David Pocock (ACT, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Decisions on when people are able and not able to enter Australia are some of the most important decisions we make as a country. They affect liberty, families, livelihoods and safety. For that reason alone, any proposal to expand or reshape these powers deserves the most careful scrutiny from this parliament. As a number of experts, advocates and community organisations have pointed out, this bill, the Migration Amendment (2026 Measures No. 1) Bill 2026, contains complex and far-reaching provisions that would significantly alter our migration framework. Yet this bill has been brought forward with limited opportunity for proper examination.

Members of the crossbench were given the bill at 11 am on Tuesday, and here we are in a guillotine sometime this afternoon, being forced to vote on significant changes just two days later. I fear that this is not what Australians sent us here to do. In the short time available, a number of very significant concerns have been raised.

First, there are concerns about the breadth of the powers that would be created. Migration legislation already grants extraordinary powers to the executive compared with most other areas of Australian law. When new powers are proposed, the parliament has a responsibility to ask whether they are necessary, whether they are proportionate and whether they are subject to appropriate safeguards.

Second, there are concerns about transparency and accountability. Several provisions in the bill appear to concentrate huge amounts of discretion in the hands of the minister without sufficient oversight or review mechanisms. That raises real questions about how these powers might operate in practice and what protections will exist for those that are affected. I think, if we zoom out, this is a really important thing to look at. Look around the world. We're seeing what leaders and their executives are doing in their countries to their people. As a Senate and as a parliament, we need to take giving the executive of the day any more power very seriously. Rather than handing more extraordinary powers in perpetuity to the executive, those powers need to be justified and well thought through.

Third, there are concerns about the potential human consequences of these changes. Migration decisions shape the lives of those affected—students, workers, families and people seeking protection, many of whom have or seek to build lives in our communities. These concerns have been raised by migration experts and civil society groups who work directly with the people most affected by these laws. Their warnings deserve to be heard and taken seriously by this place.

It is also important that the parliament listens to the people we represent. Many Canberrans have contacted my office about this bill. Canberra is a community that values transparency. It values parliamentary scrutiny and the rule of law. People here understand that Australia needs a well-managed migration system, but they also expect that system to be humane, accountable and consistent with our values. The concerns raised are reasonable and reflect the broader expectations that Australians have, that their parliament will be cautious when legislating in areas that affect fundamental rights and freedoms.

Given that we are increasingly unlikely to have any time in committee, I foreshadow that I'll be moving amendments to this bill. These amendments build on the work of my colleagues in the other place, the member for Warringah, Zali Steggall; the member for Curtin, Kate Chaney; and the member for Kooyong, Dr Monique Ryan. They would strengthen the preconditions before the Home Affairs minister could make an arrival control determination to stop a group, such as a group of Iranians fleeing conflict, from entering Australia. They would provide natural justice for those prevented from entering the country so that they could challenge that decision. They would make the decision to prevent groups of people entering the country disallowable by the parliament. Surely this is the base level of oversight on what are extraordinary powers. Again, let's look at what is happening with some of our closest allies, at what is happening in the US with the executive and the harm that that is inflicting on people over there. We cannot go down that path of giving the executive unfettered powers.

The amendments would clarify the circumstances in which cohorts of people would be prevented from entering the country. One of my concerns with the migration changes that have been rushed through by the Labor government, backed in by the coalition and rammed through the parliament in the space of days over the past few years is just how loose some of the definitions are and how much discretion is built into these laws. You sometimes hear governments say, 'We need to futureproof this so it can't be abused by a future minister.' There seems no foresight on that possibility when it comes to migration changes.

