Sharman Stone (Murray, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) Share this | Hansard source

I move the amendment circulated in my name:

(1)    Schedule 2, page 6 (line 1) to page 10 (line 20), omit the Schedule, substitute:

Schedule 2Amendments relating to additional categories

Australian Citizenship Act 2007

1  After subsection 21(8)

Insert:

Australian public interest

        (9)    A person is eligible to become an Australian citizen if the Minister is satisfied that:

             (a)    granting a certificate of Australian citizenship to the person would be in the Australian public interest because of exceptional circumstances relating to the applicant; and

             (b)    the applicant was not present in Australia as an unlawful non-citizen at any time during the period of 2 years immediately before the day the applicant made the application; and

             (c)    the person has met the requirements of subsection (2A).

      (10)    As soon as practicable after the end of each financial year, the Department must publish on its website and present to each House of the Parliament a list of all the persons who received citizenship under subsection (9) during the year and the reasons for the decision.

Individuals employed overseas

      (11)    A person is eligible to become an Australian citizen if the Minister is satisfied that:

             (a)    at the time the person made the application, the person is engaged in work that requires them to regularly travel outside Australia; and

             (b)    the person was engaged in that kind of work for a total of at least 2 years during the period of 4 years immediately before the day the person made the application; and

             (c)    the person was ordinarily resident in Australia throughout the period of 4 years immediately before the day the person made the application; and

             (d)    the person was present in Australia for a total of at least 480 days during the period of 4 years immediately before the day the person made the application; and

             (e)    the person was present in Australia for a total of at least 120 days during the period of 12 months immediately before the day the person made the application; and

              (f)    the person has demonstrated they would suffer significant hardship or disadvantage if they did not receive citizenship; and

             (g)    the person was a permanent resident for the period of 12 months immediately before the day the person made the application; and

             (h)    the person was not present in Australia as an unlawful non-citizen at any time during the period of 4 years immediately before the day the person made the application; and

              (i)    the person has met the requirements of subsection (2A).

      (12)    As soon as practicable after the end of each financial year, the Department must publish on its website and present to each House of the Parliament a list of all the persons who received citizenship under subsection (10) during the year and the reasons for the decision.

2  After section 22

Insert:

22A Minister’s decision—Australian public interest

        (1)    The Minister’s decision under subsection 24(1) in relation to a person who is eligible to become an Australian citizen under subsection 21(9) cannot be delegated.

        (2)    In making a decision referred to in subsection (1) the Minister must give consideration to the fact that the applicant’s becoming an Australian citizen would be of benefit to Australia.

Ministerial discretion—administrative error

        (3)    For the purposes of paragraph 21(9)(b), the Minister may treat a period as one in which the applicant was not present in Australia as an unlawful non-citizen if the Minister considers the applicant was present in Australia during that period but, because of an administrative error, was an unlawful non-citizen during that period.

22B Minister’s decision—individuals employed overseas

        (1)    The Minister’s decision under subsection 24(1) in relation to a person who is eligible to become an Australian citizen under subsection 21(11) cannot be delegated.

        (2)    In making a decision referred to in subsection (1) the Minister must give consideration to the fact that the person would suffer significant hardship or disadvantage if they did not receive citizenship.

Confinement in prison or psychiatric institution

        (3)    Subject to subsection (4), the person is taken not to satisfy paragraph 21(11)(c) if, at any time during the 4 year period mentioned in that paragraph, the person was:

             (a)    confined in a prison; or

             (b)    confined in a psychiatric institution by order of a court made in connection with proceedings for an offence against an Australian law in relation to the person.

        (4)    The Minister may decide that subsection (3) does not apply in relation to the person if, taking into account the circumstances that resulted in the person’s confinement, the Minister is satisfied that it would be unreasonable for that subsection to apply in relation to the person.

