Rearrangement

David Shoebridge

Pursuant to contingent notice standing in the name of Senator Waters, I move:

That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent me from moving a motion to provide for the consideration of a matter, namely a motion to give precedence to a motion to remove the Migration Amendment (Removal and Other Measures) Bill 2024 to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee.

I've seen some remarkable moments in politics, but last night the evidence of the government, the minister and the senior officials from Home Affairs about this bill was extraordinary. It was extraordinary in the lack of information they had about what on earth is urgent in this bill, who the bill will apply to and what the potential scope of the minister's powers will be. You would think that a competent government which is seeking to ram legislation through in less than two days would at least have a credible argument about why it is urgent. But, astoundingly, neither the minister nor the secretary nor any senior official could come up with a credible reason why this legislation was being rammed through in less than two days. Not one credible reason.

It wasn't as though they weren't given opportunities. The opposition asked repeatedly, 'Please give us a reason for saying why this is urgent.' There was no credible answer from Home Affairs. When we asked which categories of visa-holder this law would apply to and what the numbers were, we got confused and bemused looks from Home Affairs. They had no answer to even the most basic questions about who the bill would apply to. They think it will apply to people in detention; maybe it will apply to some people who were the subject of last year's High Court case, but they would investigate that over the next two months; it could apply to other people on bridging visas, but they can't tell us who. And they want us to ram it through as though it is urgent.

Rarely have I seen more collective incompetence than we saw from Home Affairs and the government last night. And this is the big political moment. This is apparently the big political play from Labor this week: they have got this tough-on-refugees, tough-on-asylum-seeker laws. They're beating their chests. This is their big political play, and it was pathetic. It was worse than pathetic. It was actually grossly negligent in the incompetence that they showed.

Then we asked who they had consulted on the bill. Had they consulted any NGO? Had they consulted the UN High Commission? Had they consulted anybody outside government on a bill that they want to ram through with no public consultation at all. The incredible answer was 'nobody'. They have spoken to nobody about this cunning plan of theirs. It turns out, when you put the microscope on their cunning plan, it's not very cunning at all.

This is the lowest, most base level of public policy being driven by the Albanese Labor government for only one reason. That became so clear last night. This isn't about keeping Australia safe. This isn't about some credible responsible to a crisis in migration. This is a pure political play that's unravelling as we watch. This is about Labor trying to outflank the coalition and move to the right of the coalition in a bill that they seem to have just made up in some long late-night drinking session and then brought to the parliament. You couldn't make this stuff up. This is meant to be a government that's now run by adults, but this was like some sort of kiddie's crayon drawing being brought into parliament and then defended by embarrassed officials and half-briefed ministers. That's what we got last night.

It would be negligent of this Senate to pass this bill on the half-baked assurances, incomplete information and close to riddles we got last night from Home Affairs. It would be negligent for us. So we are moving that the provisions of the Migration Amendment (Removal and Other Measures) Bill 2024 be referred immediately to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 24 June 2024. I'd love to just move that we just whack it straight in the bin, because that's where it should go—actually, pop it in recycling. We're Greens. Pop it in recycling. But that's where this should go. Go back home. I say to the government: don't pass Go; go directly to jail with this bill.

Tim Ayres

What we've seen is the usual overblown rhetoric from Senator Shoebridge. We've seen the usual Woollahra sophistry that we see from Senator Shoebridge. What we're about to see is what happens when Senator Shoebridge and Senator Cash, symbolising what's really happening here—what's really happening here is when Mr Dutton's Liberals and Nationals and Mr Bandt's Greens decide that they are going to put partisan interest over the national interest. What we're seeing is the most right-wing extremist Liberal Party in Australia's history and this trot-out bit down here. When they get together in their usual student politics exercise of putting their own partisan interest over the national interest, you're about to see the result. If Senator Shoebridge is right and the government's effort to put the national interest here first unravels today, what the people of Australia will see is that the old days, when the Liberal Party of Australia and the National Party understood that their job was to put the national interest before the partisan interest, are over. Those days are over. This is a show that doesn't understand the national interest. It doesn't understand it.

You see politics, particularly parliamentary politics, is about character, fundamentally. It's about character. What we're about to see here is this show failing the character test absolutely. Mr Dutton, the most extreme leader of the Liberal Party in its history, teaming up with Mr Bandt and Senator Shoebridge, the most Trotskyite edition of the Greens we have ever seen, to absolutely put before the national interest the partisan interest. If only national security were about words and bluster. If only it were about partisan positioning. After the last nine last years of torpid, lazy, complacent partisan government, we would be safer than we've ever been, but the truth is that reforming this migration system matters. Protecting the integrity of the immigration system matters. The Dutton opposition, after Mr Dutton's administration of these questions—

Michaelia Cash

Your failures.

