Coalition continues question time attacks on Andrew Giles
We are straight into the questions and the theme of the opposition’s pursuit today is immediately clear with Peter Dutton’s first question: does Anthony Albanese have confidence in his immigration minister, Andrew Giles?
I do [is Albanese’s short answer].
Albanese:
The government continues to refuse and cancel visas on character grounds. Section 501 has not changed and I make this point: since coming to government we [have] deported over 4,200 individuals from immigration detention. In our first year of government the number of individuals we deported from immigration detention was almost double the number the previous government deported the year prior.
The AAT made a decision independently of government to overturn visa cancellations. As the minister has said he will be reviewing the recent AAT decisions.
Parliament yesterday passed legislation abolishing the AAT and replacing it with a new administrative review tribunal. The only effective way of ensuring the tribunal members are making better decisions is to issue a new revised direction which the minister will be doing. The new directive will ensure that the protection [of the community] outweighs any other consideration.
There are heaps of interjections and then Anthony Albanese moves on to Peter Dutton’s history and everyone gets even louder.
Key events
Paul Karp
Labor senator Varun Ghosh at 2:35pm in Senate Estimates asked a series of questions about criminal offenders released from immigration detention from 2014 to 2022, under the Coalition government.
Strangely, a backbench senator already had the statistics his questions were seeking, while the Home Affairs and Australian Border Force officials did not and had to take the questions on notice.
About 45 minutes later, officials were able to give answers that, yes: four murderers, alleged murderers or accessories to murder were released from immigration detention under the Coalition; 64 people child sex offences; and 40 domestic violence offenders.
Officials confirmed that none of these were subject to electronic monitoring or curfews, as these conditions only passed parliament after the NZYQ high court decision in November 2023.
Labor’s Murray Watt, representing the immigration minister, said:
This is a really extraordinary development in this entire story. What we’ve seen today is Mr Dutton’s political campaign on this issue completely blow up in his face. Mr Dutton and others in the Coalition have waged a political campaign demanding ministers resign, demanding all sorts of standards we now learn they have never complied with themselves.”
Watt said this had happened on Dutton’s watch as home affairs minister, and not as a result of a high court decision.
For about 15 minutes the website legislation.gov.au went down (it is back now).
People trying to access it (including our own Elias Visontay) received a “This service is unavailable” message.
So either everyone is quite desperate to look up legislation, or gremlins are afoot.
We’ll let you know if there is something to know.
Dutton hits back on social media
Peter Dutton (or a staffer using Dutton’s X account) has responded to some of the things Andrew Giles raised in QT (Giles cited SMH reporting) on social media:
These are the full quotes provided to
[David Crowe]
I cancelled more than 6,300 visas – more than any Minister since Federation. The cancellation power was exercised within the limits of the Constitution. Mr Albanese watered down the law under Direction 99 and that’s why you are seeing the complete failure by this Government and the hapless Andrew Giles.
(He also then includes a personal attack against Crowe and a senior journalist not at all involved in any of this, because … Dutton.)
Elias Visontay
No progress on improving speed of Canberra-Sydney rail despite priority listing
Senior infrastructure public servants have revealed there has been no progress on improving the speed of the snail-like Canberra-Sydney train line, despite the proposal being identified as a priority project for the past four years.
Speeds on the Canberra-Sydney train line have not progressed in decades, with the more than four-hour trip comfortably outpaced by cars, buses and planes, to the ire of the ACT chief minister, Andrew Barr, who has repeatedly pleaded for either the commonwealth or New South Wales government to invest in modest upgrades that could significantly hasten the service.
During Senate estimates on Wednesday, the independent senator David Pocock asked Adam Copp, the CEO of Infrastructure Australia – a commonwealth body that provides independent research and advice to governments on projects – about the status of the proposed upgrade, which had received submissions from the ACT and NSW governments.
Copp said there had been “no particular progress on that proposal”, despite it being listed as a national significant “opportunity” on Infrastructure Australia’s priority list – described as a menu of options for governments to invest in – that could be delivered within 0-5 years. Copp, referring to either the NSW or federal government, said:
It would need a proponent to take it forward.
Barr has long pushed for either the NSW or the commonwealth to upgrade the list, given that just a handful of kilometres of the track lie within the ACT’s borders, as well as the territory’s comparatively smaller budget.
Barr has been discussing cheaper, modest upgrades to the track to make it similar or slightly faster than the drive, as opposed to the high speed rail plan outlined by the Albanese government, a decades-long project for which Labor has chosen Sydney-Newcastle as the starting stretch.
