Alice Jordan-Baird (Gorton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

The Administrative Review Tribunal and Other Legislation Amendment Bill is a key part of our government's efforts to clean up the dysfunctional migration system left to us by the former coalition government. It is so important to my electorate of Gorton that the ART is able to review migration decisions quickly and efficiently. Gorton, in Melbourne's western suburbs, is one of the fastest growing electorates in the country. So many families in the electorate come from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. In fact, Gorton has one of the highest proportions of first and second generation migrants in Australia.

I'm incredibly proud to represent an electorate with so many families that made the difficult decision to pack up and start a new life in Melbourne's west. This decision, made by so many new Australians throughout our modern history, is central to our country's DNA. Migration has enriched countless community groups, religious organisations, sporting clubs and schools throughout Gorton. Migrants also fill a number of crucial skills gaps in our local economy in Melbourne's west. These sectors include health care, manufacturing and construction.

In recent times we have seen fringe groups try and divide us by targeting migrants. The Albanese government stands against this division. We're getting on the job of giving our migration system the tools it needs to work quickly and effectively. This includes our merits review system, which allows people to review decisions made by government departments.

Last year, this government created the ART to replace the former Administrative Appeals Tribunal, the AAT, as Australia's federal merits review body. Under the previous tribunal, the backlog of cases awaiting review totalled almost 70,000 by the 2022 election. More than 80 per cent of those cases were migration and refugee matters. The AAT's backlog caused significant delays for so many migration decision reviews. These delays compromised the functioning of the AAT under the previous government.

The AAT was also undermined by a lack of transparency in the process of appointing its members. The previous government appointed dozens of former Liberal MPs, candidates and staffers to the AAT without a merit based selection process. As a result, the AAT was constantly affected by scandals and mismanagement. It could not function as an independent body capable of making high-quality decisions. An accessible, efficient and thorough merits review process is critical to maintaining trust in our system of government. This is why the Albanese government set out to abolish the dysfunctional AAT after forming government in 2022. We established the new ART to restore public trust and confidence in an independent system of review, and we designed the tribunal with merit based selection processes to support the appointment of experienced high-quality decision-makers. The ART allows Australians to seek an independent review of decisions made by government departments under more than 400 Commonwealth acts. These reviews ensure that legislation is applied correctly by our departments and authorities. They also allow those affected by certain decisions to access a relatively informal review and to achieve an outcome as soon as practicable.

The Administrative Review Tribunal Act 2024 formally established the ART, outlining several objectives. One of these objectives was ensuring that the tribunal processes applications as quickly possible, while still giving each application the proper consideration it requires. The ART also aims to process applications with as little formality and expense as needed. In setting out these objectives, we recognise that not every application to the ART is the same. The review process should always be of high quality, and it needs to make sense for each applicant, based on the issues involved. It does not make sense for the same resources and time to be committed to cases with different levels of complexity. Timely decision-making is incredibly important for the tribunal's reviews of migration decisions, like decisions to refuse visas. We can't expect applicants to wait several months or even years for a decision on whether or not they're able to stay in Australia. These decisions are life changing, and applicants deserve outcomes sooner.

It's not just that the applicants need outcomes; there's also a bigger threat at play. The Rapid Review into the Exploitation of Australia's Visa System highlighted the threat posed to the integrity of our migration system by delays at the tribunal stage. Long ART wait times give people the opportunity to exploit our migration system. When you receive a visa refusal and you apply for a review of that decision through the ART, you are entitled to remain in Australia on a bridging visa. This has opened the door for people to apply for a review, even though they know they do not have grounds, so they can get access to a bridging visa. This clogs the system with reviews that lack genuine grounds, and everyone waiting for a tribunal review has to wait longer for the outcome. This hurts the vast majority of applicants, who do go through the review process for the right reasons.

