David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I note the summary provided by Senator Kovacic, and I agree with the factual summary about the effect of these amendments. Amendments (1) and (2) remove the express reference to student visas from the bill and, instead, give a broad regulation-making power to expand the types of matters that can be decided in the ART on the papers. The history shows that both Labor and the Liberal Party will use that power to expand the number of matters and the classes of cases that will lose the right to an oral hearing and be determined only on the papers. Given that both Labor and the Liberal Party are of one mind about removing the rights, the pretend protection by putting it in the regulations is no protection at all.

The Greens will be opposing government amendments (1) and (2) for the clear reasons we said in the contribution in the second reading. People should have a right to an oral hearing. Oral hearings are important for justice. We keep hearing the refrain of 'faster, fairer and more efficient'. Well, it might be faster in the first place, but it sure as heck isn't fairer, and, by the time you take into account judicial reviews and the broader unfairness in the system, it sure as heck won't be more efficient at the end of the day. Amendment (3) gives some greater flexibility to the president to delegate powers. The rationale for that was set out in the report, and we don't oppose amendment (3).