Susan Templeman (Macquarie, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I welcome the Australian Border Force Amendment (Protected Information) Bill 2017. I welcome it alongside the legal, medical and aid organisations and an organisation in my own community, the Blue Mountains Refugee Support Group, who are looking forward to the improvements it will bring to existing law relating to the transparency that we have in Australia's offshore detention system.

As a former journalist, I've been particularly concerned with the Turnbull government's lack of transparency in the operation of offshore detention centres. My community has always been an extremely outspoken one when it comes to issues of refugees and asylum seekers. I've received hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of letters protesting not only the conditions of Australia's offshore detention centres but also the secrecy that the Australian offshore detention regime has been shrouded in.

I'm pleased to see that this parliament is taking bipartisan steps—albeit modest ones, by the Law Council's assessment—towards ensuring that Australians know what is happening in offshore detention, that refugees and asylum seekers are afforded freedom of political communication in line with the common and international law that we operate under and that individuals working on Manus and Nauru are able to more freely speak about what they see. This bill tangibly means that individuals who've been involved in Australia's offshore detention system as contractors or employees of the DIBP, such as Save the Children, social workers, psychologists, doctors and lawyers, will generally be able to speak more freely about their experiences and what they've seen with less fear of prosecution.

The bill narrows the type of information which, if recorded or disclosed, would make a person liable to prosecution under section 42 of the act. It repeals a very broad phrase, 'protected information', and gives a more precise and specific definition. For instance, it defines that 'information the disclosure of which would or could reasonably be expected to prejudice the security, defence or international relations of Australia'—such as high-level data and information on human trafficking exchanged with other countries—is covered. It specifies that information 'which would or could reasonably expected to cause competitive detriment to a person', including commercially sensitive information about commercial entities, such as names of suppliers or prices paid for goods, is now defined.

This bill begins to stop the government's total suppression of so-called whistleblowers and staff speaking out about Australia's offshore detention regime, and that is a good thing. The Chairperson of the UN Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture, Malcolm Evans, said:

This is why we think independent monitoring is so important—transparency is one of the greatest protections here. Where there's a lack of transparency, naturally there will be concerns things are not as they ought.

As a former reporter, I would say transparency is vital, and this is a good step at improving the level of transparency in offshore detention. Under the current legislation, you can't guarantee that whistleblowers would have been spared from retaliation. I'm particularly pleased that the bill has a retrospective commencement date, meaning that those who've spoken out in the past may well fall under the concessions in this bill.

The Turnbull government's mismanagement of offshore processing centres and welfare and support contracts has been the subject of two scathing Australian National Audit Office reports, so, clearly, greater transparency is very welcome. My community was outraged, rightly so, at the release of the Nauru files, where 26 former Save the Children workers on Manus and Nauru detailed what they saw and described allegations of sexual assault and self-harm in the Nauru detention centre. One of the workers stated:

You feel you can't talk about it even though you know you should talk about it.

The files, which the government shrouded in secrecy, included reports of genital mutilation against young women, people sewing their lips shut, self-immolation, sexual violence and gross mishandling of incidents by private contractors.

In September 2016, Labor initiated a Senate inquiry to investigate these allegations of abuse, self-harm and neglect, because the Turnbull government had failed to act. The government's total inaction for the past 3½ months on the chair's report conclusions and recommendations is extremely disappointing. Let's remember the Australian Border Force Act has previously been used by the Abbott government to attempt to prosecute Save the Children staff after they revealed serious allegations of abuse of women and children. In future, with this amendment, I hope this means that can't happen again.

In looking at the bill before us today, I note that in total, there were 13 submissions to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee Senate inquiry into the bill, generally welcoming the amendments to narrow the scope of information which should be protected and offer greater clarity about the types of information that can be publicly disclosed, a belated step but certainly a step in the right direction.

I would like to take a moment to talk about the anticipated amendment that has been foreshadowed by the shadow minister—that is, the minister, not the secretary of the department, should have the power to prescribe which information is protected. It should certainly be the case that the minister should be personally responsible and accountable for any decision to protect from disclosure any additional immigration and border protection information not already covered by the definition. We certainly look forward to that amendment being moved and we would support that amendment.

