Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party, Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Hansard source

DREYFUS (—) (): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

The Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No.2) Bill 2024 forms part of the package of bills that would abolish the Administrative Appeals Tribunal and establish the Administrative Review Tribunal.

It supports the establishment of the new tribunal, which will be created by the Administrative Review Tribunal Bill 2023—a bill I introduced into the House on 7 December 2023. Together with the Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Amendments No.1) Bill 2023, which I also introduced on 7 December 2023, this bill would also make the consequential and transitional amendments needed to effectively implement the reform.

Consequential bill No. 2 makes consequential amendments to 110 Commonwealth acts to ensure continuity for the tribunal and its users. Decisions under these acts collectively amount to approximately seven per cent of the AAT's jurisdiction by caseload.

Consequential amendments

The consequential amendments include amendments to a number of Commonwealth acts requiring state and territory consultation.

The changes in the bill are predominantly technical amendments that will ensure consistent terminology, concepts, structure and other policy settings. The changes also ensure that the new tribunal has the same jurisdiction as the AAT and that various provisions operate in substantively the same way as they operate in the AAT.

Consequential bill No. 2 would make changes to harmonise and streamline provisions where appropriate. It would also implement changes to the review pathway for preventive detention orders, and allow external merits review of decisions not to provide evidence of a person's Australian citizenship, under the Australian Citizenship Act 2007.

Standardising processes

Where possible, consequential bill 2 would repeal special procedures in other acts, so that the default provisions in the ART bill would apply.

The use of standard procedures in the tribunal would better support users, with increased similarity and predictability in how their matters progress through the tribunal. It would reduce complexity within the tribunal, which means there will be more scope to use shared technology, forms, staff and member resources, and create greater efficiencies than is currently possible within the AAT.

In circumstances where the tribunal's proposed standard powers and procedures need to respond to the unique features of a particular caseload, consequential bill No. 2 would make the necessary amendments to other acts to preserve existing arrangements.

We have the benefit of nearly 50 years of experience since the AAT was established, and over eight years since it was amalgamated with multiple other tribunals in 2015. We also have the benefit of extensive consultation over the last year on what does, and what does not, work within the current system.

Preventative Detention Orders

Consequential bill No. 2 would remove the administrative review pathway for preventive detention order decisions, and leave this entirely to the courts.

Importantly, the remedies currently available to an affected individual through the administrative review mechanism are also available, and would continue to be available, through judicial review.

Among other things, these changes address the risk that sections 105.51(5) and (7) of the Criminal Code could be construed as vesting federal judicial power in a body other than a court, contrary to chapter III of the Constitution. They do this by ensuring that the power to award compensation to a person for false imprisonment is only exercised by the courts.

Merits review for evidence of Australian citizenship

The bill would confer jurisdiction on the new tribunal to review a decision to refuse to provide a person with evidence of their Australian citizenship under the Australian Citizenship Act 2007.

Allowing the new tribunal to review those types of decisions would be consistent with the review pathways available for other citizenship and migration related decisions. It would provide applicants with an accessible independent review process. This is a simple change we can make to ensure that people affected by these decisions have an effective administrative review pathway in the tribunal.

State and t erritory consultation requirements

Finally, consequential bill No. 2 would also make minor amendments to 14 Commonwealth acts which contain requirements for the Commonwealth to consult with, or seek the agreement of, the states and territories before introducing amendments into parliament. These requirements arise from intergovernmental agreements. The Commonwealth has satisfied these requirements and appreciates the cooperation from the states and territories.

The creation of the tribunal may require the states and territories to make consequential amendments to their own legislation. The Commonwealth has worked closely with the states and territories to assist them to identify and progress any amendments that may be required.

Conclusion

In conclusion, consequential bill No. 2 makes technical and essential consequential amendments to legislation across the Commonwealth, ensuring a smooth transition to the new tribunal. The bill completes the package of legislation that is required to establish a new and much improved Administrative Review Tribunal—the most important reform of the federal system of administrative review for decades.

I commend the bill to the House.

Debate adjourned.

See this speech in context