James Paterson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Cyber Security) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

PATERSON () (): My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Home Affairs, Senator Watt. Senator Watt, I listened very carefully to your two-minute statement just before question time, and it is not clear to me, from what you said and what the minister for immigration has said today, whether or not the government will be releasing any of the other 92 people affected by this decision before or after the High Court has handed down the reasons for its decision. Which is it? Is it what you told the Senate yesterday, which is that no-one else will be released until the High Court has handed down its decision, or is it what the minister for immigration said today, which is that the government will now begin the process of releasing those other 92 people?

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Paterson, for giving me the opportunity to correct the misrepresentation of my remarks yesterday in question time that you've engaged in. I was very clear, and I invite anyone to have a look at the Hansard of yesterday's question time to see what I actually said on this matter rather than at how Senator Paterson has chosen to twist my words in the media today. I refer Senator Paterson to the statement that I made just prior to question time so that everyone was in a position to understand the latest developments on this significant decision. It is obviously a significant decision, and, as I said in my two-minute statement, all Australian governments are bound by decisions of the High Court. The decision was only handed down a couple of days ago, and we have been acting quickly to interpret that decision, bearing in mind that reasons for the decision have not yet been provided by the High Court. But I refer in broader answer to Senator Paterson's question. He seems to be aware that Minister Giles issued a statement early this morning providing a further update on this matter, and I'll read it to the chamber:

The Government notes the High Court ruling on November 8 in NZYQ v. Minister for Immigration …

We are considering the implications of the judgment carefully and will continue to work with authorities to ensure community safety is upheld.

The plaintiff has been released—as ordered by the High Court. Other impacted individuals will be released and any visas granted to those individuals will be subject to appropriate conditions.

And that is what is occurring. Any further statements or any further announcements about releases will obviously be made in due course. But the fundamental point here is that we are already complying with the High Court's decision in relation to the plaintiff. The minister has made clear his intentions regarding other individuals who may be affected by the decision, and, as I say, other announcements will be made in due course.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Paterson, a first supplementary?

James Paterson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Cyber Security) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yesterday in the Senate, you said, in response to a question from Senator McKim:

We're not a government that acts on decisions that haven't had reasons released.

So which is it? Will any of these people be released prior to the High Court handing down its decision, or, consistent with what you said yesterday, will they be released only after the High Court has handed down the reasons for its decision?

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Paterson can choose to twist my words in whatever way he wants to make a political statement. That's entirely his right. It is politics, and, if Senator Paterson wishes to play politics with this important matter, that's a matter for him. I repeat the statement from the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs this morning that the plaintiff has now been released, and, as I said in my two-minute statement, he has released subject to very strict conditions. He has been put on a bridging visa with strict conditions. Those conditions include the requirement—

James Paterson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Cyber Security) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I raise a point of order on direct relevance: I did not ask about the plaintiff. I asked about the other 92 people and when they will be released. Will it be now or after the High Court hands down its reasons?

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister is being relevant, Senator Paterson. I'll continue to listen carefully.

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I refer to my previous answer, which referred to the minister's statement this morning, which said:

The plaintiff has been released—as ordered by the High Court. Other impacted individuals will be released and any visas granted to those individuals will be subject to appropriate conditions.

The conditions that have been applied to the plaintiff, following his release, include the requirement to report to the Department of Home Affairs, the requirement to notify the minister of changes to his address or personal details, restrictions on industries of employment and a range of other strict conditions.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Paterson, a second supplementary?

James Paterson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Cyber Security) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, some of the people who will now be released have been convicted of serious violent and sexual offences. How many of them have been assessed by a court to be of a moderate or high risk of reoffending?

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Again, all of these matters are being worked through by the minister as we speak and have been ever since the High Court handed down its decision. We have made it very clear from the moment this decision was handed down that this government regards community safety as paramount in all cases and especially in relation to the cases that we're talking about here. We are considering the implications of the High Court judgement carefully, and we will continue to work with authorities to ensure that community safety is upheld. The government will use all available powers to keep the community safe and will consider all legislative options.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Paterson?

James Paterson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Cyber Security) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have a point of order on direct relevance. The minister did not even come near my question, which was: how many have been assessed by the courts to be of a moderate or high risk of reoffending?

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister Wong?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think he's finished answering.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Paterson. The minister has finished his contribution.