Linda Kirk (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to Senator Vanstone, the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs. Given that it was more than a week ago that the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs commenced its investigations into claims that women detainees at Villawood Immigration Detention Centre were sexually assaulted by guards and male detainees, can the minister update the Senate on progress with the investigation? In particular, when did the immigration department first become aware of the allegation, when did the detention centre service provider become aware of the allegation, and when were the police notified of the allegation? Can the minister also confirm when, according to the memorandum of understanding between New South Wales Police and her department, a crime should be reported?

Amanda Vanstone (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the senator for the question. DIMA did engage an independent contractor to look at this matter. I have a report which I am having a look at, and I expect to be able to give the Senate more information on that matter quite soon. The report has now been finalised. It was prepared following an interview with a solicitor on 1 June, and it presents the information currently available to the department on these matters. The department will, if it has not already, refer this matter to the New South Wales Police and to the Australian Federal Police. I strongly urge anyone, at any time, who has any allegations in relation to an assault or illicit drug use at Villawood—or any other facility—to bring them forward.

There was a complication in this matter, because when the matter was first raised verbally by the solicitor with someone in the department, it was clearly indicated that the complainant did not want the matter to proceed; in fact, they did not want to take the matter to the police. That does present something of a dilemma, because people are entitled to choose not to pursue a criminal prosecution. But it is my view—and I have made this clear to the department—that the department should never stand between a potential complainant and either the Australian Federal Police or the state police, because, if the complainant does not want to pursue the matter, the complainant can tell the police that. It is not a satisfactory arrangement for it not to be passed on simply because the complainant says they do not want to. That might seem unfair. Some people might say, ‘If the complainant said they do not want to, you shouldn’t,’ but that does leave people who have heard about the matter within the department open to the accusation that they should have passed it on. My view is that a complainant is entitled to say, ‘I do not want this matter to proceed,’ but the complainant should say that to police, not to the department.

Linda Kirk (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Can the minister confirm that the investigation into Villawood, by former Queensland Corrective Services chief, Keith Hamburger, has now been completed? Can the minister also inform the Senate why this matter was not referred to the police—either the New South Wales Police or the AFP—in accordance with the memorandum of understanding between the New South Wales Police and DIMA? As I understand it, that memorandum indicates that a crime should be reported at a particular point in time. Finally, does the minister intend to make the report, when she receives it, available to the public? If so, when?

Amanda Vanstone (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have answered your question in terms of my view. That is, as soon as an allegation is raised, the police should be immediately informed, even if the complainant says they do not want to. I heard an interjection from one of your colleagues earlier, asking whether I understood why a complainant might not want the matter proceeded with by the police. My answer to that is, yes, I do. This is a situation where people who hear about these matters are between a rock and a hard place. You cannot have it both ways. You cannot say, ‘DIMA should refer these matters to the police,’ and then say, ‘But do you understand why they do not want to?’ Yes, I understand, but I think they should be.

I have the report, and I am in the process of looking at it. When I have completed considering the report, I will be able to decide what portions—if any, if not all—will be  made public. I just remind the Senate that this is an allegation that was addressed to me through the department in writing, but it is an allegation that relates to something that occurred more than two years ago. (Time expired)