Andrew Bartlett (Queensland, Australian Democrats) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in Hansard and to table an explanatory memorandum relating to the bill.

Leave granted.

The speech read as follows—

This Private Senator’s Bill is one of a number of Migration Act Amendment Bills which I am tabling in the course of this year. This bill seeks to remove the unfair provisions which imposed the 45 day rule severely restricting support for many asylum seekers in the community.

The Democrats note serious problems with the operation of the “45-day rule”. Under this regulation, people claiming to be refugees must apply for asylum within 45 days of arriving in Australia. If they do not, they are refused permission to work while their application is being considered, which could take many months. Not being able to work, they are ineligible for Medicare.

The so-called 45-day rule assumes that a genuine asylum seeker will lodge an application for protection immediately after arriving in Australia. It is a fallacy which assumes that asylum seekers come to Australia knowing about the protection system, or have access to specific information about the protection system, or have the capacity to make an application soon after arrival.

Asylum seekers often do not lodge applications in time because of factors such as:

• Fear of authorities and fear in general (which often causes people to keep a low profile and avoid attracting attention).
• Unfamiliarity with Australia’s legal and administrative system and how to make an application.
• Language difficulties, cultural, religious and societal barriers.
• A less than stable mental state (often suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder) and general confusion and disorientation.
• Misinformation from well-meaning family or others about their status and what is required of them.
• Other reasons are that some asylum seekers who have been living in Australia (for example, on student visas) apply for refugee status only after the situation has changed in their own country, preventing them from returning home due to a fear for their lives. Others apply as a last resort after waiting in hope that conditions in their own country would improve and allow them to return.

These restrictions in effect ‘punish’ refugee claimants who lodge their applications after 45 days, regardless of the nature of their claims or whether they have survived torture.

The restrictions also prevent them from engaging in any form of purposeful activity (including voluntary work) so there is no distraction from thinking endlessly about their situation and the fear they feel. They are destitute, frightened and desperate. The experience is harmful to both their physical and emotional/psychological health.

There have been numerous NGO groups which have been providing assistance to asylum seekers and believe that the Government should review the “45-day rule”, to restore government assistance to former levels and to grant refugee claimants permission to work. This is a matter of basic human rights to design a refugee determination process that avoids making these people go through such an extremely stressful experience.

The Democrats do not believe that there is any justification for such a penalty in the Migration Act and believe that they are unnecessarily cruel and should be abolished.

I commend this bill to the Senate.

I table the explanatory memorandum and seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.