Julian Hill (Bruce, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) reaffirms that:

  (a) Australians love who they love, and the community must have confidence that the partner and spouse visa provisions in the Migration Act 1958 (the Act) are administered lawfully, fairly, impartially and with integrity;

  (b) while the Minister generally has the power to limit the number of visas in particular classes and subclasses by using the program management provisions in s86 of the Act, s87 of the Act explicitly prevents the 'capping' of visas to people who apply for a visa on the grounds that they are the spouse or de facto partner of an Australian citizen or permanent resident;

  (c) the Parliament has voted twice to reject legislative amendments to give the Minister a power to cap these visa classes, preferring the processing of spouse visa applications to occur on a demand-driven basis; and

  (d) inexplicable and unconscionable delays by the Department of Home Affairs in processing thousands of partner visa applications continues to result in significant harm to, and consequences for, Australian citizens and permanent residents;

(2) condemns the Government for:

  (a) using the administrative tool of migration program planning levels to unlawfully override the legislated program management tools in s86 and s87 thus effectively 'capping' partner visas against the intent of s87 of the Act;

  (b) refusing to release advice on the legality of their actions to restrict partner visa grants;

  (c) presiding over an extraordinary blow out to 91,717 as at 31 March 2020 in the number of partner visa applications on hand, an increase of almost 30 per cent in under three years;

  (d) unacceptably high and deteriorating processing times for partner visa applications, with the Department's website indicating that:

     (i) subclass 300—75 per cent of applications are processed within 16 months and 90 per cent of applications are processed within 29 months;

     (ii) subclass 309—75 per cent of applications are processed within 15 months and 90 per cent of applications are processed within 20 months;

     (iii) subclass 100—75 per cent of applications are processed within 20 months and 90 per cent of applications are processed within 24 months;

     (iv) subclass 820—75 per cent of applications are processed within 20 months and 90 per cent of applications are processed within 25 months; and

     (v) subclass 801—75 per cent of applications are processed within 13 months and 90 per cent of applications are processed within 25 months;

  (e) cutting the number of partner visas granted by 8,000 per annum which will mean the backlog and processing times continue to grow;

  (f) allowing a blowout in the backlog of cases to 5,556 cases at the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) as at 31 July 2020 with:

     (i) an average processing time for partner cases of 726 calendar days; and

     (ii) a partner visa set aside rate at the AAT of around 60 per cent;

  (g) failing to address the perverse consequences of COVID-19 related border restrictions for partner visa applicants including:

     (i) refusing to let numerous partner and prospective marriage visa holders enter Australia before their visa expires, or at least to extend their visa expiry date or refund their money; and

     (ii) refusing to let people who are currently in Australia on a temporary visa and who are granted an offshore partner visa to activate that visa without having to fly overseas; and

  (h) attempting to silence Australians who speak up publicly about the delays in processing and growing problems in the partner visa program; and

(3) calls on the Government to:

  (a) acknowledge the devastating human impact of delays and uncertainty on affected couples whose lives are in limbo, whose mental health is suffering, and whose relationships are being destroyed through separation from their partner for many years;

  (b) apologise for the unacceptable delays in processing partner visa applications and take immediate action to process the backlog noting the Government has collected massive levels of visa application revenue that should be used to process applications in a timely way;

  (c) urgently address the perverse consequences of COVID-19 related border restrictions on partner visas; and

  (d) publicly commit to affected people and the wider community that partner visa processing will in future be administered lawfully, fairly, impartially and expeditiously.

Australians love who they love, and it has always been part of modern Australia that people fall in love, marry people from overseas and build a life here. Yet right now, as we debate this motion, the lives of nearly 100,000 Australians are in limbo, desperately waiting for years for this miserable government to grant their partner visas. Australian couples are suffering, separated for years and hearts pining. Relationships are now stressed or broken as waiting times continue to increase. Desperate cries for help about partner visa delays are now one of the most common things that come to my office, and every single member of this House would have hundreds, sometimes thousands of, constituents with similar trauma.