Having said those things about the bill, there are other things that this issue raises. We must not forget that this government has systematically maligned asylum seekers and refugees and mismanaged offshore processing in Manus Island and Nauru. Whether we liked it or not at the time Manus Island and Nauru were set up as regional transit processing facilities. They were never meant to be what they've become, a place of indefinite detention, because the government failed to secure third-country resettlement options. No-one in this chamber can possibly feel that people should still be on Nauru and Manus Island four years on. The Prime Minister and immigration minister should be exploring every possible alternative.

I note that New Zealand Labour leader, Jacinda Ardern, will renew the country's offer to take refugees from Manus Island if she is successful in the election later this month. It is not enough to assume that the US agreement is the sole answer, but this minister has tried to shirk responsibility wherever he can. This is, after all, the minister who said that Australia is 'not responsible' for the hundreds of asylum seekers on Manus Island after the Papua New Guinea's Supreme Court ruled that the detention of asylum seekers on Manus Island is illegal. The minister needs to listen to the UNHCR, which last month said that PNG and Nauru remain unsuitable as places of resettlement, not least because of the lack of medical and psychological services. In fact, it is the provision of medical services that goes to the heart of the concerns my community raises with me—the impact that indefinite detention is having on people. The Blue Mountains branch of Grandmothers Against Detention of Refugee Children have been extremely vocal in fighting for fairness and humanity in our offshore detention centre, as have Justice For Children. I have with me a petition of more than 600 signatures that has gone to the Prime Minister, collected mainly in the Blue Mountains, but from as far afield as Dubbo and Bondi. These grandmothers remind the government that we are signatories to international agreements which need to be respected.

Another group in my electorate wanting to see more humane treatment of people is the Uniting Church. Members of the Springwood Uniting Church last week sent me a petition addressed to the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, expressing their outrage at the minister's decision to withdraw income and accommodation support from up to 370 babies, children, women and male asylum seekers brought to Australia from Nauru and Manus Island on medical grounds. These are some of the most vulnerable people in our community, with more than 20 of the women victims of sexual assault. The minister is making their struggle and their recovery worse by now impoverishing them and making them destitute and homeless. The government's decision to cut financial support and housing to these asylum seekers is a new low, even for them. By purposefully making people destitute, making them homeless, the Turnbull government can only be exacerbating the very health conditions they were originally transferred to Australia to be treated for. I can't fathom why these same people have not been allowed to apply for resettlement in the US. why have they deliberately being excluded from that agreement? The minister has failed to really explain why.

I encourage the congregation of Springwood Uniting to keep raising issues like these. The Blue Mountains branches of GetUp! and Amnesty International have also communicated their concerns and have joined the chorus of almost a thousand of my constituents who have taken the time to personally contact me about the treatment of refugees and asylum seekers. In fact, the only other issue that has garnered more correspondence in my electorate is the government's mishandling of the National Broadband Network—that speaks volumes for how appalled so many in the community are.

People and groups in my community, such as the Blue Mountains Refugee Support Group, have been at the forefront of providing assistance to asylum seekers and refugees arriving in Australia. They welcome this amendment to the Australian Border Force Act. The Blue Mountains Refugee Support Group is a group made up of grassroots members of my community who provide practical assistance to those in detention at Villawood and those who are released from detention. They provide financial support to asylum seekers and refugees in our community. They find employment for asylum seekers and they help them find homes. When people are given work rights they often get a job through the Blue Mountains Refugee Support Group. They rely on the goodwill of people in the community to assist them to furnish the homes that they find. They provide English lessons and tutors, and they provide friendship and support for a group of people who are often demonised and isolated. They provide lifts to medical appointments, they help them navigate complex government bureaucracy and much more.

There is also a refugee cricket team, Oceans 12. One of their matches earlier this year was on Anzac Day, with the Navy cricket team. The comment from the captain of Oceans 12 was that it was strange to be playing cricket against a Defence Force team as most of the players were more used to being afraid of defence forces in their own countries rather than being seen as equals. This is the sort of community building that the Blue Mountains Refugee Support Group does, and I'm proud to be a member of it. I will always consult them about amendments to bills and gauge their response.

The Blue Mountains Refugee Support Group has welcomed this bill as a good first step in increasing transparency in Australia's offshore detention system. They will continue to fight for fair and humane treatment of asylum seekers and refugees, and I will stand alongside them.

See this speech in context