Daryl Melham (Banks, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Joint Select Committee on Australia's Immigration Detention Network, I present the committee's final report, incorporating a dissenting report and additional comments.

At the time that the report was tabled out of session on 30 March I made a statement, and I think it is appropriate for most of that statement to be put on the parliamentary record.

Australia has for many years, and under consecutive governments, struggled with the challenge posed by irregular maritime arrivals. The sobering facts outlined in this report speak for themselves. This inquiry unfolded in a highly contested political scene, and it is no secret that the report had little chance of ever being unanimous. However, I am proud of the process and the manner in which we as a committee conducted the inquiry.

The committee received over 3,500 submissions and conducted 11 public hearings and site visits. These included visits to various detention facilities at Christmas Island, Darwin, Derby, Villawood, Adelaide, Weipa and Melbourne. The committee has made a total of 31 recommendations for the government to consider. These vary from straightforward procedural matters for the department and its contractors through to recommendations for the existing network, children in detention and processing of protection claims and security assessments, together with the implementation of the Hawke-Williams recommendations.

The committee's fundamental conclusion is that asylum seekers should reside in held detention for as little time as is practicable. Evidence overwhelmingly indicates that prolonged detention exacts a heavy toll on people and, most particularly, on their mental health and wellbeing. One study by the Physicians for Human Rights found clinically significant symptoms of depression were present in 86 per cent of detainees, anxiety in 77 per cent and post-traumatic stress disorder in 50 per cent.

The committee applauds the substantial efforts already underway to reduce the number of people in held detention. To date, over 3,700 people have either been placed in community detention or placed on bridging visas. A number of the recommendations are grounded in the desire to build on the successes of the community detention and bridging visa programs, or to point to other means to minimise time spent in detention. To this end, the committee recommends that all reasonable steps are taken to limit detention to 90 days. Where people are held any longer the reasons for their prolonged detention should be made public.

As a committee we grappled with the vexed issue of security assessments. The current system does not allow refugees to access the existing avenues for a merits review of adverse decisions. This results in practically indefinite detention for detainees with adverse assessments. It is necessary to provide procedural fairness in a system where a person's liberty is at stake, while being mindful of the need to keep security sources and procedures confidential. The committee believes the current system does not strike an appropriate balance.

Accordingly, the committee has recommended that the ASIO legislation be amended to allow the Security Appeals Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to review ASIO security assessments of asylum seekers and refugees. In my forward to the report, at page xii, I had the following to say:

… the Committee grappled with the question of security assessments, and the fact that the current system bars refugees from accessing existing avenues for a merits review of adverse decisions, resulting in practically indefinite detention for detainees with adverse assessments. While it is necessary to be mindful of the need to keep security sources and procedures confidential, the overwhelming imperative to provide procedural fairness in the system cannot be ignored where a person's liberty is at stake. The Committee believes the current system does not strike an appropriate balance. Accordingly, the Committee has recommended that the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) legislation be amended to allow the Security Appeals Division of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to review ASIO security assessments of asylum seekers and refugees.

The Committee has recommended implementing further safeguards in the security assessment process, including periodic internal reviews of adverse ASIO assessments, and the exploration of whether control orders (currently used in the criminal justice system) could allow for the release from held detention of those refugees and asylum seekers who are in indefinite detention or cannot be repatriated.

I make the point publicly that I do not believe we can say that there is not one person in the whole of Australia who can adequately reassess security assessments delivered by ASIO and still have no threat to security. Of course we can; we just need to get on and do it. I actually think that having a system like that protects ASIO. It does not detract from ASIO. There is a saying, 'who guards the guard while the guard guards you'—it is applicable. I also want to say that given the enormous human and financial cost of held detention as well, the committee has reached the fundamental conclusion that less harmful and far more cost-effective alternatives are available and should be pursued.

I want to thank the members of the opposition; they supported 16 recommendations without condition and another three of the 31 recommendations with some modifications. I want to thank the secretariat, who were exceptional in the conduct of the inquiry, and other members of the committee—I think the cooperation that was extended on the committee did the parliament proud. And I want to thank Senator Hanson-Young, who is the deputy chair.