Sussan Ley wants Clare O’Neil kicked out for interjections:
She has repeatedly interjected since being warned. The standing orders should apply equally to both sides of the house and with respect, opposition members have been ejected. I ask that you similarly treat the minister for home affairs.
Milton Dick moves on.
And question time ends.
Another question for Andrew Giles on visas and direction 99
There is another question around direction 99 being used by the AAT to reinstate a visa and Andrew Giles says:
As I’ve previously said in question time today, I will be issuing a new revised ministerial direction. And part of that is to ensure that visa decisions are guided by those two principles: protection of the community and common sense.
And as I said in an answer to an earlier question, there will be a higher focus on these than has been the case in the past. And I’m sure the leader of the opposition, when he was listening to the examples that the prime minister put to him, was reflecting on how previous ministerial directions might, under him, might have been improved too.
These are changes that will improve decision making. Now, on the specific question, I can say that I have already briefed senior officials of my department. So that these changes can progress expeditiously.
Dan Tehan goes to make a point of order, but Milton Dick pre-empts him by saying that Giles is being directly relevant and it would be a very long bow to say he is not and Tehan sits back down. “Smart move,” says Dick.
Giles:
… And I note again a report in today’s Sydney Morning Herald, which begins: ‘Two men convicted of accessory to murder were released from federal detention when opposition leader Peter Dutton was the minister in charge of immigration and home affairs.’
Released by him – not by the AAT, by his delegate when he was responsible.
Wilkie asks PM whether government is ‘kicking the can down the road’ on gambling reforms
Andrew Wilkie asks Anthony Albanese:
Prime minister, it’s almost a year since the standing committee on social policy and legal affairs released its report on online gambling and its impacts on those experiencing gambling harm.
So why hasn’t the government implemented the committee’s recommendations including a gambling advertising ban? And when will the government implement the recommendations? Or are you just kicking the can down the road until after the next election?
Albanese:
The government has done more in our two years than those opposite did in their almost decade in office. This is what we have done. We’ve launched Betstop, the national self-exclusion register. We’ve mandated customer verification for all new online wagering accounts to prevent children from gambling and strengthen protections for Australians who have registered for bet stop.
We’ve agreed with the states and territories for new minimum classifications for video games with gambling like content.
We’ve implemented new evidence-based taglines to replace the gambling taglines that were previously there that were ineffective. And we’ve introduced nationally consistent staff training. We’ve required online wagering companies to send their customers monthly activity statements outlining wins and losses. We’ve legislated a ban on the use of credit cards for gambling.
What we know, though, is that there is more to do, and the minister for communications and the minister for social services are working diligently through all of the recommendations that were contained in the report.
… I think of our dear friend, I think we can say in this chamber, Peta Murphy, the report that she did; we’re working through it in an orderly way.
We’re consulting all the appropriate groups, including gambling groups. I’ve met with a range of stakeholders, including people like Tim Costello and others about these issues. We want to make sure there’s a comprehensive approach to tackling gambling harm.
Graham Readfearn
Australia has raised with Japan targeting of large fin whales in future hunting, official says
The Australian government has raised directly with the Japanese government that country’s recent widening of its whale hunting programs.
In a Senate estimates hearing, the Greens senator Peter Whish-Wilson asked an official from the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water if the government was aware of Japan’s recent decision to add large fin whales to its list of whale species it would target in future hunts. An official said:
We are aware and have raised it directly with the Japanese government.
They added that a secretary from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade had raised the issue verbally with the Japanese government.
The issue had been raised verbally, the official said.
Josh Taylor
TikTok’s use of tracking pixel not a breach of law and ‘sadly not unique’ to platform: privacy commissioner
The Australian privacy commissioner has decided against investigating TikTok for using a tracking pixel that collects information about its users on pages across the internet, noting that while invasive, it is not a breach of the law or unique to TikTok.
The pixel collects information about users based on the websites they visit where the pixel is embedded, sending it back to the companies that use the pixel information about what they were doing on those sites.
It is a tool used by a number of organisations, but the focus on TikTok’s use comes amid moves both here and abroad to ban the app due to its Chinese parent company. The Nine newspapers reported on the matter in December last year, prompting the initial inquiries from the OAIC, and for the shadow cybersecurity minister, James Paterson, to claim it was a potentially mass breach of privacy.
