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

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Home Affairs. Minister, I refer you to the ongoing humanitarian calamity your government has created and overseen on Nauru by running a systemic regime of torture and child abuse. Can you confirm that Australia's senior IHMS medical officer on Nauru, Dr Nicole Montana, has been arrested overnight, issued with a deportation notice and has been deported—or very shortly is likely to be—from Nauru? This is after Medecins Sans Frontieres were booted off the island last week and after more than 5,500 doctors have demanded that the children you are torturing on Nauru and their families be brought to Australia for urgent medical treatment. Minister, why was Dr Montana deported and what are you doing about it?

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator O'Sullivan on a point of order.

Barry O'Sullivan (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I've raised this once before: this assertion, directed at personalities and us collectively, that we're torturing children has just got to be unparliamentary and I believe that the senator ought to withdraw it.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order, Senator McKim?

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

I was very clear not to accuse any individual senator in this place of engaging in child abuse. What I said, very clearly, is that the government is running a systemic regime of torture and child abuse—and I respectfully put it to you that that is not out of order.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order raised by Senator O'Sullivan, there is no use of unparliamentary language or reflection upon another senator because it was not directed at another senator. However, Senator McKim, I urge you to read standing order 73. I have had discussions with party leaders about standing order 73 and its particular restriction that says questions shall not contain arguments, inferences, imputations, epithets or ironical expressions, among others things. That question, in my view, does not comply with standing order 73. I will, as I have said before, invite the minister to answer the parts of that question which were in order—and there were parts of that question that were in order. But I have warned senators that I will start applying standing order 73.

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Small and Family Business) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm assuming that, because we're on broadcast today, Senator McKim decided he would trump Senator Whish-Wilson and ask a question similar to that which he asked yesterday. But I completely dismiss the assertions that Senator McKim has made in relation to the situation on Nauru. I am aware of media reporting about the matter of an International Health and Medical Services senior medical officer departing Nauru on 17 October 2018. This is, of course, a matter for the government of Nauru. I am advised that there has been no impact to the continuity of care for transferees and refugees on Nauru and that another senior medical officer remains on the island. I am also advised that there are 65 health professionals contracted by the Australian government to provide health services on Nauru, including 33 mental health professionals. These services are available seven days a week and after hours. Colleagues may be interested to know that this equates to a ratio of one medical professional for every 11 transferees on the island.

Again, though, Senator McKim does need to be reminded of why this situation has occurred. And, yet again, Senator McKim, as we move towards the election, there is a very clear choice between those of us in the coalition government, who will always ensure that Australia's borders are secure, and those in the Australian Greens and the Australian Labor Party, who the minute they get into office, if they are elected, would ensure that the calamity and chaos that occurred under the previous Rudd-Gillard Labor government will occur yet again. (Time expired)

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator McKim, a supplementary question.

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

Minister, the Department of Home Affairs says that there'll be no impact on the continuity of care for refugees as a result of Dr Montana's deportation, and you've actually repeated those words today. Can you confirm, however, that the reality is that this is a lie and that numerous appointments with Dr Montana for today have been cancelled and no replacement appointments offered? Is the Department of Home Affairs lying to Australians yet again, as they did after the Good Friday shooting on Manus Island?

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Small and Family Business) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator McKim, I completely reject the premise of your question. Those of us on this side of the chamber are very proud of the work that our Department of Home Affairs does in keeping our borders secure. Again, though, Senator McKim does need to be reminded of exactly why—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator McKim, on a point of order?

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

Yes, thank you, Mr President. The point of order is on the basis of relevance. I understand that the minister has said the words that she rejects the premise of the question. I do understand that. The issue, though, Mr President, is that I have directly put to the minister that the information she just gave to the parliament in her previous answer is inaccurate. I use the word 'lie' in relation to what the Department of Home Affairs has said. It's the same as the minister has said. So could you please direct the minister to answer the question and to be clear about whether her rejection of the premise is actually a rejection of that assertion.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senators know I cannot direct a minister how to answer a question, as long as they are being directly relevant to the subject matter of the question. The minister is being directly relevant.

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Small and Family Business) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Again, then, for the record, I am advised that there has been no impact on the continuity of care for transferees and refugees on Nauru and that another senior medical officer remains on the island. I will also reiterate for the record that I'm advised that there are 65 health professionals contracted by the Australian government to provide health services on Nauru, including 33 mental health professionals. Again, these services are available seven days a weeks and after hours. Again, Senator McKim, this equates to a ratio of one medical professional for every 11 transferees on the island.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator McKim, a final supplementary question.

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

Minister, you've twice now claimed that Dr Montana's deportation has not impacted on the continuity of care for refugees on Nauru in any way. Can you please commit that you will seek further advice on this and remit to the Senate the response from the department specifically to my assertion, which I believe to be fact, that appointments have been cancelled today and no alternative appointments offered? (Time expired)

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Small and Family Business) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Again, Senator McKim, you've even stated yourself that you have made assertions—nothing more and nothing less. I again reiterate that I have been advised—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator McKim, on a point of order.

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

This was an incredibly specific question, Mr President. My point of order is on relevance. This was a specific question about whether the minister would seek further advice in regard to whether or not appointments with Dr Montana on Nauru have been cancelled and no alternative appointments made.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator McKim, that was the second part of the question you asked. I remind senators that you made a statement before that, Senator McKim, and the minister is entitled to address the statement you made before you had that question about what the minister had previously asserted. I cannot direct the minister how to answer a question as long as the minister is being directly relevant—and, in this case, I believe the minister is.

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Small and Family Business) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Again, perhaps Senator McKim needs to understand exactly why we are in the situation of even having people on Nauru and Manus Island. Again, that is because of the policies that Senator McKim and those in the Australian Greens would delight in implementing if ever they are able to join with a Labor government and do so. Senator McKim, it is a reality that, because of the policies that your party supported, 50,000 people arrived here on in excess of 800 boats. Senator McKim, it is a fact that, because of the policies the Australian Greens supported, there were 1,200—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator McKim, on a point of order.

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

It is on direct relevance. The minister is not being, and has never been in this answer, directly relevant to the question I asked. I ask you to remind her of the question, please.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'll ignore your observation on my first ruling, but I remind the minister that this question related to the previous two questions about healthcare services. I remind the minister of the terms of the question.

Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Small and Family Business) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I was saying, that we even have to have a conversation about Nauru or Manus Island is only because of the policies that the Australian Greens support. (Time expired)

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

That was one of the most pathetic things you've done, and that is really saying something.