May 22, 2024
PETA CREDLIN: Let's go to that issue again, impacting Immigration Minister Andrew Giles. Joining me now. The Shadow Home Affairs Minister, by god we wish he was in the job James Paterson. Senator, thank you for your time. I think we've done a good job tonight explaining how the Minister's direction plays into this, but surely now we've seen the AAT, the tribunal basically use it as a fig leaf to allow an individual out of detention, that individual allegedly has murdered another person. Surely the Minister is now going to revoke this direction immediately.
JAMES PATERSON: Well Peta, it never should have been issued in the first place. And if the Minister believes, as he is now saying this afternoon, that the AAT has misinterpreted and therefore made a decision that was wrong in law, why didn't he appeal the decision of the AAT two months ago when it was made? And why didn't he use his discretion as minister to cancel this person's visa again and put them back into immigration detention, and then force them to take the matter to the courts in order to get themselves freed? There is no way for Andrew Giles to escape responsibility here. He issued this direction. The effect of this direction has been put into practice by the AAT. A person has been freed and they've now allegedly murdered another person, as they threatened to do, and they should never have been in the community to do that. So there's nowhere for Andrew Giles to hide here.
CREDLIN: Well he is hiding, he hasn't fronted the media, he's not taking questions. This is his modus operandi.
PATERSON: That's exactly right, Peta. Whenever the going gets tough, Andrew Giles disappears. The Minister of Home Affairs, Clare O'Neil, she disappears. And the Prime Minister tries to brush it off or focus on other things and he misdirects. Really, responsibility has to be taken here. Because before this minister issued this direction, it was not a requirement for decision makers to consider the ties to a country before they made their decision. And in that direction, he specifically says "considerable weight should be given to the fact that a non-citizen has been ordinarily resident in Australia during and since their formative years, regardless of when their offending commenced and the level of that offending". What that means, Peta, is, no matter how serious the crimes they commit, a non-citizen shouldn't be deported from our country, as long as they've been here since a kid. Now, this is designed to appease New Zealand who have been complaining about this, but actually it applies to every person from every country who's here as a non-citizen.
CREDLIN: James my legal my reading of that though the direction, is that it creates almost like a quasi-Australian status. You know, if you are here a long time, even though you are not Australian, you're not a permanent resident. You might be here someone who was, applying to be a refugee and rejected. You've got to put them in this sort of this different category that just by length of time in Australia, they get some of the rights of Australians. Now, that's not law. That's not in the Migration Act. If they're not Australians, they're not Australians.
PATERSON: I agree with you, Peta. It's got this bizarre situation now where we have Australian citizens who clearly can never be deported. People who are not citizens, who come here recently, who can be deported. And people in the middle who are not citizens, but they've been here for a while, so we're going to go a bit lenient on them. I mean, there was no need to issue this direction. It can be repealed tomorrow if this government thinks that it poses a danger to the community, as it clearly has. And it should be, there is just no excuse. If you commit a crime, I don't care how old you were when you came to this country. If you commit a crime, you're a non-citizen, you violated the agreement that you implicitly entered into when you came to our country by violating our laws and our values. And you should be kicked out. And I guarantee you, under a Dutton government, with me as Home Affairs Minister, with Dan Tehan as Immigration Minister, that's exactly what will happen.
CREDLIN: James, just really quickly. The guy from Burundi, he's broken curfew. Fronts the tribunal, a magistrate in this case. And the magistrate makes a point where he lets him off, there's no incarceration that comes as a result. But he makes the point that the Commonwealth, yet again, the Commonwealth prosecutors offered no particular position on sentencing. Now, the last time this happened, there was a horrible consequence and the government said that they would lift their game, that they would give instructions to their lawyers. Again, this has happened.
PATERSON: That's right, Peta. And the Attorney-General has an opportunity here. The Attorney-General can issue a direction to prosecutors as to the approach he would like them to take in cases like these. And he could direct them to, for example, take the position that we shouldn't support bail, that we should always oppose bail in cases like these. Now, the Attorney-General hasn't done so. The Prime Minister hasn't directed him to do so. So again, this government must take responsibility for the decisions of the courts. There will be people free in the community who should never have been in the community, who may now re-offend in the community and that is on this government.
CREDLIN: I swear to God, if you can't do the job, resign. This is what I'd say to ministers. If you can't do the job go get another portfolio or perhaps leave the parliament all together. James thank you.
ENDS
