Immigration Detention
CHAIR: Thank you very much, Senator McKim. I will now give the call to Senator Van.
Senator VAN: I have questions about the impacts of COVID-19 on onshore detention and removals. How many foreign criminals have you been able to deport from Australia throughout the pandemic?
Mr Pezzullo : I will see if the commissioner has got those statistics readily to hand.
Mr Outram : I have the statistics between 1 July 2020 and 31 January 2021. I can probably go back and get March; we may have that available. But 618 people were removed from Australia between 1 July 2020 and 31 January 2021.
Senator VAN: Thank you. To date, have there been any cases of COVID-19 within the onshore immigration detention network?
Mr Outram : Zero.
Senator VAN: Zero?
Mr Outram : Zero.
Senator VAN: How are you keeping it out of—
Mr Outram : There's been a herculean effort across our detention network by my officers, the Department of Home Affairs and service providers, working with state and territory chief medical officers and authorities, and implementing the CDNA guidelines, which is the Communicable Diseases Network of Australia Guidelines, to keep COVID-19 out, and that means we have had to establish social distancing and manage visits differently. We've had to create quarantining facilities. We've had to quarantine detainees when we've moved through them various states. We have had to quarantine Serco officers for removal operations. So it's been a herculean effort to keep it out of our detention centres to date.
Senator VAN: Can I congratulate you then, Commissioner; that's amazing. Can I ask why the detention facilities on Christmas Island were reopened?
Mr Outram : As a function really of the numbers in the onshore network. We only have a limited number of facilities and capacity in any event. COVID-19 really changed a lot of things for us—our inability to remove people to a lot of countries around the world, even some countries where the detainee wants to go home, is volunteering to go home; we're unable to remove them. There are some countries that won't accept people back, because of the COVID-19 pandemic. We've had to implement, as I just said, social distancing and quarantining measures and create capacity within the onshore network. The bottom line is we didn't have enough capacity onshore for the number of detainees we were holding. North West Point on Christmas Island is a standing facility. We maintain a high state of readiness anyway, and it has the capacity for, initially, 250 and even more should we require it. It was a matter of capacity.
Senator VAN: How many are currently being detained at North West Point?
Mr Outram : I believe it's a little bit over 230. I might just take that on notice. I do have the exact number somewhere.
Senator VAN: If you need to, sure.
Mr Outram : It's about 230 or 240 at this point in time.
Senator VAN: Did you say full capacity is 250?
Mr Outram : We've got authority from government to take it up to 250 if we need to, in a budget sense. The exact number is 229.
Senator VAN: Could you please describe the cohort that is being transferred to Christmas Island.
Mr Outram : Yes. The transferees are considered to be a risk to the Australian community. The majority, but not all of them, have been 501 cancellations. Many of them consist of those who have been convicted of crimes involving assault, sexual offences, drugs and other violent offences. They're detained for the purposes of removal from Australia. The other thing I would say is that we have also gone through a painstaking process in terms of identifying the cohort to be transferred. There are no volunteers. It's a difficult decision. Ideally, you wouldn't put people on Christmas Island, but we have to. So we've gone through a process and we've taken into account people's removal status pathway, legal proceedings, medical needs and community and family contacts as well.
Senator VAN: Is it safe to say they all have criminal convictions?
Mr Outram : Yes, or they're a risk to the community.
Senator VAN: I might move from there to strengthening the character test. How many visas have been cancelled under character provisions since 2014?
Mr Outram : I'd probably need to defer that—
Mr Pezzullo : We should ask Mr Kefford. The commissioner does a wonderful job once decisions have been made in terms of detention and management of detained persons—
Senator VAN: I was going back to you, thank you, Secretary.
Mr Pezzullo : but decision-making is a matter for the department.
Senator VAN: Would you like the question again, Mr Kefford?
Mr Kefford : Yes, please.
Senator VAN: How many visas have been cancelled under the character provisions since 2014?
Mr Kefford : In 2014 there were 516; in 2015-16 there were 986; in 2016-17 there were 1,278; in 2017-18 there were 904; in 2018-19 there were 943; in 2019-20 there were 1,020; and this year, to 31 January, there have been 624.
Mr Pezzullo : None of us have an abacus here.
Mr Kefford : In my folder that adds up to 6,271.
Senator VAN: In either aggregate or individual years, again, how many were cancelled between 2009 and 2013?
Mr Kefford : I don't have any earlier data than the 2014-15 year here with me. I'd need to take it on notice.
Senator VAN: If you wouldn't mind.
Mr Pezzullo : It's a question that we've answered previously on notice. I'm quite certain we've gone back to 2009, but we'll dig that out.
Senator VAN: Thank you. Regarding the Migration Amendment (Strengthening the Character Test) Bill 2019, which is currently before the Senate, how would these new powers work and what crimes would they cover?
Mr Kefford : The way in which the bill is designed, as it currently stands, not all people—non-citizens—convicted of serious criminal offences objectively fail the character test. This bill ensures that people who are convicted of a serious criminal offence and pose a risk to the community but receive less than a 12-month imprisonment for their crimes can be considered for cancellation.
Senator VAN: What is the process a department officer would undertake when considering a case under the proposed laws? And what are the sorts of things that they would consider?
Mr Kefford : There's an established process, all of it governed by the requirements of both the relevant sections of the Migration Act and the principles of proper administrative decision-making and natural justice and so on that apply to our decision-making. It's an ongoing process, clearly, given the numbers that I've just been talking about, but essentially the decision-maker would consider the material in front of them going to the seriousness of the offence, and this is the way in which it works now. Under the direction that Senator McKim was referring to in another context, if it weren't a mandatory cancellation they would consider the other factors that might weigh against cancellation and then would reach a decision that's recorded properly. And then there are opportunities for the individuals to make their case under the normal provisions of natural justice.
Senator VAN: But they would be effectively considering the seriousness of the crimes? They would be very serious crimes that they're looking at.
Mr Kefford : That's right. The considerations are the nature of the offending, the seriousness of the crime, as well as the potential risk to the Australian community.
Senator VAN: Thank you. Are you able to provide some examples—obviously, without identifying anyone—of people who wouldn't or don't objectively fail the character test, who now would under this new legislation?
Mr Kefford : Rather than lapse into hypotheticals or risk giving away personal information, the intention of this bill is essentially to—at the moment, the mandatory provisions apply where sentences of a particular length are ordered by a court. In this case, the bill would allow us to take into account the seriousness of the crime, even if a lesser sentence were applied. We might be able to provide some examples on notice of the sorts of circumstances where that would apply, but I'd rather not speculate at the table.
Senator VAN: Thank you.
Full Transcript here.