It used to take six months or maybe a year—that was normal. But after seven years of this mean, miserable Liberal government, waiting times are drifting past two years and just keep rising. Perhaps worse, though, than the time it takes is the complete uncertainty and fear. Australians now cannot plan their lives. Do they buy a house? Sell a house? Do they start a family? Will they ever get a visa? They click refresh on the website, watching these estimated wait times rise and rise, getting little to no information about their application from that black hole, that vortex, which is the Department of Home Affairs. Many people are terrified to speak up, thinking this may harm their chances. In truth, I found this helps people, as the government now is so desperate to stop the public criticism it was caught only two weeks ago fast tracking visas to people who went to the media in desperation. People who had waited years suddenly got their visa in 12 hours! It's an outrageous abuse of process and a corruption of public administration.

These delays are not due to a lack of resources. The visas are expensive—they're nearly $8,000—plus thousands more for health checks, security checks and agent fees. No, the growing delays are the result of deliberate—and I believe illegal—government policy. From the moment the government was elected and the now Prime Minister became immigration minister, a hard cap was placed on the number of partner visas issued every year. Two years ago he cut the number of visas every year, so now waiting times just rise even faster.

'Illegal' is a pretty strong word to throw at a minister, but it's true. Under the Migration Act, the minister has the power to cap and queue the number of visas issued each year for most visa classes. But spouse, partner and dependent child visas are different. Section 87 of the act explicitly states that the minister cannot cap those visas. They're supposed to be demand driven, acknowledging the reasonable right of Australians to fall in love and build a life with their partner here. The Hawke and Howard governments tried to pass legislation to give the minister the power to cap these visas, but both times this was rejected by the Senate.

The government know that what they're doing is not just cruel it is illegal. They have legal advice which they refuse to release, but we saw with documents released under freedom of information a Yes Minister-style attempt in 2016 to explain that a planning level is not a cap—it's just a cap! Yet only under this government has this hard annual limit been locked in, in a flat line. It's a cap. Some of the saddest situations are those people who have been granted a prospective marriage visa, having paid $10,000 to $20,000 and waited for years yet the government will not let their fiance come to Australia now. The clock is ticking for these couples as their visas expire.

The irony was the acting minister last week, speaking about keeping Australians together when he's keeping couples apart. And disgracefully the government will not refund their money or extend their visa. They're ripping off Australians in their own state-sponsored immigration racket. Are they seriously asking Australians to fork out another $10,000 to $20,000 and wait another two to three years in the hope that next time they might get lucky? We're a better, fairer country than this. Australians deserve to be treated better by this government.

The issue is not just going to go away, no matter how much the government members may wish it. The numbers will just keep rising. That's their policy, and there are angry Australians in every electorate in this country. They are now getting organised, thanks in large part to the wonderful Amelia Elliott from the Deakin electorate. She can't get a call back from her local MP—although she told me she watched 60 Minutes and figured out why. But, on behalf of all those Australians, I urge, I demand, government MPs to stop, to put down the partisan cudgels and talking points and ask themselves: How would you feel if this was you? How would you feel if this was your child? Is this right? Is it fair? Is it just to treat Australians in this way? And if the quiet voice inside says, 'No,' then do something—speak to the minister, do it quietly, do it loudly, do it in your party room. But let's work together to force change and fix this mess. Let these prospective marriage visa holders come to Australia for their wedding. Clear the backlog of partner visas, and let Australians who are in love be reunited with their partners. It's not too much to ask.

Ross Vasta (Bonner, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Andrew Giles (Scullin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Cities and Urban Infrastructure) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

Julian Leeser (Berowra, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on this motion moved by the member for Bruce. Like me, the member for Bruce—as he often refers to me as the other Julian; he, in this case, is the other Julian—is a member of the Joint Standing Committee on Migration, which I chair. The member for Bruce has raised these issues of partner visas with the Department of Home Affairs when they appeared before the committee in the context of our present inquiry into working holiday-maker visas. I know that this has been an issue of concern to him for some time.

I want to say that the COVID-19 situation has meant that the ability of people to come to Australia, even Australian citizens let alone people's non-Australian partners, has been significantly curtailed as a result of international and domestic border closures both in Australia and overseas. My office, like those of many other members, has received multiple inquiries about Australians seeking to travel to see family in other countries, to return to Australia from overseas and to bring partners and family members to Australia. While there is increased attention being paid to the issue of Australians overseas, it's worth noting that since 13 March the Australian government has helped over 27,000 Australian citizens and permanent residents return to Australia on more than 345 flights, including 64 flights directly facilitated by the government. The international passenger arrival caps are putting pressure on seats and the ability for people seeking to return to Australia quickly. These caps are being reviewed every fortnight, with the next review to take place on Friday 4 September.

