Rebekha Sharkie (Mayo, Nick Xenophon Team) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to oppose the Migration Amendment (Prohibiting Items in Immigration Detention Facilities) Bill 2017 in its current form. I will just speak briefly on this bill, and I will leave it to my colleague Senator Griff, in the other place, who will be seeking to move amendments to this bill and who also has carriage of the immigration portfolio on behalf of NXT and has done a huge amount of work on this bill.

The provisions of this bill are awash with ministerial executive overreach—overreach designed to allow the minister to deny any item of comfort or communication to asylum seekers in detention. For every piece of legislation brought to this place, we in this chamber must ask: what is the purpose of this bill? And for this bill I can see no purpose.

Now, it stands to reason that, where asylum seekers in Manus and Nauru are in possession of items that are illegal under Australian Commonwealth or state law, or even Papua New Guinean or Nauruan law, this possession should also be prohibited in detention centres. Illicit drugs, child pornography—none of these items should be in our detention centres, and I believe every member in this place agrees.

I also recognise the need to retain the existing powers in the Migration Act to remove weapons, as well as items which could be used to escape from immigration detention centres in Australia, from the possession of asylum seekers. However, if asylum seekers have items that are not weapons or otherwise illegal under Australian law, why should they be prohibited? Why should asylum seekers not be able to access items that are indeed legal? They are not in prison. I repeat: they are not in prison. The government has been at pains to say that they are free to come and go from detention facilities in Nauru and Manus. So why would we deny them simple liberties such as mobile phones to communicate, if they are not indeed prisoners?

As I've said previously, I cannot but agree with the simple principle that immigration detainees should not be able to possess items that are illegal under state or federal law. However, this bill is clearly much more than that. It gives unfettered power to the minister to prohibit any item he or she chooses, regardless of the reason for that prohibition.

I suspect that mobile phones, especially those with cameras, would be the first item to be considered on the minister's list should this legislation pass the parliament in its current form. Right now, there is limited knowledge of the conditions and events that happen, particularly on Manus and Nauru. We do not have freedom of the press there. We do not have parliamentary delegations. There is very little transparency. The only insight we truly have—for those of us who are concerned about the treatment of asylum seekers—is to follow a number of detainees on Twitter and other social media. It is the only way that the Australian community and indeed the global community—and, believe me, the global community is watching—have any understanding of what is truly happening on Manus and Nauru.

There is one man in particular that we rely upon, although there are many men, particularly on Manus, who are on social media. He's a Kurdish freelance journalist. His name is Behrouz Boochani. His communications on social media, I believe, are the only way we have some sort of window into life on Manus. I can imagine it takes great courage for Mr Boochani to speak out daily on social media about the real life on Manus, and this bill would silence him.

A core principle and aim of NXT is to pursue greater transparency and accountability in government. In its current form, this bill could be used by the minister or future ministers to thwart that aim. Therefore, we cannot support it.

See this speech in context