In accordance with standing order 39(f) the report was made a parliamentary paper.

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak to the report which has been tabled. This report was principally about the riots that took place just over a year ago. In March 2011, Australia's immigration detention network descended into chaos. There were riots, there were fires, there was violence, there were mass break-outs and there were attacks on detainees, Commonwealth officers, Australian staff and Federal Police, first at Christmas Island and just a few weeks later at Villawood. Australians watched in disbelief as Federal Police were forced to retake a Commonwealth facility in the middle of the night by force. The nation was rightly appalled. The coalition has demanded answers in this parliament. It was the coalition who moved that a parliamentary inquiry be established into what happened and, more broadly, the issues within the detention network. When this was first put forward, the government dismissed this as a stunt; they only later recanted and were forced to support the inquiry after the coalition gained the support of members of this parliament in the House and in the Senate.

The rolling crisis that overwhelmed our immigration detention network was the product not of a mandatory detention policy but of a simple failure of a border protection policy that resulted in too many people turning up on too many boats. What these events demonstrated is that you cannot run an effective immigration detention network under a mandatory detention policy if you are not going to support a strong border protection policy regime at the same time, as was practised by the Howard government.

The Hawke-Williams review found that these incidents were not entirely unpredictable. There had been numerous reports and events that indicated that a major event was brewing. Critical amongst these was the draft received from Knowledge Consulting by DIAC in May 2010, which was briefed to the then Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, Senator Evans, and also to the department secretary. That report said:

… it is likely that a serious incident will occur in the next six months and highly likely during the next twelve months … North West Point Immigration Detention Centre is overcrowded and understaffed … staff and client safety is compromised … client mental well being is at risk … the potential to escalate into a serious incident or incidents … far too many clients accommodated in NWP for the current capacity of the infrastructure … Lilac Compound in a High Risk category … hunger strikes and self harming, riots, burning and trashing of infrastructure, mass escapes, serious injuries to IMA's and staff' …

All of this was in the report received by the minister in May 2010. It is not surprising, then, that when the detention population had risen to 6½ thousand IMAs in detention, up from just four when the coalition left office, and serious incidents were occurring at a rate of one every 5½ hours in the first quarter of 2011, as opposed to one per month at the end of 2009, the Hawke-Williams review found that significant overcrowding, an increase in the length of detention time and 'the increasing proportion of detainees on negative pathways' all contributed to the situation that presented itself.

But, as our inquiry found in the report submitted by coalition members, these events and these forces did not occur spontaneously. They were a result of the government's decision to abolish the proven border protection regime inherited from the Howard government; the refusal of Senator Evans as Minister for Immigration and Citizenship to take action on that draft report he received in May 2010 either to restore the policies that worked, to abolish the discriminatory asylum freeze that had put the system under even further pressure or to take steps to further expand the detention network to cope with the rising rates of failure of the government's policies; the inability of Minister Bowen to adequately reduce the population as a result of the lack of expansion in the network when it was needed; the failure of Minister Bowen to comprehensively respond to clear warnings of escalating tensions, including security weaknesses identified in physical infrastructure; the failure to ensure that clear joint operational procedures for key agencies working with DIAC were in place; the failure to resolve the ambiguity of roles and responsibilities, particularly in relation to state and federal police; and the failure to send DIAC back to the table with Serco to renegotiate the contract to ensure that the arrangements that were in place were able to deal with the rising level of failures.

This is a serious report, and I want to commend the chair on the way he handled this inquiry. I particularly commend Tim Watling and his staff at the committee secretariat. The findings in here, as outlined by the coalition and as found in the Hawke-Williams review, sound a very clear warning to this government: if you do not restore proven border protection policies, you can expect further chaos. Last night 175 people turned up on the biggest boat to turn up since February 2010. There are as many people in the detention network today as there were when they set fire to the immigration detention facilities in March 2011.

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time allotted for statements on this report has expired. Does the honourable member for Banks wish to move a motion in connection with the report to enable it to be debated on a later occasion?

Daryl Melham (Banks, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the House take note of the report.

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In accordance with standing order 39, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.