Tim Wilson (Goldstein, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I'd like to follow on from the member for Indi and thank her for her contribution in this debate. The support for the Australian Border Force Amendment (Protected Information) Bill 2017 is broad across the parliament because everybody is concerned about making sure that we are a country that accepts people on the legitimacy of their refugee application and that everybody is treated in a just way.

The provisions included in this bill that narrow the provisions in the Australian Border Force Act are extremely important in making sure that we get the measures in the law necessary to protect people—particularly vulnerable people at vulnerable stages of life, held in custody or detention by Australian agencies or offshore—and that the policy intent of the provisions set out in the original act are fully realised. They do this by narrowing the provisions to ensure that there are protections and that secrecy or privacy of individuals who are detained is properly protected. But at the same time—as I have raised in a previous public capacity—it is to ensure that information that should be available in the public sphere, particularly around the protection of people and if there are issues around criminal behaviour against individuals, can be properly reported as part of a process to make sure the government, no matter who is in charge and no matter what instrument it is, can be held properly to account.

The provisions in this piece of legislation are relatively straightforward. They narrow the basis of the provisions within sections of the existing act to make sure that it is focused primarily on immigration and border protection information rather than simply protected information, particularly around the conduct of entrusted persons. I think everybody in this place would agree with the broad thrust and focus of this bill for that reason, because it seeks to achieve the original intention of the legislation, rather than going off and doing something different, and to address the concerns that many Australians have and have had in the past. These concerns can now be addressed by narrowing the scope and definition within the legislation.

It fits within a much broader package of making sure that this government and this nation meet their expectations and responsibilities around making sure we treat in a fair and just manner people who are seeking protection as a consequence of facing persecution elsewhere in the world. We face a difficult challenge as a consequence of people seeking asylum in Australia, particularly when they arrive through means that aren't the traditional routes recommended to us by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. We have to maintain and protect a clear and consistent approach, which allows people to be accepted on the basis of their need and the legitimacy of their application, not on the method or means for their arrival into Australia. At different stages that has been, broadly speaking, a bipartisan approach.

I understand that at the moment the opposition is continuing to support the government. At other points in recent past they have not done so. I hope they continue to do so, because it is in the best interests of Australians and also because it is in the best interests of those people seeking protection. It is so that they know the direct, honest and straightforward pathway to make it into Australia, rather than trying to circumvent processes to get into Australia by other means.

Having spent a lot of time in detention centres as well as refugee camps across the world, I have seen the very real and human consequences of what happens when people seek to arrive in another country through processes and means that may not be consistent with the country that they are seeking to enter, and with which they are prepared to accept. In the end, there are millions of people all around the world who are either displaced or seeking refugee protection as a consequence of the circumstances outside of their control.

We are one of many countries that takes this issue very seriously. There is a need to be able to provide people with protection as a consequence of those circumstances. We need to have a process and a system that people have confidence in. In countries, particularly in countries like ours, they need to have confidence that people are being accepted on the basis of need and the very real risk of persecution, rather than simply the way they self-identify or make their means or process to get to the country. It must be a just system to continue to preserve confidence so that we can accept people into Australia as refugees. This simple bill around refining the content and the detail within the Australian Border Force Act seeks to achieve that.

To follow on from the previous member, I've also had a number of constituents who have continued to raise concerns with me around the operation of Manus Island and the Nauru detention centre and around the conditions that people face. They aim to make sure that they are treated in a fair and just manner. I consistently raise those issues, both in my former capacity and in my current capacity, to make sure people are treated with dignity and respect. I want to stress to all the constituents of the good electorate of Goldstein that this is something that is very much at the fore of the government's mind: making sure that people are treated with dignity and respect, and, in addition, making sure their time in detention is reduced.

That is why the deal with the United States, to get people off Manus Island and Nauru, has been secured: to try and minimise the time people are held in offshore detention. Those people are able to move on with their lives. It's obviously in their interests, because it gives them the opportunity to realise what they were always seeking—to live a life free from persecution—and then to be able to go on and do it in an environment where they are able to live out their hopes and their dreams. This provides the opportunity for the formation of a family and to be able to secure work and opportunity. That should always be the objective when people are facing persecution: not just to protect them and make them safe but to provide them with foundations and opportunity for them to be able to get on with their lives, as we would hope for our fellow citizens.

This has been a long and difficult process, but it continues to be the objective of this government. In addition, it is very much in our national interest to do so. While we are being very supportive and generous to tens of thousands of people who come to Australia as refugees by providing them with support and assistance, there is no national interest on our part in holding people in detention any longer than necessary. When it comes down to it, we need people to move on with their lives as part of the package to maintain a strong protection for border security that the Australian people and the government have confidence in. We equally want people who are in detention centres to spend as little time there as possible. It's obviously financially beneficial to everybody but, more importantly, it's about people being able to move on with their lives.

If there are problems associated with that, we must be free, within the context and while respecting the privacy of individual people, to provide information that's appropriate in the public domain, because the government always needs to be held to account. As someone who has had a longstanding advocacy in this space, as well as holding government to account more generally, I am always cautious about any measure that limits the capacity for information to be reported about government. That's not a partisan point, whether the Liberals, Labor or anyone else is in office. That's a point of principle—in fact, it goes to one of the core reasons I am a Liberal. Whenever you have centralised power, no matter who is in the position to exercise it, we pose the risk that people may choose to limit the information that is freely available to the advancement and the protection of the interests of those in positions of power and responsibility. In many cases, that's at the core of why people flee from countries—because they experience persecution in the first place. That's why this bill and this provision seeks to clarify what has been longstanding practice under the existing bill—to clarify it for everybody so it will continue to operate into the future.

The Australian Border Force Amendment (Protected Information) Bill 2017 is one that seeks to be a realisation of government aspiration and policy around refugees, and at the same time makes sure that government can be appropriately held to account for its conduct, no matter who is in office, so that all Australians can look to their government with confidence that they are doing the best, the noble and the humanitarian thing.

See this speech in context