</p><p class="italic">(26) Schedule 3, item 12, page 56 (line 2), omit "and temporary".</p><p></p><p>The opposition opposes schedule 2 in the following terms:</p><p class="italic">(14) Schedule 2, items 29 to 31, page 35 (line 24) to page 42 (line 16), to be opposed.</p><p class="italic">(15) Schedule 2, item 37, page 44 (lines 11 to 14), to be opposed.</p><p class="italic">(16) Schedule 2, Division 2, page 44 (line 15) to page 46 (line 11), to be opposed.</p><p class="italic">(17) Schedule 2, items 40 and 41, page 46 (lines 16 to 21), to be opposed.</p><p class="italic">(18) Schedule 2, item 43, page 46 (lines 25 to 28), to be opposed.</p><p class="italic">(19) Schedule 2, items 45 to 50, page 47 (lines 4 to 24), to be opposed.</p><p>These amendments go to the question of TPVs. The Labor Party remains—I have stated this position very clearly—absolutely opposed to TPVs.</p><p class="italic">Senator Brandis interjecting—</p><p>Sorry, what was that? Here we go! Lord Brandis wants to cut in. Lord Brandis, who sits there in his slothful manner, wants to cut in and wants to question whether or not we have real conviction on this matter.</p> <p class="speaker">David Bushby</p><p>Mr Chairman, I raise a point of order. Senator Carr knows that he needs to refer to senators in this place by their correct titles.</p><p>The CHAIRMAN: Yes, he does indeed. I again remind senators to refer to other senators by their correct titles.</p> <p class="speaker">Kim Carr</p><p>Under the Howard government there were 11,000 TPVs issued. Of those, 9,800 were made permanent. This demonstrates, on the historic record, that overwhelming numbers of people on TPVs deserved to have permanency. These sets of amendments put our long- and well-held view of the failure of this TPV regime, and I would urge the Senate to support them.</p> <p class="speaker">Michaelia Cash</p><p>The government will not be supporting the amendments.</p> <p class="speaker">Sarah Hanson-Young</p><p>The Greens will be supporting these amendments. We are very clearly on the record saying that temporary protection visas are only given to people who have already been found to be worthy and needing protection. It simply adds more pain and more suffering to people and does not allow refugees to rebuild their lives in this country. It does not allow them to put roots down, start contributing properly, allow their kids to go to school and know that they will become Australian citizens and proud members of our Australian community. Temporary protection visas last time around, under John Howard, were a fundamental failure of policy. It is why they did not work. It is why, under John Howard, they had to be quietly reversed for person after person after person. They did not stop the boats. All they did—</p><p class="italic">Senator Bernardi interjecting—</p><p>The CHAIRMAN: Order! Senator Hanson-Young, please resume your seat. Senator Bernardi, I would kindly ask you to resume your own seat.</p><p>Of course these amendments to remove and to delete temporary protection visas are important. Under the John Howard government, temporary protection visas encouraged women and children onto boats. Temporary protection visas kept genuine refugees in limbo in the community for years, suffering unnecessarily. They do not allow people who are genuine refugees who need protection, who deserve protection and who want to contribute to our nation the ability to rebuild their lives or to have certainty around what their kids are going to do and what jobs they are going to take. Temporary protection visas were a fundamental failure of policy last time they existed, and they will be again. That is why the Greens support deleting them from the bill.</p><p>The CHAIRMAN: The question is that the amendments be agreed to.</p>
|