Australians seeking to return should remain in regular contact with their airlines and travel agents to confirm their arrangements and subscribe to our travel advice at smartraveller.gov.au. I know from my contact with consular teams in other countries, particularly the high commission in India who I spent some time with in January this year, they are doing their best to help people out.

In the partner visa context, it is right to acknowledge for those waiting for partner visas that things have become much harder because of the COVID circumstances. While visa applications are continuing to be processed, people are experiencing many uncertainties with flights cancelled, weddings uncertain, very real health risks involved in travelling and no clarity about when the situation will change. All of this is added to the stress associated with visa applications in general.

Some applicants are also finding it difficult to get checks that they need to be processed in their own home countries. Services like biometric tests may not be currently available, and this means that their visa applications cannot be progressed and finalised. It's a reality, and it's difficult and frustrating for the people there to experience. Those in these difficult situations should be aware that if they do not yet hold a partner visa they are able to apply for a temporary visa and request travel exemption. Prospective marriage visa holders can also apply for an exemption to the current travel ban if they have compelling and compassionate reasons to travel to Australia.

Family migration is an important part of our migration program. The most common visas in the family migration category are partner visas. In 2018-19 there were 39,918 people coming to Australia on partner visas. This is actually a very significant figure when you consider that there were 119,188 marriages in the same year. That means for every three couples in Australia that were married, there was a partner visa granted to someone who came to Australia and built their life with the people they love. I think that this indicates we actually have a high number of people successfully obtaining partner visas each year.

I want to make clear that, contrary to what the member for Bruce has implied, the partner visa program isn't capped. While there is a cap on the overall number of migrants who come to Australia, there's no limit on the number of partner visas that can be granted. While section 85 of the Migration Act allows for the imposition of caps on visas of a specific class, that cannot be done for partner visas because of section 87.

Partner visa applications involve a two-stage processing arrangement to protect the integrity of the visa program. An applicant must be in a genuine and continuing relationship with their sponsor at both stages in order to be granted a permanent visa. This ensures that we are looking at people who are in serious, long-term committed relationships.

The public have every right to have confidence in the system and to have confidence that those who come here come here legitimately. The truth is that partner visas have been abused in the past. In 2012 The West Australian reported a marriage scam in Queensland, with a migration agent charging $18,000 to match people to Australians for bogus marriages. In the same year the Department of Home Affairs told a Senate inquiry that around nine per cent of prospective marriage visas are refused because the genuineness of that relationship could not be satisfied in that same year. In 2018 the Herald Sun reported that, over the four years prior, nearly 1,500 applications for partner visas were thrown out due to fraud.

So there have been concerns about the partner visa process and the genuineness. It's important that those concern are addressed and that people are properly assessed. While the partner visa process is burdensome for those who legitimately want to build a life together here in Australia, it's essential that it's rigorous because experience demonstrates that it can be and will be abused.

Andrew Giles (Scullin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Cities and Urban Infrastructure) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I mentioned earlier my hope that the member for Berowra would second the motion. He disappointed me on that, but I thought his contribution was a very interesting one. Typically for him, it was a thoughtful and decent contribution, but, frankly, irrelevant to the case that he appeared to be making against the member for Bruce's motion. The member for Berowra did not engage with the key issues that the member for Bruce has put forward—the key issues I think all of us are experiencing in our electorate offices as we deal with people going through very difficult times and engaging with the legislative framework. Of course, the legislative framework has to deal with integrity in the system and has to recognise that there have been issues in the past, but that has got absolutely nothing to do with the issues, as is made abundantly clear by the statistics set out in the motion, particularly those going to the tribunal.

I'm very happy to stand with the member for Bruce and all of my Labor colleagues in recognising some facts. The key fact is that we are a proudly multicultural nation. Until recent times we have also been travelling people. People form loving relationships with people who aren't Australian citizens quite often, including my mother and father, for example. Our legal framework has recognised this for some time. In the other place attempts to change that legal framework—to impose a cap—have been rejected on two occasions. This government has no such proposal. As in so many other areas, it lacks the courage of its conviction, so it seeks to do by administrative fiat what it will not do with its lawmaking powers. That is profoundly unacceptable. If government members have a different view, they should put it before the House in the proper way, through introducing a bill.

