Linda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Absolutely. First of all, in November, the president said there were an increasing number of children in detention; then, the second reason was that the policies of the new government were not having an effect on the numbers. That one really floored me, because clearly Operation Sovereign Borders was a change of policy, and it was having an impact. That is only the first answer.

The second answer, on 24 February this year, said 'The high numbers of children in detention, the increasing amount of time of children in detention and the 10-year review of the 2004 report.' I thought that was in the president's opening statement. A high number children: yes, although they were decreasing. The increasing time in detention: as the president and all of those opposite would know, it is axiomatic. The fewer children in detention, the longer the average time they will be in detention. I thought, 'Has she called an inquiry?', because we are actually reducing the numbers of children, and the secretary of the department of immigration confirmed that that was the case.

Then there was the snapshot report, which is very important because that features again later. That was the second point. There are three points. You will note that not in one of those three reasons provided in the opening statement was there Operation Sovereign Borders or a drying up of information—that was on page 7 of Hansard. Then we get to page 20 of Hansard and the answer changes again. The president said, 'Once Operation Sovereign Borders got underway, it was clear that information from the department of immigration was not as readily accessible.' Therefore, yes, Operation Sovereign Borders was a factor because of the drying up of information.

There is a fourth answer. On page 20, as well, in Hansardso it was not even another page of Hansard—the answer was, 'No, it was not Operation Sovereign Borders'. A bit further down, on the same page of Hansard, guess what? It was Operation Sovereign Borders that was an impact. We have not even got to the end of that first page. She then said, 'No, it was not Sovereign Borders,' and, just to finish it off, on the same page of Hansard, she said, 'Yes, it was Operation Sovereign Borders.'

Honourable senators interjecting—