Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the same document, firstly in regard to comments just made by Senator Birmingham. He referenced in his speech an alleged increase in self-harm post the passage of the medevac legislation. I want to place very clearly on the record that, in fact, there has been a relatively recent significant increase in self-harm amongst those poor people who have been in offshore detention for nearly seven years now, but that had nothing to do with the passage of the medevac legislation; it was as a result of the coalition winning the last election. I challenge Minister Birmingham, because my sources for that are the primary sources—the multiple refugees on Manus Island, who are my friends and whom I've spoken to directly. I spoke with them in person during my relatively recent trip to Manus Island, where I was deported from Papua New Guinea by the Papua New Guinean government—I suspect, on the orders of the Australian government.

Ultimately, that self-harm was because the Labor Party, to its credit, had taken to the election a policy of supporting the New Zealand resettlement, and yet this coalition, this heartless group of politicians, including Senator Birmingham, who's now fleeing the chamber rather than listening to this, have basically tortured people for nearly seven years now. So that spike in self-harm was not caused by the medevac legislation; it was caused by the victory of the coalition in the recent federal election. I know that from the primary sources, unlike Senator Birmingham, who, once again, is just making stuff up to suit a political agenda.

Ultimately, at the end of the day, the medevac legislation is about taking decisions about whether people need to be evacuated to Australia on medical grounds out of the hands of politicians and bureaucrats and putting those decisions where they should be, which is in the hands of medical professionals. If Minister Birmingham is ever unfortunate enough to suffer a medical condition which requires medical treatment, I can guarantee you he's not going to go and see Minister Dutton to ask how he should treat his medical condition; he's going to see a doctor, and rightly so.

So why should Minister Birmingham and his serried ranks of colleagues on the LNP side of this chamber force people who have been marginalised; disadvantaged; and illegally detained, according to the Papua New Guinea Supreme Court, for over 6½ years now—people who have only ever stretched out a hand to this country to ask us for sanctuary—to have their medical futures determined by politicians and bureaucrats? The answer, of course, is he should not and his colleagues should not, and they do not have a moral leg to stand on on this issue.

It is doctors that should be determining medical treatment for people to whom Australia owes a duty of care. And I can say very clearly that Australia does owe these people a duty of care, because that is what the courts in Australia have repeatedly found and that is what Minister Dutton implicitly acknowledged when he settled the civil case against his government brought on behalf of multiple detainees on Manus Island and Nauru, which he settled for about $70 million. That was Australian taxpayers' money he used to settle that case so that the courts in Australia did not force open the closed doors behind which this government operates, the secrecy, and lay open the whole sordid, sorry, bloody saga that has been going on for over 6½ years now to the disinfectant of sunlight.

What this report clearly shows, when read in connection with Minister Dutton's response, is, firstly, that the minister has admitted that incorrect transfer numbers were tabled in previous IHAP reports. We now know that two new medical professionals have been appointed to the IHAP—that's the International Health Advisory Panel. We now have a more detailed outline of the number of transfers and decisions made by the panel. But we also, importantly, have a range of concerns outlined by the panel that it has raised with the department. I'm referring to page 5 of the report here. Those concerns are about a lack of satisfactory interpreter services; delays in treating doctor referrals, and delays in referrals to the minister; a lack of movement from Nauru when the panel has recommended transfer; and the support provided to persons with negative transfer outcomes.

What this report, taken as a whole, actually shows is that the process is working. It's working as it was designed to do, and that is that the decisions be independent and that they be made by medical professionals—that those decisions be medically led, not politically led by politicians, ministers and bureaucrats beholden to the government of the day. This report is very strong evidence that the medevac laws should not be repealed.