Wilson Tuckey (O'Connor, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

The Australian Citizenship Amendment (Citizenship Test Review and Other Measures) Bill 2009, on the face of it, might appear to be quite unimportant legislation, just a matter of some technical amendments to address issues that arise from time to time. But there is a lot more in it than that. There are fundamental issues involved, which the opposition has identified and which it addresses in its amendment, moved by Dr Stone, to the motion for the second reading:

That all words after “That” be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:“the House defers consideration of the bill until the following have occurred:

(1)    the Government redrafts the bill so that it provides a ministerial discretion for those who cannot meet the residency requirements but whose citizenship can be demonstrated to be in the national interest; and

(2)    the Government redrafts the bill so that it provides a ministerial discretion for awarding citizenship to offshore workers who cannot meet the residency requirements, but who can demonstrate significant hardship or disadvantage.”

Those matters have been detailed by the shadow minister for immigration and no doubt will be addressed in the third reading debate. There is also, within those more detailed amendments, a prohibition on the minister of the day delegating his or her rights under these particular special arrangements. Circumstances of this nature constantly occur in this parliament because ministers are unprepared to deal with controversial issues—and some arise from these amendments, particularly the ones relating to elite athletes—or, more particularly, because it is a lot of hard work. One could possibly say that it is a great way for a lazy minister.

This is fundamental. You get elected to this parliament to govern. Our processes give certain people more right to govern than others by way of the executive or frontbench or however you want to refer to it. But if you are not prepared to do the work, if you are not prepared to put your name on the line in terms of public opinion by taking decisions under the discretion provided to you by legislation, then you should not be in the job. It has been well known for a long time that the position of Minister for Immigration and Citizenship is a very hard job. It is one where you are under pressure every day. The parliamentary secretary arrangements, introduced by the Hawke government and now becoming virtually a part of this place, are designed to relieve some of that workload. But that does not alter the fact that the minister has the power of discretion as provided by the act and as is wished to be maintained by the coalition, the opposition, and that is how it should be.

It has been demonstrated over the years that, when authority is delegated, the Public Service has not always dealt with that in the appropriate manner. There has been a very broad interpretation of some of those powers, resulting in the entry of individuals who otherwise would not have been able to become citizens of Australia. In this House, it was the case that the mistakes of ministers could be aired, and there is a history of ministers feeling obliged to resign for their mistakes or even, in years gone by, the mistakes of the public servants who assisted them. Today, of course, we know that it does not matter what question is asked in this place; there will be no detailed answer. There will be no attempt whatsoever—

See this speech in context