Deborah O'Neill (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Scarr for paying such attention and you, Deputy President, for your elegant explanation of exactly my intention.

You either believe in the law and you support the law or you don't. When you're the government, you are impelled to act within the boundary of the law. We're talking about citizenship. I've attended many citizenship ceremonies. When you're born in this country, you don't come out with these magic words—maybe by the time you're three or four you might be able to say them—but this is what Australian citizens undertaking a pledge say:

From this time forward, under God, I pledge my loyalty to Australia and its People, whose democratic beliefs I share, whose rights and liberties I respect, and whose laws I will uphold and obey.

What we've got being constructed, in a totally mischievous way, a fearmongering way, an anxiety-inducing, mental-health-harming way, is an opposition who are refusing to accept that fundamental responsibility that is a responsibility of citizenship, and that is to uphold the law. The law that we have derives from the Constitution, and I happen to have a pocket copy of that.

Let's find out what the federal judicature actually has to do and what the federal justice system relies on:

Chapter III of the Constitution (sections 71-80) provides for the establishment of the High Court of Australia. One of the High Court's principal functions is to decide disputes about the meaning of the Constitution. For example, it is the High Court which ultimately determines whether an Act passed by the Commonwealth Parliament is within the legislative powers of the Commonwealth.

That is in our Constitution. The High Court, having considered the matter about citizenship cessation and migration, made a determination that upended what everybody in this place had thought was law for 20 years. When they did that, change had to be undertaken. Within one week and one day, this government had acted. Today, here in this parliament, the Australian government was seeking to get passed the Australian Citizenship Amendment (Citizenship Repudiation) Bill 2023 to give the Minister for Home Affairs the capacity to make an application for a court to make an order ceasing the Australian citizenship of a person who is also a national or citizen of another country. That's what fundamentally has to change. Prior to the High Court's determination in recent weeks, ministers were actually able to make a declaration. Ministers operated. That has now been found to be outside of the law—unconstitutional, at odds with the Constitution.

The mischief-making of those in the opposition, who have made claims—once again, immediately after question time—that only one person needed to be released, completely misinterprets and misrepresents the reality of what a government is impelled to do in this situation. The Labor government is always going to look after our citizens. We take that responsibility profoundly seriously. That is why this piece of legislation that has come before the parliament this afternoon—it has already been passed in the Senate and over in the House—will go ahead, I hope, with the support of those opposite, despite their mischief-making. It's time to stop mucking around, get on with the job and keep Australians safe.