May 28, 2024
.png)
KIERAN GILBERT: Immigration Minister Andrew Giles is staring down calls from the opposition to resign over the issue known as Direction 99, issued last year. The direction sets out five considerations the Administrative Appeals Tribunal must take into account when deciding whether to overturn a visa cancellation. One of those factors is the strength of the person's ties to Australia, which has been used by dozens of serious offenders in order to help them remain here. The opposition wants this direction torn up and the Minister sacked. Let's bring in now the Shadow Home Affairs Minister, James Paterson. What needs to be done to get rid of Direction 99?
JAMES PATERSON: Well, number one, it's author, its principal author, Andrew Giles should be sacked. He's been shown to have no judgement when it comes to community protection. He puts everything before community protection. And the results are plain for people to see. At least three, possibly four child sex offenders who are allowed to stay in Australia as a result of this direction. Number two, after he's sacked, the next thing the Prime Minister or the new Minister should do is repeal Direction 99 and return to the previous direction under the Coalition government, which did genuinely put community safety first and which deported people who were violent non-citizens.
GILBERT: There was a caveat in the direction, correct me if I'm wrong, which says if an individual's behaviour is so appalling that the tribunal can rule out those connections to Australia and get rid of them, as normally would have happened previously?
PATERSON: It says that but at the same time, in this new primary direction about ties to Australia, it says basically the longer your ties to Australia, even serious offending can allow you to stay as long as it's a strong tie to Australia. And that’s what the AAT has done. And they have not just done at once, which you might put down to a single member of the AAT or a bad decision, but they've done it on dozens of occasions. In fact, people who came here in their late teens, in their 20s and even 30s who committed child sex offences and other serious offences have been allowed to stay. And the AAT members lay it out in their decision making, that the reason is direction 99 and their requirement to consider the strength of a person’s ties.
GILBERT: So it's not some rogue member of the tribunal. This is a consistent pattern now?
PATERSON: It is senior members of the AAT. It is multiple members of the AAT. It is two former Labor politicians who are members of the AAT. These are people who are making decisions based on the guidelines Andrew Giles gave them.
GILBERT: How soon could, if the direction was to be removed, would that come into effect immediately?
PATERSON: Well, almost instantaneously. It's a regulation issued by the Minister.
GILBERT: So it doesn't have to go through the Senate?
PATERSON: There's no parliamentary process required at all, doesn't have to go through the House or the Senate. The Minister can repeal it tomorrow. He can issue a new one, or we can revert to the previous one with no issues at all.
GILBERT: When you look at some of the individuals that have been able to have their deportations overturned. This, quite frankly, would never have happened, not only under former Coalition government, but former Labor governments. And the government had wanted to get rid of these individuals by issuing deportation notices.
PATERSON: That's right. Kieran. Prior to this government, it was standard practice, if you're a non-citizen and you committed a serious crime, no matter how long you've lived in this country, you are deported. And it's changed under this government because Anthony Albanese gave in to request by Jacinda Ardern. Now the New Zealand government made the same request to our government, and we politely said we value our relationship with you as our friends, our closest partners in the region. But we are not going to allow violent criminals to stay in our country who aren't citizens, just to make life easier for you.
GILBERT: Could a scenario be, could we see a situation where the government could say, okay well, we will honour this deal with New Zealand, but make it explicit that it's only to do with New Zealand, every other criminal or someone alleged of criminal behaviour, gone?
PATERSON: Well, they haven't done that. They've applied it to all nationalities, not just New Zealanders and some of the people who've we've read about in the media this week are from countries other than New Zealand. But the problem with that approach, Kieran, is that by volume, the largest number of migrants who are caught in this in New Zealand. It's not because they're particularly criminally inclined, but because there's so many of them in our country who don't have citizenship, because it's been very easy for New Zealanders to come here. And so even if you said, okay, it's only New Zealanders that we're not going to deport, if they've been here for a while. That's still a whole lot of people who committed very serious crimes. In fact, one of the worst crimes that we've read about is of a New Zealand citizen who allegedly raped his 14 year old stepdaughter while his partner was in hospital giving birth to his child. I mean, it doesn't get more horrific than that. There should be serious consequences for people like that.
GILBERT: Yeah indeed, It's horrific. I don't think, there would be anyone watching who doesn't think that that person should be booted at the first possible opportunity.
PATERSON: Except Andrew Giles apparently.
GILBERT: Well, you've had the Senate estimates today, you’ve had Home Affairs before the hearing. Has there been any reassurance about the cohort released off the back of the High Court ruling that that group is being monitored appropriately?
PATERSON: Well, none whatsoever so far Kieran. In fact, information which Home Affairs gave me in the February estimates by way of a tabled document they are now refusing to give me by way of a tabled document and are saying that I have to ask each of these questions individually. Despite the fact that Stephanie Foster gave me a personal commitment in a Senate hearing that she would handle this issue exactly the same way she has previously.
GILBERT: So what's going on there?
PATERSON: Well, we know that in between that she had a very fraught meeting with the Minister for Home Affairs. It was reported by your colleague Olivia Caisley and others in the media that the Minister for Home Affairs reprimanded her for providing the Senate and me with the information that we asked for.
GILBERT: And you think that might be behind her reticence this time?
PATERSON: It's hard to explain why all of a sudden, we have a totally different approach, which is to not provide this basic information which the public's entitled to know.
GILBERT: Well, I know the Senate estimates are in about five minutes. We better let you go. Thank you for making the time.
PATERSON: Thanks Kieran.
ENDS
