Zaneta Mascarenhas (Swan, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

It is a pleasure to have the opportunity to stand here and speak on the Administrative Review Tribunal (Consequential and Transitional Provisions No. 1) Bill 2023. When we had the federal election in 2022, the Australian public said to us decision-makers here that they wanted to see more integrity in our government and in our institutions. That is the core of what this bill does.

Effective administration is not merely a duty; it is actually a responsibility and it is central to our system of governance. When our administrative systems fail, we fail our citizens and we fail in our obligations to democracy. The truth is that a robust democracy is one of the things that makes this country a great place. When we fail in our responsibility to serve people that elect us, we know who suffers: it is people. And we know that the former Liberal government fell dismally short in this regard. They neglected to uphold a system critical to our democratic principles and international obligations. The backlog in our administrative review system, which has meant that people have been denied access to a fair and impartial hearing, is an example of this. They failed to respect institutions and the responsibility of government. The former Prime Minister and his multiple ministries was the absolute epitome of this, showing a disgraceful disregard for the principles on which our system of government was founded and operates on—a system that I am proud of and that I am here to uphold.

Let's talk about the specifics of the bill. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal was established in 1976. It was meant to provide fair hearings for individuals affected by government decisions. It was to provide an avenue for people to review the decisions made by the primary decision-maker. When we think about just processes, it makes sense to have an independent organisation to review decisions that a body makes. However, over time, under the governance of the Liberals and its decision-making process, it became ineffective and inefficient. This was because the Liberals did not care about fairness and impartiality. They did not care about the impact of executive decisions on the people in this country. All they cared about was jobs for the boys and, less often, occasionally, for the girls.

The AAT became, under the Liberals, a retirement village for failed liberal staffers and failed liberal politicians, of which there were many. The former government appointed as many as 85 former Liberal MPs, failed Liberal candidates and former Liberal staffers. They were appointed without any fair selection process based on merit. What did this do to the AAT? It seriously undermined its independence. It was a plum job in retirement, and the Liberal appointed AAT members failed in their duty to maintain any form of efficient decision-making. This poor administration had serious consequences for many Australians. It's disappointing, but unsurprising, given the track record of the Liberals as they operated under the previous administration. It was so disappointing, when we considered the origins of the AAT and what it was initially set up to achieve.

Further, in talking about this bill, we must not forget the vision behind the establishment of the AAT. It was an remarkable innovation aimed at providing accessible and impartial reviews of government decisions affecting everyday Australians. I refer to comments made by the esteemed Justice Kirby, who looks back fondly on those times. He describes how the Gorton, McMahon and Whitlam governments had begun to move toward securing the enactment of the mosaic of legislation which would truly revolutionise administrative law at the federal level in Australia. The initiative of the Whitlam government in establishing the AAT was part of a broader movement toward securing the enactment of legislation revolutionising administrative law.

It was a great time for change. It was a time when laws were passed to dismantle discriminatory policies, like the White Australia policy, and to establish groundbreaking legislation such as the Racial Discrimination Act. It was at the same time that the Whitlam government established Medicare and provided expanded higher education to more people, particularly women.

Justice Kirby, who was chairman of the Australian Law Reform Commission in 1975, was there at the birth of the AAT. He described it as 'an exciting time' for administrative law. I don't know many people who are excited by administrative law, but, then again, I don't know many lawyers who would get as excited about the periodic table or collision theory as I do!

What we do have in common is that when Justice Kirby says, 'All sound law and policy should be based, so far as possible, on sound data'—I love that statement. Data driven decision-making is really important, and we need to make sure that we make decisions on sound, justified bases. It shows that there is not such a divide between science and policymaking. And how perfect it is that I come across Justice Kirby's comments during the week of Science Meets Parliament festivities, which we are all enjoying this week. I know there are a lot of scientists in the Great Hall right now talking about data driven decision-making.

If we look at the data when it comes to the AAT, we see a problem, and we need a solution. The functioning of the AAT has been subject to scrutiny showing that the status quo was not working. The current operation of the AAT was undermining public trust in effective public administration. This bill will implement the recommendations made by the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee, the Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme and the Rapid Review into the Exploitation of Australia's Visa System.

The inquiry by the Senate committee found that the migration review division, the largest AAT division, cannot address the significant volume of legacy cases and the continuing number of new applications without better resourcing and case management. The committee was concerned that such a backlog of cases was taking years to finalise and that these delays have real-world impacts on applicants who have no certainty about the future for them and their family. And when we say the word 'applicants', we're fundamentally talking about people—and that's what this democracy is fundamentally about; it's about people.

I want to talk about this particular point raised by the committee. Only last week, while back in the electorate of Swan, I met with Associate Professor Mary Anne Kenny at the School of Law of Murdoch University. Mary Anne is a well-respected advocate and an independent adviser in the area of refugee and immigration law. She has a special interest in the intersection of mental health and refugee law. Mary Anne is also associated with the Centre for Human Rights Education at Curtin University, which is in my electorate. Mary Anne has acted on behalf of many unaccompanied minors seeking protection in Australia. So when she came to speak to me with her colleague Professor Caroline Fleay I was really interested to hear their thoughts on this bill and how it will make a difference to the migration system she had been involved in for so many years.

We discussed the impact of the failed migration system and the cumbersome and dysfunctional administration of migration under the Liberal government on the lives of those living in limbo for so many years. I talked firsthand with two individuals who had suffered at the hands of a dysfunctional system. They're suffering mental health issues because of years of uncertainty. I appreciate their bravery and courage in presenting a face to the issue we're discussing today.

Today, as we address the erosion of one of these key initiatives by the previous government, we must acknowledge the voices of those directly affected by the administrative failures. I know for sure that the situation is not what the Whitlam government envisaged when they established the AAT. It was about protecting people from the abuse of power. And we have many things to thank the Whitlam government for. The initiative of the Whitlam government in establishing the AAT was part of a broader movement towards securing the enactment of legislation and revolutionising administrative law in Australia. It was a time of great change and a time when laws such as the discriminatory policies like the White Australia policy were passed, as well as the establishment of groundbreaking legislation like the Racial Discrimination Act.

The Administrative Review Tribunal Bill before us today is a step towards rectifying the shortcomings that evolved under the watch of the Liberals. It will ensure that our administrative systems are not merely retirement villages for failed politicians but, rather, functional entities designed to actually serve people, designed to protect people, designed to provide an avenue for review, designed to function as they were meant to function. This bill is the result of careful consideration incorporating the recommendations of various committees and inquiries, including the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee and the Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme. It shows that it's not rushed, it's not hurried, it's not ill thought out. It's well considered, it's well drafted and it's well intentioned. It's responsive to the failures of the past.

That's why it's important that we can all contribute to this important debate. It reaffirms our commitment to providing a simple, affordable and accessible system for the review of government decisions. It's a testament to our dedication to upholding democratic principles. It's a testament to ensuring our accountability in decision-making. It's a testament to Labor's principles to make systems accessible to all: impartiality, fairness and equity. These are all principles that I stand by. These are principles that the Labor Party stands by. In conclusion, I urge all members of the parliament to support these bills. I commend the bills to the House.

See this speech in context