Ministerial discretion—administrative error

        (5)    For the purposes of paragraph 21(11)(g), the Minister may treat a period as one in which the person was a permanent resident if the Minister considers that, because of an administrative error, the person was not a permanent resident during that period.

        (6)    For the purposes of paragraph 21(11)(h), the Minister may treat a period as one in which the person was not present in Australia as an unlawful non-citizen if the Minister considers the person was present in Australia during that period but, because of an administrative error, was an unlawful non-citizen during that period.

3  Subsection 24(1A)

Omit “or (8)”, substitute “, (8), (9) or (11)”.

4  Subsection 24(2)

Omit “or (7)”, substitute “, (7), (9) or (11)”.

We have an extraordinary situation here. The coalition values Australian citizenship as a privilege and an honour to be conferred on men, women and children who can demonstrate a commitment to this country through embracing our values, our ideals and our beliefs and speak functional English so that they can fully participate in our parliamentary democracy, our economy and our communities. I am proud when I go to the citizenship ceremonies and see men, women and children of all nationalities who have come to Australia. They are from all races and from a range of backgrounds. They may be rich or poor, skilled or not skilled. There is a whole range of people standing there and proudly proclaiming that they agree with the values and ideals of our country and the responsibilities of citizenship. These people have served a four-year residency in Australia and have come to know and love this country.

We are concerned that this government is choosing to discount the value of the citizenship certificate, or being a citizen in this country, by simply looking at whether or not the applicant is a medal prospect. There is no way that this business can be disguised. The amendment bill that this government is putting before us may have had its words watered down a little so that it now refers to ‘a special activity’, but the only people who will be able to present to the minister for a discounted residency in order to gain citizenship are those nominated by either Tennis Australia or the Australian Olympic Committee. This is about people who may be able to win medals for Australia internationally. Shame! This is a devaluing of Australian citizenship. Australians love their sport and we are proud when one of our sportspeople stands on the podium and wins a medal for our country. But it is not a matter of a medal at all costs—and this is what this legislation seeks to impose.

Just today we have been told in the media that the Australian Olympic Committee is arranging to have Ms Borodulina, the speed skater this legislation is all about, sworn in as an Australian citizen at the embassy in South Korea. So Ms Borodulina, who is to be fast-tracked into citizenship, will not even be in Australia to gain her citizenship when this bill becomes law. Next Tuesday she will become an Australian citizen for no other reason, it would seem, than that she is a medal prospect if she becomes a member of the Australian Winter Olympics team. Shame! We do not believe Australians are that crass. We believe they honour and value Australian citizenship. So we have proposed a substantive amendment to the bill, which says no to this.

Citizenship should be treated very seriously. We agree that there may be some exceptional circumstances where it may be in the public interest for a man or woman who can contribute to Australia in an extraordinary way to become an Australian citizen even when they may not have served the full four-year residency requirement. In our amendment we have proposed that the minister should have the discretion to grant citizenship in these circumstances but the discretion would not be able to be delegated and it would be fully transparent in that, if ever such a decision is taken, the name of the person would be put before the parliament and published on the Department of Immigration and Citizenship website. The decision would therefore be transparent and the government would be responsible and accountable.

I find it extraordinary that the Parliamentary Secretary for Multicultural Affairs and Settlement Services would suggest that the minister of the day would so lack integrity that they would agree to someone who has never been in Australia, and who is of no interest to Australia, becoming an Australian citizen. I find it extraordinary that he would be so doubtful that his minister would have the integrity to exercise such a discretion. So we say quite bluntly and clearly that we cannot agree to an amendment which simply reflects the urgings of the Australian Olympic Committee and Tennis Australia. We believe we are a bigger nation than that in heart and spirit. We believe that the variety of people who step forward to become Australians is a strength—the diversity of race, background and skills. It is about the diversity they contribute to Australia—it might be as a professional or as a skilled tradesperson or as someone who is raising a family. It is not about elitism. (Time expired)

See this speech in context