Senate debates

Tuesday, 11 September 2012

Motions

Instrument of Designation of the Republic of Nauru as a Regional Processing Country

5:50 pm

Photo of Rachel SiewertRachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to oppose the approval of the designation of the Republic of Nauru as a regional processing country. I want to start, as I started a previous contribution in the debate on the legislation, by remembering the people we are talking about. We seem to forget that these are people fleeing persecution, terror, torture and inhumane treatment in their homelands. And what we are doing through this process is further subjecting these people, who are fleeing for their lives and the lives of their families, to the inhumane conditions that will exist in the facilities on Nauru. In the first instance, they will be in tents.

The government has not ensured that the facilities will meet the humanitarian standards that the Houston report said should be in place. Those standards are not being met and will not be met. The government is relying on the so-called Houston solutions but it is not implementing the recommendations that humanitarian standards should be in place. In fact, this is why Nauru did not work last time, and it is why people then had poor mental health and are in fact still suffering from the effects of being held on Nauru for excessive periods of time. It is interesting that in answer to questions today from Senator Hanson-Young, our portfolio holder on this issue, the minister would not commit to what period of time we are talking about and would not commit to what a no disadvantage test means. It seems to be elastic and indefinite. The government wants to walk both sides of the road. They want to have a so-called no disadvantage test but they do not want to say how long it will apply. In questions to Senator Lundy, representing the minister in this place in the debate on this motion, Senator Milne articulated the concern that some people had—and Senator Hanson-Young raised this too—that for Malaysia it would be something like 76 years. Senator Lundy's response was, 'That's something we will work out in full consultation with the UNHCR.' Has the government done that yet?

Comments

No comments