Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Four years ago, there was a proposal from the then coalition government to ban phones for people in migration detention. There was a public outcry about that bill, and rightly so because it was saying to people who are in migration detention who, in many cases, have done nothing more than just come here seeking a better life for themselves and their families, 'You have no right to have some of the basic essentials of life, including things like a phone.' A phone allows people to contact those on the outside world, to get the support that they and their families needed and, in some instances, to report back on the torture that was taking place inside these immigration detention hellholes.

You would have thought—and people said this at the time—that someone who has not been convicted of a crime and who has just been put in this inhumane system of mandatory detention shouldn't be stripped of their basic rights, including the right to have things like a phone, which is an essential now, for many people, to stay connected with the outside world, to stay connected with family and friends and to pass on critical news about what is happening to them and their life.

There was a public outcry when the coalition tried to do this, and Labor joined in the outcry. We, the Greens, were there together with other members of the crossbench, saying, 'This is an inhumane bill and should be opposed.' Back then, when Labor were in opposition, they joined us—rightly so—in saying, 'There is no case for denying fundamental rights of communication to people who haven't even committed a crime and are just stuck in the legal limbo, in the hellhole, that is mandatory detention in this country.

Now that Labor is in government, they have the power to make some positive change and to improve the conditions of people who are stuck in these detention hellholes. Labor could work with the rest of parliament to give more human rights to people, to undo some of the damage that has been done by previous coalition governments over a decade. But when Labor is in power, and has the ability to make some positive change to support multicultural Australia and migrants, they instead turn around and attack them.

This is a piece of legislation that not even the coalition would have been able to get through. This is worse than what the coalition had proposed, and it comes in a final week of parliament where it now seems that Labor is also wanting to re-enliven their Trump style travel ban, which has been stalled in this parliament, and to use this final week of parliament to work with Peter Dutton, the Leader of the Opposition, to attack migrants and refugees. This is a shameful way to end this parliamentary year. With Labor and Liberals joining together, it is a race to the bottom on migration in the lead-up to the election. This is extremely disturbing. I worry that this now gives us a taste of what the election campaign is going to look like. I am very distressed that we are about to enter another race to the bottom between Labor and Liberal to see who can attack refugees and migrants the most.

A few years ago, Labor were in here joining the rest of us pointing out that a bill like this was inhumane, cruel and could not be justified. Now, when they're sitting on the government benches, what do they do? They pass it. And it's even worse. Why, Labor, are you working with the Liberals to stoke fear and division in our community?

This bill, the Migration Amendment (Prohibiting Items in Immigration Detention Facilities) Bill 2024, will have sweeping powers. It will allow the minister to determine whether a thing is a prohibited item in an immigration detention facility. That is the language: a 'thing'. If the minister thinks that this thing 'might be a risk to the health, safety or security of persons in the facility, or to the order of the facility', they can ban it. The bill explicitly says that mobile phones, SIM cards and any device that can connect to the internet can be determined to be prohibited things. How is it that something that is simply the ability to connect with the outside world is somehow a threat? It could only be considered a threat if Labor had something to hide about what is happening in these detention facilities.

Why is Labor now saying it is a threat for people who are stuck in these facilities to expose what is going on? Labor and Liberal are so fond of saying to everyone, when it comes to security legislation, that if you have nothing to hide, you shouldn't be concerned. Well, why is it that Labor and Liberal, when it comes to some scrutiny about how they are run these detention prisons, now say that it is a threat to let anyone talk about what is going on inside?

Think about the logic that is in this bill, which Labor and Liberal are now trying to rush through. On this logic, on the way they've drafted it, you could ban a toothbrush because it could be sharpened to a point. You could ban deodorant because it could be flammable in an aerosol can. That is what this bill allows. This bill, as I've said before, is almost exactly the same bill that Labor voted against in 2020, following a public outcry concerning government overreach and human rights violations. The Australian Human Rights Commission said at the time:

No-one held in immigration detention has forfeited their human rights, and immigration detention must never be imposed as—

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Melbourne, I'm sorry to interrupt in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour. You will be granted leave to continue your speech when the debate is resumed.