Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the document.

I rise to take note of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission report, the detailed title of which is Breach of Ms CD’s human rights at the Curtin Immigration Processing and Reception Centre. I notice that it got some air today during question time, and the minister undertook to provide some further information in respect of it. What I wanted to do was canvass some of the issues that are contained within it. What concerns me most of all is that the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs suffered significant problems during 2000 and 2001, particularly in relation to what are more commonly referred to as the Rau and Solon cases and then the subsequent Palmer and Comrie reports into those issues.

What has now occurred fits into that earlier time frame of 2002 or slightly thereafter, and so it could be argued that in a historical context the department has moved on. However, the way that this is being handled by the department in 2006 raises concerns. These concerns are stated by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commissioner, although stated silently. There was an inappropriate action taken in relation to the human rights of a person who is referred to as Ms CD. The commissioner said, ‘I was of the tentative view that the act of the department of continuing to accommodate the complainant in Charlie compound through June, July and August 2002 and failing to move her to a more suitable compound in the circumstances constituted an act or a practice by or on behalf of the Commonwealth in the meaning defined.’

Therefore, there was an adverse finding against the department that they had inappropriately housed Ms CD. The finding went to a number of issues. One of them was a recommendation for financial compensation, which is not that unusual in these circumstances. Where someone has been wronged, there is a redress—both an apology and a finding for financial compensation. In this instance, the apology was quick off the mark, if I can say it that way. As noted under heading 5, the report went on to say that on 2 September 2005 the department provided a written apology to the complainant. But it was different when it came to the financial compensation.

The commissioner’s quietly understated comment on this was to refer back to the report, in which, after taking into account all the matters, he recommended that $15,000 be paid. The commissioner then referred those reading the report back to section 1.3, which was the response from the Commonwealth to the commissioner’s comment that the respondent was invited to advise the commission whether:

... it has taken or is taking any action as a result of my findings and recommendations.

The department were aware for some time of what the recommendation was. The department responded by letter on 23 June 2006, so presumably the commission had given the department reasonable notice up to that point. However, their response was:

The President recommends that, in addition to the general efforts of the department to ensure all immigration detainees are treated in a culturally appropriate way, the department should have particular regard and act appropriately to circumstances in which there may be a history of hostility between certain groups of people ...

The response goes on to explain that they are going to do something about the way that they detain people to ensure that there will be a new client placement model for the immigration detention services network and those matters. They then go on to note the $15,000 compensation and say:

Please be assured that we are working on this matter as a high priority and will get back to you on this as soon as possible.

The report went to print. It is now well into October. Clearly, the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commissioner is still waiting for the ‘high-priority’ and ‘as soon as possible’ response to eventuate. (Time expired)

Andrew Bartlett (Queensland, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to continue my remarks.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.