The privacy commissioner, Carly Kind, said in a statement on Wednesday that there was “no clear and obvious breach of Australian privacy law that would warrant opening an investigation and the issues “are sadly not unique to TikTok”:
Pixels are one of many tracking tools, including cookies, that permit granular user surveillance across the internet and social media platforms. Many of these tracking tools are harmful, invasive and corrosive of online privacy.
We urgently need reform of the Privacy Act. It is the best way to tackle the most harmful aspects of the digital ecosystem.
Kind said the OAIC was considering how to address issues raised by the proliferation of online tracking tools, including better disclosure by sites using them.
Giles points to reports of offenders released into community while opposition was in government
Dan Tehan is back again!
Didn’t the minister mislead the parliament when he said each of the 153 hardened criminals would be continually monitored, given that evidence in Senate estimates advises that 26 sex offenders, including child sex offenders, no longer have electronic monitoring order?
Andrew Giles:
This is a question I’ve answered previously, relying on the evidence given to Senate estimates that the detainees who were required to be released are being continuously monitored.
But in relation to the last aspect of this question, I am deeply concerned by reports just in, in the Sydney Morning Herald, that refer to 102 convicted sex offenders released into the community when the leader of the opposition was responsible, and 64 child sex offenders not brought by order of the court or tribunal members released by his [ministerial orders].
Tehan tries to raise a point of order but Giles has finished his answer, so no point of order!
Milton Dick issues a Barnaby Joyce-specific warning, that anyone who is the member for New England should shut it, or be kicked out.
He’s been here in the parliament for almost 20 years and will cease interjecting for the remainder of question time and … is now on a warning.
I know he’s never been thrown out of parliament before.
It is not a competition. The member for New England will remain silent for the remainder of question time.
Imagine having that power for just general life.
‘The location of every individual is known’, says Giles after question on released immigration detainees
Dan Tehan is back (hashtag blessed) with another question which has similar vibes to the previous questions, but is in relation to a different cohort.
(Every time a Coalition MP says “hardened criminals”, they mean the cohort who were released after the high court ruled that indefinite detention was illegal. The cohort does include people who served sentences for crimes, but it also includes people who were not convicted of crimes, or not charged. It is also worth remembering that Australian citizens who commit crimes are released into the community once they have served any custodial sentence ordered by a court.)
Tehan:
Can the minister for immigration confirm, of the 153 hardened criminals that were released into the community, at least two of the murderers [are] in the community without electronic monitoring, and if we know it is at least two, what is the number of murderers out in the community without electronic monitoring?
Andrew Giles:
I thank the shadow minister for his question and I do say that it was the leader of the opposition sitting there who let someone out of immigration detention, his [direction] that [got] that person a visa with no monitoring and no reporting obligations, and that person than went on to allegedly commit a crime, and he doesn’t seem interested in talking about it.
Because he and the shadow minister always play politics. This group of people are constantly being monitored. As the ABF have advised, the location of every individual is known. The decisions made by delegates are informed by the work of the community protection board which is comprised of a range of expert people with deep experience in these areas who consider each case on its merits as the law requires.
As Paul Karp reported earlier, this was also ranged in estimates and the ABF commissioner, Michael Outram, said that the delegates’ decisions on curfews and ankle bracelets are made “judiciously and studiously” and consider a range of information, disputing the approach of looking at a criminal conviction and assuming they’re “all the same”.
Each case revolves on its own merits.
Milton Dick deals with the points of order:
He takes Monique Ryan’s point, but says no one is identified and it is up to the member to make sure the details are accurate.
He wants silence when people raise their points of order. No matter who it is.
Andrew Giles then gets to answer:
The government continues to cancel visas on character grounds as it appears to have been the case here. I continue to cancel visas from set-asides [tribunal decisions] where appropriate. As I outlined an in the prime minister outlined, we are issuing a new direction that is revised and we will be focused on …
Dan Tehan has a point of order. Milton Dick points out Giles has been speaking for just 15 seconds and it would be virtually impossible to have a point of order on relevance at this point of the answer.
Tehan, though, has always seemed to believe that “fools rush in where angels fear to tread” is political career advice, and says:
The question is, when will they revoke ministerial order 99?
Dick points out that members need to say what their point of order is actually on, but is assuming it is relevance and therefore, there will be no more points of order on relevance with this answer.
Giles:
As I was saying, the new revised direction will ensure the two principles that have always been at the heart of these ministerial directions in commonsense decision making will take place at the … new ART.
It will make sure that community protection outweighs other considerations and, particularly going to the case that the member referred to, we will strengthen the principles of community safety including the impact [on] victims and their families, and strengthen the family violence provisions.