There is nothing fair in the present arrangements. I hope members opposite can acknowledge that and deal with it directly, as I'm sure they are dealing with constituents who are in a state of great distress. The inexplicable and unconscionable delays on the part of the department in processing thousands of visas are resulting in deep personal harm and this is compounded by the wider circumstances all of us are dealing with right now. The statistics set out in the motion tell a dreadful story, but they don't hint at the personal tragedies that are the real stories here. They are the real inequities. The member for Bruce has been such a passionate advocate for migration broadly, particularly for couples and families who have been separated through this unconscionable system, if it can be called that. I believe he said earlier that this is an unconscionable racquet.

There are particular issues that we are confronting now that impact on partner visa applications and their processing. That's why on 1 May I wrote to the acting minister requesting that he recognise the human dimension of this system and put in place a no-disadvantage approach while travel and other restrictions are in place—that he get rid of some of the present restrictions on visas being granted and put in place a consistent approach.

The member for Bruce recognises that we have seen some ad hoc decisions which have seen justice granted in particular cases, but people shouldn't be reunited with the person they love because they can get a story up in the SMH or their story told in this place. We should see justice done in accordance with the law. That should not be too much to ask. I wrote to the minister on 1 May; five months on I am yet to receive a response, and I think that speaks volumes about the acting minister's commitment to his portfolio. He's very interested in talking tough on border protection but not in managing his vital immigration responsibilities. The Prime Minister loves to talk about bureaucratic congestion. If he wants to fix that, he should start with that minister and this department. This is a department that is running away from responsibility and has made a series of decisions to devalue its immigration functioning, which is a really significant issue here. We are losing capacity as well as losing will. And what has the government's response been to this? The grand plan wasn't to take responsibility. It was to outsource our visa processing to the highest bidder, to outsource our visa system to the highest bidder. What an extraordinary thing for a conservative government that likes to talk tough about borders to seek to do.

In the face of a problem, an issue of bureaucratic congestion, what does it do? It doesn't fix the problem, it doesn't recognise its human dimension, it seeks to sell it off to big business to allow the tickets to be clipped. What an extraordinary neglect. Here, government members, there is an opportunity: you can act in the interests of decency, in the interests of justice, in the interests of love and in the interests of upholding both the spirit and the letter of the law.

Julian Simmonds (Ryan, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm pleased to rise as the third Julian to speak on this particular motion. We ought to get the Parliamentary Library to track down if that's the first time that has ever happened in parliament's history!

It is a serious matter, so I will turn to the motion. There are a couple of reasons why I rise to speak on it today. Firstly, I want to lament the fact that Labor members, the mover and Labor members opposite who have spoken to the motion, are trying to score cheap partisan political points with an issue that is so difficult and so heartbreaking for many. To go as far as to declare that we don't support love is just an absolute nonsense, and shows how far the Labor members opposite will go to seek to gain some relevance at this time. Secondly, I just want to provide this Chamber with a few of the facts on this matter as it stands.

We are in the middle of a global pandemic, and I do want to recognise the heartbreak and distress that so many Australians have gone through, and continue to go through, as we all deal with the impact of it with our families and friends. The 41 deaths announced today by Victoria is yet another tragic reminder of what we are up against and the pain and sacrifice that all Australians are going through as we fight the pandemic. The government have acted swiftly and decisively from the start of this crisis, and we're doing what we can to assist all Australians, no matter the circumstances. We have acted in Australia's best interests and with those interests at heart. That is why it does sadden me to see the approach taken by Labor members today. The motion goes as far as to condemn the government and suggest we're not acting with integrity, and I want to, in very clear terms, dismiss this proposition. Australians have seen this government, led by the Prime Minister, act with the utmost integrity through the crisis. This shows, once again, how Labor are just desperately trying to seek relevance by scoring cheap political points.

