House debates

Wednesday, 8 March 2023

Committees

Human Rights Joint Committee; Report

4:33 pm

Photo of Josh BurnsJosh Burns (Macnamara, Australian Labor Party) Share this | | Hansard source

On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights, I present the committee's report entitled Human rights scrutiny report: report 2 of 2023.

Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e).

by leave—I am pleased to table the second scrutiny report of 2023 of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights. In this report, the committee has considered 18 new bills and 89 new legislative instruments. The committee has commented on one of the bills and three legislative instruments and has also concluded its consideration of four pieces of legislation. In particular, the committee has commented on the Migration Amendment (Aggregate Sentences) Bill 2023, which is now an act. The act provides that aggregate sentences—that is, one sentence for multiple offences—may be taken into account for all relevant purposes, including assessing whether to automatically cancel a person's visa on character grounds. The bill also retrospectively validates past decisions and actions.

The committee considers that there is a significant risk that the bill, in expanding the basis on which a visa can be automatically cancelled—which results in mandatory immigration detention and subsequent removal from Australia—may be incompatible with human rights. Having regard to these significant human rights implications, the committee notes that the bill passed both houses of parliament within three sitting days, which did not provide adequate time to scrutinise this legislation.

The committee is also seeking further information in relation to the human rights compatibility of three legislative instruments. The first relates to the requirement to report the administration of the japanese encephalitis virus vaccine to the Australian Immunisation Register. The second relates to the requirements for passengers from China, Hong Kong or Macau to provide proof of a negative COVID-19 test prior to boarding a flight to Australia. The third instrument restricts access to certain court documents to nonparties until after the first directions hearing.

The committee has also concluded its consideration of three bills and one legislative instrument. In doing so, it has made a number of recommendations to amend the legislation to improve its human rights capability. For example, the committee has recommended some minor amendments to the Export Control Amendment (Streamlining Administrative Processes) Bill 2022. These amendments would require entrusted people, when disclosing information obtained under export control powers, to consider certain matters prior to disclosure, such as if there are sufficient safeguards in place to protect individual privacy.

The committee has also recommended an amendment to the Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Bill 2022 in relation to the prohibition on foreign campaigners engaging in certain referendum campaigning or expenditure, which may include people who have lived in Australia for a number of years. On the one hand, the committee absolutely acknowledges the legitimate purpose to protect our democratic processes from malicious foreign actors, but the committee notes the potential impact on a number of rights, including the right to freedom of expression. The committee has recommended that the bill be amended to require the Electoral Commissioner to consider if the foreign campaigner has a genuine connection to Australia and the extent of campaigning before imposing a civil penalty.

Finally, the committee has recommended amendments to a legislation instrument: the Aged Care Quality and Safety Commission Amendment (Code of Conduct and Banning Orders) Rules 2022. In particular, the committee is concerned that a register of all aged-care workers subject to a banning or is published on a public website. While the committee considers this measure is directed towards the important and legitimate objective of protecting vulnerable older Australians, the committee has considered that it has not been demonstrated that it is a proportionate limit on the right to privacy to publicly publish these details. The alternative the committee made is that the register should be made absolutely available to all aged-care providers who need to consult it when determining who to employ in aged-care facilities, but recommended that it not be published on a public website.

With these comments, I thank the secretariat for the expertise provided to the committee, as always, by the very high-quality staff. I thank the committee members and I commend the report to the House.