Laurie Ferguson (Reid, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Multicultural Affairs and Settlement Services) Share this | Hansard source

It is ridiculous that the opposition is suggesting that the minister should receive and make decisions on something as valuable as citizenship from anyone in the world who wants to put an application in. Doesn’t the opposition think it is ridiculous that anyone in the world now has a pathway to citizenship even if they do not have a visa or have never come to the country?

Indeed, this amendment would create an industry for vexatious citizenship applications that the minister would need to consider. Anyone could put in an application for citizenship, which would have to be personally seen by the minister, and there would be absolutely no restriction on who could apply. As long as you had a visa, you would not even have to be in Australia.

To accept the opposition amendment would undermine the very integrity of the process and the longstanding criteria for assessing whether a migrant is eligible for citizenship. Australian citizenship is too valuable and important to be the subject of the personal opinion of the minister of the day alone. What one minister thinks appropriate will vary from minister to minister. I think, having long-term experience in this portfolio, we have seen some very sorry uses of ministerial discretion in this particular portfolio area. In the last parliament, we know this was the subject of public debate and widespread commentary.

Also, by moving these amendments, the opposition have completely contradicted themselves. They supported the government in closing off ministerial discretion to children under 18 because it was being misused by a group of people who wanted to prolong their stay in Australia yet they propose to create another power which would allow the same people to apply to the minister for citizenship under a different provision.

The amendments that I have introduced by way of the special residence requirements by people engaged in specified activities or a particular kind of work provide a specific legal framework and clear eligibility requirements, which will ensure that the special residence requirement is used appropriately and only applied to the group of people for which it is intended.

Furthermore, the proposed amendments provide a legitimate pathway to citizenship for people who are engaged in particular kinds of work which requires them to travel frequently outside Australia and who will not be able to meet the general residence requirement as long as they engage in that particular kind of work.

As for the interjection about our caucus, quite frankly, it does not get too much coverage in the media compared to every meeting of the opposition party. Having been at the caucus meeting, I can tell her there was no debate whatsoever about this matter.

See this speech in context