The amendments would also ensure that parents, grandparents, siblings and partners of Australian citizens are not prevented from entering the country, even if they are a member of a cohort otherwise prevented from entering. We are dealing with the loved ones of Australian citizens, and this is a very blunt instrument. Surely, the least we can do is say, 'If you are an Australian citizen, we will at least be looking out for you and your family'? That would ensure that people in transit and on their way to the country are not prevented from entering because a decision was made while they were in transit. Surely that is also just common decency? They would ensure that the Minister for Home Affairs considers whether to allow individuals to enter the country even where they are members of a cohort otherwise prevented from entering and they would ensure that, where people are prevented from entering the country, their visas do not expire because of the prevention and they may be compensated for travel, visa processing and related costs. We have some of the highest visa application fees in the world. As a wealthy country, surely the least we could do is provide people a refund for taking this extraordinary action?

These are comprehensive amendments, and their breadth speaks to the huge issues with this bill. I understand the intent of the bill is to preserve the integrity of the humanitarian intake program. However, after considering the provisions of the bill in the short time available and listening to experts in my community, listening to Canberrans who I represent and vote on behalf of in this place, it's clear that this bill has significant shortcomings and that it should not be supported. This bill should not become law today, and I will be opposing it.

Australia's migration system must be effective, but it must also be fair and accountable. That is the standard the public expects us to deliver. It is the standard this parliament should actually seek to uphold. This bill does not meet that standard, and it certainly does not have my support.

I'm very concerned about the lack of consistency in the government's approach to dealing with laws and humanitarian crises around the world. There was absolutely no talk of this sort of legislation after Russia invaded Ukraine. We saw a far more generous approach, and I've met a number of Ukrainians who now live in Canberra and are contributing and who are grateful for the opportunity that we've given them. So it is very concerning that we now have a government that, under the cover of giving humanitarian visas to brave football players from Iran, is bringing this to the parliament. As I said earlier, I commend Minister Burke for his work with the Iranian women's team. I think it shows what Australia can and should be doing. It shows a minister who deeply cares, a minister who is in touch with what Australians want, a minister who is willing to go out of his way, to drop everything else, to actually rise to the occasion and deliver for people who need our support and for Australians. I fear that, at the same time that is rightly being shared on social media and rightly being covered in the media, we have this heinous bill being brought through here.

We should maybe do a tally. Maybe we can talk about this in the next sitting of the Senate. How many Labor MPs and senators post about this bill? How many of them front up to the community that they are meant to be representing and say: 'We saw what's happening in Iran, so we're giving ourselves the powers to cancel every single visa that we've issued. Yes, we already have extraordinary powers to cancel visas on security grounds and on character grounds—on a whole range of grounds—but that's not enough. Forever, going forward, we want the power, for some undefined events, to say, "No visas from that country—sorry if you paid money for the visa; sorry if you're on your way here; sorry if you're in transit; sorry if you're coming for the birth of a granddaughter or for your sister's wedding; we don't give a stuff because we do not want to give a visa to anyone from the country you come from."'

We can surely do better than this. It feels so ridiculous that this is what the Senate is debating—and, again, under the cover of a government that knows that Australians care. You know that Aussies care, that we have big hearts, that we see the suffering and we say, 'We're not the biggest country; we're a middle power; we can't stop the war, but we can play our part.' Increasingly, I don't think we're seeing those values being lived out. We talk about the land of a fair go, but this doesn't seem like it. This really does not seem like it.

I urge the government to think again when it comes to this. Let's actually come up with a consistent framework when it comes to conflicts. That's surely something we could be doing. Increasingly, I'm getting Canberrans ask me about that and say, 'Why was there such a discrepancy between the war in Ukraine—Gaza, Iran—and our response?' These are Australian citizens' families and loved ones. Honestly, we've got to do better than this.

I oppose this bill. I'll be moving amendments to try and make it a little bit better. I thank my colleagues in the other place who have, in a very short space of time, consulted, spoken to experts and had amendments drafted to try and make this terrible bill better, fairer and clearer and, importantly, to put some more checks on the executive. Yes, Labor have a whopping majority in the other house, but to the coalition I say: this is the place where we should not give up power to the executive, not just in this instance but in perpetuity. That is a very serious thing to grant to government, and it's my view that whenever we do that it should be very well thought out, consulted on and scrutinised. Then, in circumstances that warrant it, we should hand over that power. It doesn't seem like this is that situation. This is rushed. It's a knee jerk. Again, I see some of the arguments, but I just don't think they've been well enough made, so I'll be opposing this bill.