There are so many cases of applicants who have genuine grounds to apply for a review of a visa refusal outcome. You only have to be in Australia, to walk around my electorate, to see it. Because of the diversity of my electorate, immigration matters are one of the main issues my constituents contact my office about. My office recently assisted a young woman from the Middle East in receiving advice from the department as to the process for applying for a partner visa. In this instance the application was successful. Receiving a partner visa meant she could be together with her family and contribute positively to our community. Despite her young daughter growing up in Australia, they had been paying international school fees. For this woman, the partner visa meant that her daughter could access our amazing Australian education system. I hear stories like this every day in my office, and I see those stories in the first- and second-generation migrant communities that have decided to call Melbourne's west home. While long ART wait times exploit our migration system, they also hurt those people who have genuine grounds for review of visa refusal decisions.

We on this side of the House recognise that the ART needs the proper resources and flexibility to review applications efficiently. That's why our government has introduced the Administrative Review Tribunal and Other Legislation Amendment Bill. The ART is currently required to hold oral hearings for almost all reviews, even when they're not needed. These hearings are costly and delay the review process. The bill would amend the Migration Act 1958 to remove this requirement when it comes to certain decisions, including decisions to refuse student visa applications. The bill would strengthen the ART's procedures by allowing the tribunal to instead make decisions under a new on-the-papers review procedure. This means that the procedures will be based entirely on written materials instead of lengthy and unnecessary oral hearings.

Every case has unique circumstances and should be treated as such. Allowing the tribunal to be flexible is crucial in preventing backlogs from forming. Student visas are significant when we're talking about backlogs. In 2024-25, almost 40 per cent of applications lodged with the ART were student visa matters. This was almost double the number of student visa matters submitted to the previous tribunal in 2022-23. Because we're a young electorate, student visa matters are raised with my office nearly every day. Student visas are short-term in nature. They're also relatively low in complexity, in terms of the materials involved. There simply does not need to be a large backlog and excessive wait times for outcomes.

The tribunal process needs to be streamlined so that it makes sense for the issues involved in each case. In saying that, we know how important it often is for applicants to get to present their case to the ART. That's why the tribunal will also be required to invite applicants to give the tribunal written submissions and evidence on certain matters relating to the issues under review; will continue to give applicants certain adverse information and invite applicants to comment on it; will continue to request or obtain additional materials by other means, including making requests or orders for the applicant to provide certain documents; and will make its decision based on the written materials provided by applicants, without holding a hearing.

We recognise that the review case loads have changed significantly in the short time since the ART was established. A balance must be struck between efficiency and high-quality decision-making. These changes will better strike that balance. We're acting to make sure that our review system remains flexible and fit for purpose now and into the future.

The bill will also allow the minister to expand the on-the-papers process regulation to include decisions relating to other kinds of temporary visas. In saying that, we recognise that certain visas, such as permanent and protection visas, are complex and involve vulnerable applicants. Visas like these are often applied for by people fleeing war and persecution overseas. These amendments would therefore exclude reviews of these visas from being assessed on the papers.

The bill would also amend the ART Act to give the tribunal greater flexibility in terms of the types of cases it can assess on the papers. The ART would be able to make its decision based on written materials for applications where the application can be reviewed without the presence of the parties involved and the circumstances do not require a hearing to be held for a decision to be made. Everyone deserves a fair review, and we understand that giving the tribunal members the capacity to adapt their processes to the matters put before them is crucial in maintaining a fair review process.

While the bill would strengthen the independence of the ART, it's important that it includes safeguards. Parliament will still be able to disallow regulations extending the tribunal's ability to review applications without holding hearings if such regulations are inappropriate. The ART will also be required to consult and take submissions from the parties involved before it decides not to hold a hearing. It's important that we understand that efficiency in the review process cannot come at the expense of applicants having the opportunity to present their case to the ART. This is why our bill will not limit the written information applicants would be able to present to the tribunal in relation to their review.

The bill goes hand in hand with the migration reforms passed by the Albanese Labor government. The bill supports the government in ensuring our migration system can give Australia the skills we need. The bill protects our migration system, streamlining the review process and increasing flexibility and fairness. I want to see our migration system continue to deliver great outcomes for my electorate in Melbourne's western suburbs and for all our communities around Australia. I commend the bill to the House.

See this speech in context