Onto the important facts of the matter. The department manages the delivery of the partner visa program in line with the planning levels and priorities set by the government. It has been the longstanding practice of successive governments to manage the orderly delivery of migration program outcomes against planning levels. The partner visa program is not capped. It's an important point, and I will say it again: the partner visa program is not capped. Section 85 of the Migration Act allows for instruments to be made to impose caps on visas of a specified class. No instrument has been made that caps the partner visa program. Section 86 of the act provides that if a cap is imposed and if the number of visa grants reaches the number specified in the instrument, no more grants may be made. But then section 87 goes on to provide:

Section 86 does not prevent the grant of a visa to a person who applied for it on the ground that he or she is the spouse, de facto partner or dependent child of:

  (a) an Australian citizen …

  (b) the holder of a permanent visa … or

  (c) a person who is usually resident in Australia …

The practicalities of what this means to the migration program is that Australia's rules for partner visas balance the need to provide pathways for legitimate migration with the need to ensure that we don't allow people seeking to do the wrong thing to abuse the very legitimate pathways. This is not about, as Labor are trying to oddly insinuate, us preventing love. That is ridiculous and patently false. The measures in place involve a two-stage processing arrangement that protects the integrity of the program. Applicants need to show a continuing relationship with their sponsor at both stages of the two-stage process. I don't think this is anything other than what Australians would expect to occur.

Specific measures have been put in place around international borders as part of COVID-19, and that is a legitimate part of the health response. Of course, it sees impacts for both noncitizens and nonresidents. The partner subclass visa holders are exempt from the travel restrictions and can travel to Australia. Immediate family members of an Australian citizen or permanent resident, including a spouse or de facto partner who does not hold a visa, are able to apply for a temporary visa and request a travel exemption. It is in this way that the government is working with all Australians on this very sensitive and delicate matter, to make sure that we put Australia's interests first and do so with compassion and understanding of the sacrifices they are making. We'll continue to take this approach.

Helen Haines (Indi, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Eighteen per cent of Indi residents were born overseas. Many came here because they fell in love with an Aussie or fell in love with the country, and who could blame them? North-East Victoria, in my electorate of Indi, has a long history of offering a new home to migrants: the Chinese who mined for gold in the Ovens Valley; the thousands of refugees who passed through the gates of the Bonegilla reception centre after World War II; the Italians who transformed the King Valley into a food and wine mecca; and the recent arrivals from Nepal, Bhutan, Rwanda, Somalia, Kenya and the Democratic Republic of Congo, to name but a few. They breathe new life into our towns, such as UNICEF ambassador, Atosha Birongo, formerly the Wodonga youth ambassador of the year, and the Sikh community, who, after the bushfires, served free meals in Wodonga, Wangaratta, Tallangatta and Corryong. We are stronger and better because of what migrant families have brought to our rural and regional communities.

I share the member for Bruce's concerns about the growing backlog and delay in partner visas and the impact on new arrivals who want to make my electorate their home and want to make Australia their home. At the end of June last year, there were almost 80,000 partner visa applicants in the pipeline. Together with their Australian partner, this makes 160,000 people waiting for the paperwork so that they can start building their future. This was before COVID-19 and the expected blowout in processing times and travel bans. With 90 per cent of applications taking up to 25 months, they now have to be prepared for a two-year wait. Long processing delays take an emotional and financial toll, especially if one is overseas. Anyone who has done a long-distance relationship can tell you it's no easy task. Uncertainty is destabilising. If you don't know when your visa will be granted, you can't make plans, you can't start a family, you can't buy a house and you can't establish yourself in a job.

For people on temporary visas, COVID-19 restrictions have delayed English-language tests, NAATI tests and health examinations. A young doctor in my electorate is building her career as a regional GP, but her pathway to permanent residency is in limbo because of these delays. COVID related border closures are having a perverse impact on prospective marriage visa applicants. One Australian constituent of mine had a full wedding planned to marry his Chinese fiancee, but, after she travelled home to China at Christmas, she is now being prevented from re-entering to get married. She is stranded and the prospective marriage visa runs out at the end of October. The man has been contacting me for months. It's a very reasonable request that, at a minimum, there's an extension granted to this visa or they risk reapplying all over again.

Families desperate to begin their lives together should be reunited as quickly as possible. Migration has long been the key to Australia's economic success. The PM has predicted an 85 per cent drop in net migration this financial year. Migration will be crucial in the COVID recovery, and, when the borders open up, we should prioritise partner visas. We should welcome people who have chosen Australia as their new home, with a partner already in the community. They have a long-term plan and will invest in housing and their children's education. We should encourage them to move to regional Australia. Growing up in the country, as I can attest, is a great place to grow up. Let's get them here.