Mehreen Faruqi (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, it's another week and another cruel, anti-migrant, anti-refugee, anti-Muslim bill from the Albanese Labor government. After spending all week patting themselves on the back for providing protection visas to Iranian women's soccer team members, the Albanese Labor government are now doing everything they can to prevent any more refugees from this war in Iran reaching our shores.

Labor jumped up and signed us on to Trump and Netanyahu's war on Iran but aren't willing to face any of the consequences. They'll send aircraft and missiles to aid in the US-Israel led bombing campaign but will not lift a finger to help those being killed or displaced or those whose lives are being ruined by this shameless and shameful war. Even worse, Labor will go out of their way to ensure that these people can never seek safety on our shores, and the Liberals are right with them to pass whatever cruel, racist legislation they dream up.

It is impossible to tell the difference between Labor, the Liberals and One Nation. Well done! You all must be so proud of yourselves! This bill might be dressed up in the major party lingo of border integrity and ministerial discretion, but let's be honest about what it really is and who it will be used against—Muslims. The first people targeted will be Iranians, the same Iranians that Labor apparently wants to protect. What utter and blatant hypocrisy. But, before long, we can expect it to also apply to Lebanese people, to Afghanis, to Palestinians, to the Sudanese and who knows who else. This is nothing more than a Trump-style Muslim ban dressed up in Labor doublespeak.

Years ago, we might have expected to see this kind of bill from the Liberals or One Nation, but the Labor Party of today is doing their dirty work. This is a Labor Party that is complicit in Israel's genocide in Gaza and is jumping at the first chance to get behind Trump and Netanyahu's illegal war on Iran. The Labor Party of today engages in the same politics of fear and division and the same tired and dangerous scapegoating of migrants, refugees and Muslims. We all know this so-called ministerial discretion will be anything but neutral. It will not be applied equally. It will be used to target people who are already demonised, already treated with suspicion and already forced to prove their worthiness over and over again.

The bill hands enormous powers to the minister to decide on a whim who is worthy of safety and who is not. It entrenches a cruel double standard where some are welcomed and protected while others are shut out and punished. It sends a chilling message to Muslim communities that their suffering and fear will be met not with compassion but with suspicion and with shut doors. The sad thing is that none of this is new. This country already has one of the most brutal, inhumane and cruel refugee regimes in the world, one that Trump wants to replicate. It is built on offshore prisons, endless detention and policies that punish people for simply seeking safety, often from wars that this country has been embroiled in.

This country is also one in which we are witnessing a massive rise in anti-Muslim hate. As we saw this week, the Labor government can't even bring themselves to support a Greens motion recognising this rise and calling for action to combat Islamophobia. Policies like these have real consequences for communities who see the so-called leaders of this country say that it is okay to discriminate and that it is okay to scapegoat. It reinforces that migrants are the problem, when it is really this government's policies, bills and warmongering that are the problem. That is just disgraceful. Indeed, it is hard to even find the words for the lows that this Labor government has now sunk to.

We should be a country that offers peace and that offers relief from violence. We should be a country that responds to war with calls for justice and peace and offers refuge from violence rather than perpetrating it. The minister says that this bill is about safety, but what it is really about is telling some people that their safety is not important and that their lives are not worth saving. This legislation enshrines racism, cruelty and fearmongering into law. The Albanese Labor government should really hang its head in shame for even bringing this bill to this chamber. The Greens are proud to stand against this bill, and we are proud to stand against this war. I now move our second reading amendment:

At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate calls on the Government to immediately raise the number of places in Australia's humanitarian intake to at least 27,000 places per year as set out in the Australian Labor Party's 2023 National Platform".