Tim Ayres

Yes, Senator Cash, Minister Dutton at the time failed absolutely on NZYQ. In 2018, Mr Dutton ignored the legal advice that was provided to him. And why do you think he did that? Because there would have been the usual narrow, self-interested, partisan-interest consideration. Mr Dutton had a bit of a think about it and thought, 'Whose problem is this really? Somebody else's problem down the track. What's my job here? To position for myself.' That's what Mr Dutton did in 2018. That's what the Morrison government did in those sad sordid years of maladministration, of weak staffing, of underresourcing, of weak political leadership on these questions. That's what they did from 2019 to 2022. And we're about to see on full display in this chamber what happens when you get a group of right-wing political extremists with no regard for the national interest and a bunch of Trots cooking up a solution to this that they recognise as in their partisan interest.

What is proposed in the parliament here by the Albanese government is a measure which adds a set of additional tools in a sensible way that improve the character, the quality and the integrity of the migration system. What happens here is that we now have an extension where, according to Senator Birmingham and Senator Cash, it's not important. An additional 43 days before a Senate inquiry reports—that is time that is going to tick away while precisely nothing happens, because Senator Birmingham has lost the capacity— (Time expired)

Michaelia Cash

Quite frankly, Seinfeld could not have scripted the last 24 hours of the Albanese government! To say that the last 24 hours has been chaotic is an absolute understatement, and that is why the coalition is supporting the motion that is being moved by the Australian Greens. We will, of course, be amending it, and I foreshadow an amendment. Senator Ayres talked a big game. I give him that. He talked a big game. That's fair enough. He talked a big game. He does that well. But let's look at what Senator Ayres actually said when you break it down.

He talked about those of us failing a character test. Senator Ayres, I put to you that the Prime Minister fails the character test on these bases: he fails the test when it comes to scrutiny; he fails the test when it comes to transparency; he fails the test when it comes to accountability. Why do I say that? Look at what the Prime Minister said to the Australian people. The Australian people should reflect on what the Prime Minister told them before the election. Before the election, when Mr Albanese was in promise-making mode—post the election, we're in a very different mode—he told the Australian people this: if he and the Australian Labor Party were elected to office, he and his ministers would deliver transparency, integrity and accountability in everything they do. Well, I have to say, the last 24 hours of this government have shown that that is blatantly false. Actions in this case, Prime Minister, speak louder than words. Anyone who has not seen the footage of Minister O'Neill this morning running from the press in the press gallery, running away—all they wanted to ask her were questions in relation to this legislation, the first one being, as Senator Patterson opened last night with: why is this legislation urgent?

I would have thought the Australian people would think that is a reasonable question, given we are being asked to rush it through the parliament today under a guillotine—and, for those who don't know what a guillotine means, it means we have, as the opposition and the Australian Greens, no opportunity on behalf of the Australian people to scrutinise this legislation. So one would think, to a simple question by Senator Patterson last night in committee and the journalists today to Senator O'Neill asking why this legislation is urgent, Senator O'Neill and the officials last night could clearly articulate a reason. This is where the problem lies, because they couldn't. They said to us, 'Trust us.' The last time the Australian people trusted the Albanese government, they were let down miserably.

When it comes to secrecy, when it comes to a lack of transparency, when it comes to a lack of accountability, which is what this motion moved by the Australian Greens goes to—that is, giving the Australian Senate on behalf of the Australian people the opportunity to properly scrutinise this legislation, because the government has failed to articulate any sort of urgency associated with it—Dennis Shanahan, in his article of 25 March—quite frankly, he sums it up: 'Labor's transparency vow lies bleeding from a thousand cuts.'

This is the reality for the Australian people: the Prime Minister and the Attorney-General trumpeted before the election that if you voted for them you were heralding in a new era of transparency, but you all need to wake up. The Australian Labor Party run the Senate and House of Representatives like a shop floor. That is it. They're the union in control, and guess what? The rest of us don't have a say. They will use any form of tactic to silence us. And in silencing us—Mr Albanese, shame on you, because you silence the Australian people! That is the history of the Australian Labor Party: 'Nothing to see here.' If you bully people enough, if you intimidate them enough, they will eventually capitulate and fall over. Well, guess what? We are not going to do that. We are going to stand firm on behalf of the Australian people. We will support this motion and we will ensure that this bill gets the proper scrutiny it requires because, as I said, you've said it's not urgent.

Long debate text truncated.