Andrew Giles (Scullin, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

He cut compliance functions in immigration in half. And what happened because of that? Well, Christine Nixon had a bit to say: rampant sexual exploitation, organised crime running rampant and our protection system absolutely trashed. These are scars which persist, and we have taken responsibility for fixing the problem. We continue to do that, because every decision we make is with the safety and the values of the Australian community in mind.

It was really disappointing that the Leader of the National Party, someone for whom I have some regard, asked a question which spoke about the commitment we have made to Border Force, the Federal Police and the Commonwealth Department of Public Prosecutions in utterly inappropriate terms. Those investments are absolutely critical to keeping communities safe.

Something that's also critical is for parliamentarians and anyone who holds public office to speak the truth, to not mischaracterise facts—particularly wilfully. The commentary on the High Court decision is, frankly, absolutely unworthy of any member of this place. Members should reflect on their wider responsibilities as lawmakers, particularly those who have held significant executive responsibilities previously.

It is worth repeating a couple of points in respect of this story. It is the case that the Commonwealth vigorously defended the proceeding. We did so, and we also sought to maintain the detention of the individual in question—unlike, it has to be said, certain former ministers. Before the decision we took some steps to let state and territory law enforcement officials know that there could be an adverse decision and to prepare for that. We also undertook a range of steps ourselves. Immediately after the decision we set up Operation AEGIS to coordinate the work of the ABF, the Australian Federal Police and those state and territory agencies. We got to work, despite what they said otherwise, immediately on exploring what regulatory and legislative options would be open to us, having regard to the limited nature of the information we had when we only had the order, not the reasons for the decision.

Within eight days we passed a bill through this parliament—strong new laws. I acknowledge the cooperation of the opposition in securing the passage of those laws. When we looked at those laws, which were moved through quickly and contained significant amendments, we sought to boost the sanctions available in them and to improve the laws otherwise, as any reasonable government would. Indeed, as I indicated on the morning those laws became operative, we will continue to review them to ensure community safety is maximised.

We introduced new laws and briefed the opposition on them. For some reason, despite the fact they created offence provisions in respect of the very amendments they put forward as visa conditions, they voted against them not once but twice.

See this speech in context