Steph Hodgins-May (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Here we have Labor's latest edition in 'don't mention the war'. Don't mention the catastrophic impacts of us entering an illegal war that is killing civilians, including women and children—over 160 schoolgirls. Don't mention Labor's cruelty towards refugees time and time again. I've got to say it's wearing pretty thin hearing them get up and speak about what a proud multicultural nation we are while simultaneously slamming the door shut on people who need our protection more than ever, and it's getting pretty tiring hearing them completely disregarding international law and our international humanitarian obligations.

Time and time again, it's Labor governments that treat refugees with the most cruelty of anyone. Don't be fooled. This is a cynical call and cry-out to One Nation. That's who they're talking to: One Nation. They don't want the public to know what they're doing on this bill, the Migration Amendment (2026 Measures No. 1) Bill 2026. That's why they don't want it to go to a proper inquiry, and that's why they are not getting up and speaking about it—because they know it's the wrong thing to do. They know it's cruel, they know it's inhumane, and they know that Australians will not and do not support it. It's absolutely pathetic.

Today, they have hit an all-new low. Just when you think they couldn't stoop any lower, they come out and support Uncle Donald Trump in this illegal war. They have their slow and steady creep of changing talking points day to day. They take the public for mugs; they really do. But people are clueing on, and they see you for what you are: a group of people who say one thing and do another thing, a group of people who aren't willing to stand up for principles that you say your party is founded on, and a group of people who just want to hide in the shadows and, frankly, are spineless when it comes to issues of standing up and showing leadership on the global state, showing compassion and showing respect for our international legal institutions and for people who are fleeing war zones that we are playing a role in creating.

Parliament is being run by the war parties of Labor, Liberal and One Nation. They are rushing us into a new US forever war, cheering on the bombing and shutting the door to people seeking safety from that same appalling war. This bill will allow Labor to prevent someone's grandmother who has a valid visa from coming to Australia because their country might be too dangerous to return to. Can you put yourself in the shoes of someone who is having their neighbourhood bombed and is afraid to return home, knowing that they have no option because cruel countries like ours are slamming the doors shut? Can you put yourself in that position? Of course you can't, because the privilege just puts you in a whole other realm.

People are coming here for weddings, for funerals, for work and to enjoy our community, and they've had this snatched away by Labor in a race to the bottom with One Nation and the Liberals. Stop being afraid of them, and show some leadership. That's what Australians are crying out for. Don't follow the US. Don't follow Trump. Don't follow One Nation and the race-to-the-bottom LNP. Show us some leadership. Make yourselves proud. To those backbenchers backgrounding journalists: it's not good enough. How do you sleep at night? I just don't comprehend how these people sleep at night.

If you ever thought this war was about protecting the people of Iran, here is the clearest example of why it is a massive lie. With this bill, Labor is actively working to prevent people from Iran from being safe, all because the war parties of this parliament are in a race to the bottom. Once again, it is everyday people who pay the price—people so far removed from the decisions being made in the war rooms in the US, in Tel Aviv and here in the parliament in Canberra. The government gives with one hand while taking away with the other. It welcomes the praise in the morning and quietly shuts the door later in the day. This is duplicity, plain and simple.

Protection should never depend on someone's public profile or the amount of attention their case receives. I do want to acknowledge those incredibly brave Iranian women, some of whom will rightly be granted asylum in this country. But the government is saying: 'Don't look over here. This is awkward. This is a bit messy and cruel. Don't look over here; look over there. Look at the headlines.' It's not good enough. Protection should never depend on someone's public profile. Anyone who genuinely fears persecution has the right to seek safety in this country. That includes people already living in our communities who are still stuck in limbo, without certainty or a clear pathway to protection.

This is all in the name of appeasing the US and warmongers who profit off conflict. To quote the CEO of the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre, who has been a fierce advocate and champion for people rightly seeking our protection:

Australia and the United States are sending military forces to the Middle East in the name of liberating the people of Iran, while at the same time legislating so that they can shut the door on those very same people when they seek safety here—even when they already have a visa.

