Maria Vamvakinou (Calwell, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I'm pleased to rise to speak to the Administrative Review Tribunal Bill 2023, the Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Bill 2023 and the Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 2) Bill 2024. The parlous state that the AAT is in is best reflected, I would say, in the experiences that my electorate office has faced over the years, virtually on a daily basis. We've had to deal with countless constituents who've come to us both frustrated and bewildered, in most cases, by the very long and frustrating delays that they have experienced as they await the outcomes of their cases being heard and adjudicated by the AAT. My office deals with referrals to the AAT, predominantly in the areas of immigration, Centrelink and the NDIS. Of course, as chair of the Joint Standing Committee on Migration, I also know too well the importance of integrity in the structures of our migration system and its particular avenues of appeal, especially as a large number of my constituents are very much engaged with the migration process.

I'd often be asked and would have to answer about why the delays that my constituents were experiencing were so exorbitant. To reasonable people and, often, desperate people, such delays just didn't make any sense. Often it resulted in their being angered and distressed, and this distress was further compounded by their inability to understand our appeals system, especially for those who didn't speak English, because they had to rely on others to support them and to guide them. These are people who await decisions whose outcomes have a direct impact on their lives. Therefore, the stakes are often very high for these people and for their families.

Most of my constituents who have had to deal with the AAT are what I would describe as vulnerable people who are not very well resourced and often do not understand the complexities of an appeals process, yet they are subject to it and need to go through it. So they are pensioners—invalid pensioners or age pensioners—NDIS recipients and their families and, in a large number of cases, those who are appealing decisions in matters of immigration. Across the board, there are a range of visa categories, from partner visas through to parent and humanitarian visas. So, as you can imagine, these are issues that are very personal and sensitive in nature, and the effect of senseless, unreasonable delays have often left my constituents not just frustrated but, as I said, desperate with worry and uncertainty about their future and what it holds.

So, at the very least, I believe, having dealt with these cases and the AAT, that there was an acceptance about the delays. It seemed to have become a culture or an expectation that there would be long delays, especially in the case of immigration cases. I noted over the years that these delays at the AAT became opportunities for unscrupulous migration agents and even labour hire companies to use the delays to tell vulnerable people such as those who were here largely on working holiday visas—and there were lots of these cases; I met many people, who came to see me over the years—that, if they applied for protection visas, they would go to the AAT and the AAT would take up to three or four years to process their claims, and by the time they got to that, they would most likely be rejected anyway, but that didn't matter. The purpose was that they would get three, four or five years of additional work on bridging visas here in Australia.

These kinds of almost vexatious appeals to the AAT were allowed to fester and become a magnet for exploitation and abuse by unscrupulous people because of the length of time that it took for cases to be resolved. It's a common feature, especially with immigration cases, that you're going to buy yourself two, three or four years. The other issue with the delays in dealing with immigration cases, especially with the AAT, is that migration agents would also use this as a pathway to eventually get into ministerial intervention. So the AAT, in becoming what it did become—this body that was unable to respond accordingly and in due time to cases—gave rise to a whole series of other possibly unintended consequences, but they were the consequences of those long delays. They were also the consequences of an AAT that was staffed by people that perhaps weren't appointed on merit. They didn't have the knowledge and they didn't have the expertise that was required to deal with the complexity of a lot of the cases that came before them.

The Australian public and my constituents have a right to expect that the AAT not be compromised as it was under the previous government, because the previous government had good form, without absolutely any thought whatsoever, in happily appointing their colleagues—as we've heard, 85 former Liberal MPs, failed Liberal candidates, former Liberal staffers and other close Liberal associates—without any merit based selection processes. They were quite happy to employ them and appoint them to the AAT. These people had no relevant experience to match the nature of the cases that they were being called upon to adjudicate over. So, in many ways, the former government fatally compromised the AAT. It undermined its independence and eroded the quality and efficiency of its decision-making. These appointments—and we've heard a lot about them throughout many of the contributions that have been made today by my colleagues—most certainly undermined the independence of the AAT and reduced its quality and the efficiency of its decision-making.

Bodies like the AAT require the appointment of people who have the skills to understand the complexities faced by our constituents, not just those in immigration but also those accessing Centrelink, the NDIS and the other vital government and social services. The issue of merit is fundamental to fairness and efficiency when it comes to appointments to the AAT. This is why I welcomed the Albanese government's announcement in late 2022 that it would abolish the Administrative Appeals Tribunal and replace it with a new federal administrative review body.

This is a significant reform, and I welcome the opportunity to speak to the legislation in the form of the Administrative Review Tribunal Bill 2023, which will implement the government's commitment to establish a new federal administrative review body. This bill builds on 50 years of experience, learning and broad consultation to establish a tribunal that is user focused, efficient, accessible, independent and, above all, fair. It is informed by a significant body of work and literature that implements all three recommendations from the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee's review into the performance and integrity of Australia's administrative review system; four recommendations from the Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme; and the government's response to two recommendations from the Rapid Review into the Exploitation of Australia's Visa System.

When we came into government we inherited an AAT that was not on a sustainable footing. It was beset by delays and had an extraordinarily large and growing backlog of applications, which was felt by everyone in my electorate who happened to come into contact with the system, as I indicated at the beginning of my speech. This came at a very real cost to the tens of thousands of people who rely on the AAT each year to independently review government decisions that have major and sometimes life-altering impacts on their lives. These are decisions such as whether older Australians receive an age pension, whether a veteran is compensated for service injury or whether a participant of the NDIS receives funding for essential support. Many of these people, as I've said already, are members of my constituency.

The Albanese government is committed to restoring trust and confidence in Australia's system of administrative review, beginning with the establishment of the new administrative review body, which will be user focused, efficient, accessible, independent and fair. The important central feature of the new body will be its transparent and merit based selection process for the appointment of the non-judicial members. They will be independent and untainted, and this will be the hallmark of any fair process that the Australian public, but in particular my constituents, deserve and will benefit from.

Under this government's legislation, the tribunal will finally have transparent, merit based appointment processes for the appointment of members. It will be informed by the operational needs of the tribunal to ensure that only the highest-quality members are appointed to these very important roles. This is in stark contrast to the former government, which, as it became evident, believed in jobs for Liberal mates, at the expense of our constituents, fairness and a merit based selection process. This is a welcome contrast—an effective, clear and just difference through the provision of an independent mechanism of a review which is fair and just. It resolves applications in a timely manner and with as little formality and expense as is consistent with reaching the correct or preferrable decision. It is accessible and responsive to the diverse needs of parties. It improves the transparency and quality of decision-making and promotes public trust and confidence in the tribunal. On those grounds, I commend the bills to the House.

See this speech in context