Kevin Andrews (Menzies, Liberal Party, Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) Share this | Hansard source

May I thank the members for Watson, Kooyong and Fisher for their contributions during the second reading debate on this bill. As members have pointed out, this review provisions bill strikes a practical balance between continuing to ensure that review applicants receive procedural fairness, on the one hand, and ensuring that the tribunals are able to provide procedural fairness in a way that is sufficiently flexible to be appropriate in each individual case, on the other hand. This is achieved by providing a discretion to the tribunals to deal with adverse information orally at a hearing. The bill also clarifies that adverse information which has already been provided by the applicant other than orally for the purposes of the decision under review does not have to be given to the applicant for comment or response.

Reference was made in the debate to the recommendations by the Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs, which handed down its report on this bill on 20 February this year. I record my thanks to the committee for the valuable work it has done throughout its inquiry into the bill. I also thank the people and organisations who provided thoughtful and considered input to the committee. The committee recommended that the bill be passed with an amendment so that adverse material may only be provided orally at hearing at the election of the applicant. However, the government supports the passing of the review provisions bill in its original form. This is because the recommendation would, to a large extent, nullify the objective of the bill to allow the tribunals flexibility in how they give procedural fairness to review applicants.

The committee’s proposed amendment would remove the ability of the tribunals to control a process by which adverse information is provided to applicants. Those applicants who wish to deliberately delay the review process could simply refuse to respond to adverse information put to them orally at hearing, even where they are perfectly capable of doing so. The government’s longstanding objective of maintaining the integrity of the migration review process could be undermined because the committee’s proposed amendment has the potential to be open to such abuse. In addition, the committee’s recommendation would add an impractical process and introduce greater complexity in the conduct of tribunal hearings. I also remind the House that this bill does not affect an applicant’s right to seek judicial review of a tribunal decision. Access to the courts remains intact. I therefore commend the bill to the House.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

Ordered that the bill be reported to the House without amendment.

See this speech in context