In closing, I want to recognise how the multicultural organisations of my electorate have stepped up for their border communities during the recent border closure. This closure has brought a sudden increase in police and military presence at checkpoints—a worrying sight for many migrants who faced such frightening circumstances in their previous country. These multicultural organisations have sprung into action, developing frequently asked questions sheets and video and audio resources in Nepali, Kinyarwanda and Swahili, and they coordinate bilingual assistance in applying for permits. I attended a meeting with these organisations and was impressed by their collaboration and fast action, and I want to recognise representatives from the Albury-Wodonga Ethnic Communities Council, Albury Wodonga Volunteer Resource Bureau, the Humanitarian Settlement Program at the Red Cross, and the Uniting Church, amongst others.

I call on the government to take immediate action to process the partner visa backlog and address the consequences of COVID-19 on these applications. If this means recruiting additional staff, so be it. Consider it part of JobKeeper. Maybe call it 'matchmaker', if you want to. Call it jobmaker, matchmaker or whatever. This is serious, and we need to act. It is incredibly heartbreaking and distressing, and we can do a lot, lot better.

Tim Wilson (Goldstein, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I start the discussion on this motion, noting the contribution from the member for Bruce and those who have made contributions, and say, frankly, how disappointing it has been that they seek to politicise something as important as making sure we reunite people who fall in love. Frankly, to suggest in this discussion that the government opposes love is just farcical and highlights that they are not actually serious about the serious issues at the heart of this motion and what our focus is, which is making sure we have an orderly migration system, that we protect and secure our borders and that we build an Australia for everybody to be able to realise their ambition and their dreams.

We know that at this time we are not in a normal period. Earlier this year, because of decisions and advice from health authorities, we closed international borders and introduced a travel exemption system, in extraordinary circumstances. Truthfully, I never thought I would see this situation. I remember when it was first discussed, and I was flabbergasted at the prospect. Ever since then we have had challenges as Australians have wanted to go overseas and, of course, Australians who have wanted to return home. I have to say that I had some real issues with the current arrangements, and I have made those comments public, because I believe that every Australian should have a right to return to their country and that limitations or barriers should not be unreasonable. But the practical reality is that, at this time, there are many Australians stranded in other parts of the world who want to get home and they can't.

The primary reason that this is occurring is that, because of the outbreak in Melbourne—which has our second-largest passenger airport—the state government has chosen to stop receiving international flights. Of course, Melbourne is not the only airport where we receive people back into. But when you have the second largest, with the second-largest traffic, it has a real and material impact on the number of Australians that can get home, with the obligation and burden of quarantining as well. We need to fix that. I have many constituents whose friends and families can't get home. While there are a lot of other issues in migration, including those that have been raised today, I'm sorry—I am very hardline on this—but Australians have a right to enter into their own country, and Melbourne and the Victorian state government are letting us down.

Worse, some airlines have used it as an opportunity to exploit people. I have spoken to the Deputy Prime Minister and the minister responsible about precisely this issue, where people are having their tickets cancelled and they're being asked to rebook on business class airfares and, in many cases, they are being asked to forego up to $50,000 for a family to return home. It is exploitive. It is gouging. It is despicable in this period. I don't doubt the challenges facing the airline industry, but if people buy a ticket, they should expect it to be honoured. I know that there are some Goldstein residents where there family is in one country and they have to go to a third country to get to a connecting flight, and they've gone to that third country to get the connecting flight back to Australia and found that their flight has been cancelled. It's shameful conduct.

Similarly, families in the United Kingdom and the United States—in just about every country—want the opportunity to come back to our nation. They must take precedence. Australians have a right to come back to their homes. Reasonable quarantine measures should be provided and supported. So, the sooner you can open Melbourne airport, Dan Andrews, Victorian Premier, the sooner we will be able to fully respect Australians and allow them to come to their homes. It is your mismanagement of the situation we presently have that means that Australians are locked out of their homes, and it is wrong.

Of course, on partner visas, we fully recognise that there are other people who wish to come to our country to be reunited with the people they love. That's why we have an uncapped program. It is to make sure that there are proper processes in place so that it isn't exploited or used for fraud. That's right and that's just.

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.