The Albanese government's actions today send a disturbing message about who is worthy of protection and who is not. I don't know if you can stoop any lower, Labor, but it's really hard to imagine it. I want to thank my colleague Senator Shoebridge for mounting as much of a challenge as possible to these draconian laws. I hope you give yourselves a slow clap and sleep well tonight.

Tim Ayres (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Industry and Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Firstly, I table a letter from the Minister for Home Affairs to the chair of the scrutiny of bills committee, responding to concerns raised by the committee.

I thank all senators who've risen to speak on the Migration Amendment (2026 Measures No. 1) Bill 2026. The amendments in the bill demonstrate the government's commitment to protecting the integrity and sustainability of Australia's migration system. The bill establishes a new legislative framework to enable the Minister for Home Affairs to more effectively regulate travel into Australia in periods of international conflict to avoid any unsustainable strain on the functioning of our migration system. The bill does this by empowering the minister to make an arrival control determination that would suspend temporary visas of certain classes of noncitizens in specified circumstances. This is a personal power of the minister, and the minister must first obtain written agreement from the Prime Minister and the Minister for Foreign Affairs.

The arrival control determination legislation is an important addition to the government's ability to regulate travel to Australia. Currently, this may only be achieved through individually assessing each visa to determine where there are grounds to cancel a visa, which takes time and is not appropriate in circumstances where an urgent response at scale is required. The bill allows the minister to make an arrival control determination if the minister is reasonably satisfied that an event or circumstance has occurred or is occurring outside Australia and the noncitizens to whom the determination is to apply may, if they enter Australia on a temporary visa, remain in Australia after the visa ceases to be in effect, or if the visa would not have been granted had the event or circumstance occurred or been occurring at the time it was granted.

A determination can be in effect for a maximum period of six months. It cannot be varied or extended. However, it can be revoked by the minister by legislative instrument. The bill does not operate in relation to permanent visas of any kind. It only applies in relation to temporary visas and only for noncitizens in a class specified in the determination.

The bill also expressly provides that an arrival control determination does not apply to noncitizens who hold a temporary protection or other temporary humanitarian visa in Australia; a refugee or protection visa holder or applicant; or an immediate family member of an Australian citizen or permanent resident. The bill also enables the minister to exempt individuals from an arrival control determination on a case-by-case basis via a permitted travel certificate, enabling travel for those individuals.

The current situation in the Middle East demonstrates how quickly circumstances that may be relevant to holders of valid temporary visas who may seek to travel to Australia can change. In these circumstances it is vital that government can respond accordingly. This bill provides government with a framework to better and more rapidly regulate travel to Australia in periods of international conflict or global shocks. This new framework will ensure government has the means to quickly take the necessary steps to manage risk before it manifests in Australia. I commend the bill to the chamber.

Varun Ghosh (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the second reading amendment moved by Senator Faruqi on sheet 3695 be agreed to.

Fatima Payman (WA, Australia's Voice) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

At the request of Senator Thorpe, I move:

At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate condemns and rejects legislation that grants extraordinary decision-making power to the Minister for Home Affairs that is intended to prevent black, brown, Muslim and Arab people fleeing conflict zones from entering Australia and terminates even the most basic parliamentary safeguards such as a sunset clause and scrutiny powers".

Question negatived.

I wish to note my support for that amendment.

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

by leave—I also note the Greens' support for that amendment.

Tammy Tyrrell (Tasmania, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

At the end of the motion, add ", but the Senate condemns and rejects legislation that grants extraordinary decision-making power to the Minister for Home Affairs that is intended to prevent people fleeing conflict zones from entering Australia and terminates even the most basic parliamentary safeguards such as a sunset clause and scrutiny powers".

Varun Ghosh (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the second reading amendment on sheet 3701 moved by Senator Tyrrell be agreed to.

Varun Ghosh (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the bill be now read a second time.