Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister Assisting the Leader for Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Labor supports this bill, the Migration Amendment (Family Violence and Other Measures) Bill 2016, which was under consideration by the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee when the previous parliament was dissolved on 9 May last year.

During the election campaign, we took to the people of Australia a number of measures aimed at ending the scourge of family violence. Eliminating family violence must be a national priority. It is an area where there ought to be, and I believe is, bipartisanship. I can see no evidence to the contrary on that point. We are therefore keen to work with the government and the crossbench to achieve greater protection for women and children facing domestic violence, and this bill is consistent with that aim.

The purpose of this bill is to implement an assessable sponsorship framework for sponsored family visas similar to the framework that applies to sponsored work visas. Under this framework, a sponsor will have to make an application to become a sponsor before the primary visa application can be submitted. The sponsor will then be subject to several legally enforceable obligations. All family visas already have a sponsorship requirement, but under current practice there are few enforcement mechanisms. There is little scrutiny of the character of the sponsor or of the responsibilities that they assume. In some instances, applicants have not had longstanding knowledge of the sponsoring family member. There have been claims of family violence arising from within the existing program. This bill is intended to provide a remedy for that: it allows the sharing of police checks, and visa applicants will have access to information to understand the background of their sponsors in a much more effective manner. Under the framework introduced by this bill, applicants will be supplied with the information that they need before they agree to accept sponsorship. For obvious reasons, this is especially important when dealing with applicants with children.

The bill gives the minister or a delegate the power to refuse a sponsorship application or cancel an existing sponsorship where police checks reveal that the sponsor has a history of family violence, where the sponsor has a history of previous immigration cancellations or where there has been inappropriate use of the family visa program. Importantly, the bill retains provisions of the Migration Act that allow people applying for permanent residence in Australia to continue with their application after the breakdown of a marriage or a de facto relationship in which they or other family members have experienced violence by their partner.

This bill is an important step in providing greater protection to the victims or potential victims of family violence. But, in the bipartisan spirit that we believe offers the best way to go forward in this matter, Labor urge the government to go further. We ask the government to consider measures to protect people on temporary visas by creating a new type of visa. These new temporary visas would remove impediments to women leaving their partners and provide a right to work so that women leaving violent relationships will be able to support themselves.

I say again that Labor is willing to work with the government on this matter and I commend this bill to the Senate.

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

The Migration Amendment (Family Violence and Other Measures) Bill 2016 amends the Migration Act to allow the refusal of a sponsorship application, to cancel or bar a family sponsor in certain circumstances, to impose statutory obligations on approved sponsors and to facilitate the sharing of personal information. Obviously, family violence or domestic violence is an incredibly serious issue and one that has been responded to in greater measure by Commonwealth, state and territory governments in this country over the last few years, which is something that needs to be acknowledged and welcomed, albeit while pointing out that not all of the responses have been perfect or, indeed, adequate. However, because we are dealing with an important issue, which family violence obviously is, that doesn't mean that we can completely abandon procedural fairness, nor does it mean that we can completely abandon rights such as privacy rights, so the discussion or the conversation in this context often becomes one around where we strike a balance between conflicting imperatives. And that's something that, I'm sure, all members of this chamber wrestle with from time to time across a range of issues.

It's in that context that the Australian Greens express some concerns with the provisions in this legislation. This legislation provides that potential partner or marriage visa sponsors would first need to be approved as a sponsor before the sponsored visa process can commence. It's worth pointing out that the explanatory memorandum makes no mention of why these changes are necessary or what deficiencies there may be in the current arrangements that have led the government to form a view that the amendments that are proposed in this legislation are, in fact, necessary. I refer the Senate to the Australian Law Reform Commission's 2011 report Family violence and Commonwealth lawsimproving legalframeworks, which considered the issue with regulating sponsorship, and during that inquiry the department of immigration submitted:

Such measures could lead to claims that the Australian Government is arbitrarily interfering with families, in breach of its international obligations. It could also lead to claims that the Australian government is interfering with relationships between Australian and their overseas partners in a way it would not interfere in a relationship between two Australians.

The Australian Law Reform Commission concluded that, rather than instituting a separate criterion for sponsorship:

… the safety of partner visa applicants should be promoted by targeted education and information dissemination.

The Australian Law Reform Commission also concluded:

… that, because of concerns about Australia's international obligations, as well as procedural fairness and privacy, sponsorship requirements should not be altered.

So that is the view of the Australian Law Reform Commission.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator McKim. It being 2 pm, the debate is interrupted. You will be in continuation.