Lidia Thorpe (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

[by video link] I rise to speak on the Courts and Tribunals Legislation Amendment (2021 Measures No. 1) Bill 2021. Most of this bill is actually very administrative; however, there are three key provisions that we are concerned with. I will deal with them in order.

The first is the proposed amendment of sections 7(2)(c) and 7(3)(b) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975. The proposed amendment in the bill would remove the role of the Governor-General in the appointment process in both sections 7(2)(c) and 7(3)(b) of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal Act 1975, or the AAT Act, and replace it with the minister. This would mean that the minister would have exclusive power to appoint someone who is not qualified for the crucial roles of deputy president, senior member and member of the AAT. The AAT is meant to be an independent body that reviews the minister's decisions. It is inappropriate for the minister to have any role in appointing members of the AAT, as this is a clear conflict of interest. The amendment in this bill continues the sad story of the AAT becoming the retirement fund of former government staffers and MPs—surprise, surprise!

This amendment would further expand the minister's powers to appoint to the AAT unqualified or unsuitable people who are unlikely to perform the independent review required of them. We don't think this should be allowed.

I move to the proposed immunity for Immigration Assessment Authority reviewers. This proposed amendment to the AAT Act would grant to members of the Immigration Assessment Authority the same protection and immunity as is afforded to a justice of the High Court of Australia—really? That is so wrong! IAA reviewers are not independent decision-makers; they are public servants. They are responsible for implementing the policies of the executive government. It is incredibly inappropriate to give IAA reviewers the protection afforded to independent judicial officers. Since the inception of the IAA, reviewers have performed their roles as public servants and nothing more. They don't have independence, they are not impartial and they are not transparent. Unlike judges and AAT members, IAA reviewers do not take an oath, are not required to declare conflicts of interests and are not paid independently of the executive government. That means they don't have a fixed term, either. They do not even have to have legal qualifications. As the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre stated in a submission to the inquiry into this bill:

… the IAA provides not only deeply unfair and likely incorrect outcomes, it also fails to meet even the minimal threshold of lawful decision making in almost half of its cases.

The Josephite Justice Office, in their submission into their inquiry into the bill, stated:

In the long term it is apparent to many organisations working with people seeking protection that the IAA needs to be abolished and replaced by a body designed to provide justice, protection and the right for those appealing to have their appeals responsibly and fairly heard.

I move to the third concern the Australian Greens have with this bill, and that is the short-form judgements from the Federal Court. This bill would allow the Federal Court to provide judgements in short form for a decision dismissing an appeal if the court unanimously decided that the appeal does not raise any question of general principle. The Australian Greens are sympathetic to the Federal Court's heavy workload, but providing detailed, reasoned judgements is an inherent aspect of justice, including natural justice, that cannot be interfered with. The amendments in this bill are not how you improve access to justice. To improve access to justice, the government must instead properly resource the courts and the AAT. The provisions in this bill effectively remove the right to a proper court judgement for people appealing migration decisions. Surely we can't allow that.

The Australian Greens look forward to seeing amendments to this bill. However, this shouldn't be the end of the story. I invite my colleagues in the opposition and on the crossbench to get to work with us to improve the system for people seeking refuge and asylum. As a parliament, we should abolish the IAA and establish a fairer process for persons seeking asylum. As a parliament, we should properly resource the AAT and appoint more relevantly qualified and experienced AAT members to address the current backlogs. We must also create an independent body to make the AAT appointments and to strengthen the independence of the AAT, particularly around the appointment process, and to ensure that only relatively experienced and qualified people are appointed. Surely that's what you would agree with, right? We will see. As we have seen recently, this is incredibly needed right now. My heart is with those in Afghanistan seeking the protection of our government and the many Afghan people who are here in this country with broken hearts watching the news. Know that I am with you, the Australian Greens are with you and we commit ourselves to working with everyone here to bring as many people to safety. Thank you.