Chris Ellison (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Human Services) Share this | Hansard source

The Australian values section of the resources book is fairly general. It sets out:

Values which are important in modern Australia include:

• respect for the equal worth, dignity and freedom of the individual
• freedom of speech
• freedom of religion and secular government
• freedom of association
• support for parliamentary democracy and the rule of law
• equality under the law
• equality of men and women
• equality of opportunity
• peacefulness
• tolerance, mutual respect and compassion for those in need.

It goes on to say:

These values and principles are central to Australia remaining a stable, prosperous and peaceful community.

Those are fairly general values which can incorporate within them a great deal of difference, which we enjoy in our Australian community. Nonetheless, they are of general application and we do not see a need to have specific tuition in a person’s own language to appreciate those values. They are of such a general nature that you do not really need to drill down into great detail which might require communicating with someone in their own language.

The second part of this is the requirement that a person understands and has a degree of proficiency in English. Part of the application for becoming a citizen of Australia is that you have a basic understanding of English. We think it would defeat the purpose for us to get into the weeds of the detail and do that in a person’s original language because that would be confusing things even more. We believe that the values as set out in the resources manual, which is freely available for people who want to apply to become citizens, are self-explanatory. Even with a very basic understanding of English you can still appreciate what is being conveyed under the Australian values section. We do not think it is so complicated that you need to communicate with a person in their original language. Our view is that what other countries are doing in that regard might suit their regime or the way they have structured their citizenship tests but we think that the way that we have put it is of such simplicity that there will not need to be any tuition or training in a person’s own language.

Question negatived.

by leave—I move government amendments (1) and (2) together:

(1)    Schedule 1, item 5, page 4 (after line 33), at the end of subsection 23A(1), add:

Note:   The test must be related to the eligibility criteria referred to in paragraphs 21(2)(d), (e) and (f).

(2)    Schedule 1, item 5, page 5 (after line 6), at the end of subsection 23A(3), add:

Note:   The eligibility criteria for sitting the test cannot be inconsistent with this Act and in particular subsection 21(2) (about the general eligibility criteria for becoming an Australian citizen).

The first amendment clarifies the operation of proposed subsection 23A(1) and the second amendment clarifies the operation of proposed subsection 23A(3). The first amendment comes as the result of a recommendation of the Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs. That committee recommended an amendment to clarify what it believed was some ambiguity existing in the proposed subsection. Although our legal advice indicates that there is no ambiguity, this proposed amendment inserts a notice at the end of the new proposed subsection to make clear that the test approved by the minister under the proposed subsection must relate to the eligibility criteria referred to in paragraphs 21(2)(d), (e) and (f). We appreciate that the Senate committee was of that view and we respectfully disagree but, to make it absolutely beyond doubt, we will insert a note to deal with the concern raised by the Senate committee. Our legal advice is that the note is not needed, but we do appreciate the work the Senate committee did on this. This particular committee does a very good job, so we have taken that on board and we will put in that note.

The second amendment inserts a note into proposed subsection 23A(3) in item 5 of schedule 1 to the bill to make clear that the eligibility criteria for sitting a test cannot be inconsistent with the act and, in particular, with the general eligibility criteria for citizenship contained in the new proposed subsection 21(2) of the bill. Again, this note will alleviate concerns that have been raised regarding the power to determine eligibility criteria for sitting a test. Concerns had been expressed about this during proceedings before the Senate committee. I do not think there was a Senate committee recommendation on this, but the government did take note of those concerns and, in an effort to allay them, has determined to insert this note.

We believe that these two amendments will make absolutely clear the operation of the respective proposed subsections. Again, whilst on legal advice this is not necessary, we are doing it in an effort of good faith and to demonstrate very clearly our position in relation to the operation of these proposed subsections. I commend both amendments to the committee.