[Theme Music Starts]

RUBY:

From Schwartz Media, I’m Ruby Jones, this is 7am.

Since the last federal election the government has deported more than 4,000 non-citizens from Australia.

Many of those people have been in the country for most of their lives, and have no connection with their country of origin.

Now the Morrison government is trying to pass new laws that could see the number of deportations increase dramatically.

Today, principal solicitor at the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre Hannah Dickinson on why Australia is deporting so many long-term residents.

It’s Thursday, March 3.

[Theme Music Ends]

RUBY:

Hannah, can you start by telling me who the government can actually deport from Australia and on what grounds?

HANNAH:

So successive governments have long had the power to cancel visas on the basis of character. It falls under what's called Section 501 of the Migration Act.

Obviously recently we've seen the case of Djokovic, which has really brought a visa cancellations into the public domain.

Archival tape -- News:

“The Australian Open is about to begin in Melbourne without its defending men's champion Novak Djokovic has been deported”

HANNAH:

His visa was first cancelled on the basis of being a threat to public safety and later that was a risk that he would incite discord.

Archival tape -- Sky News:

“The minister does have the power if he accede to evict Novak Djokovic from the country to prevent him returning for three years …”

HANNAH:

But historically, there have been other high profile cases we've seen Snoop Dogg be excluded from the country as well as Chris Brown.

Archival tape -- News:

“So Australia has told Chris Brown that he has 28 days to prove that he is a good person, and explain why he should be allowed down under.”

HANNAH:

The reality, though, is that tens of thousands of ordinary people are facing visa cancellation and particularly since 2014.

RUBY:

Right OK. So what was it that happened in 2014?

Archival tape -- Scott Morrison:

“Thank you, Madam Speaker. I present the Migration Amendment Character and General Visa Cancellation Bill 2014 and Explanatory Memorandum”

HANNAH:

In 2014, Scott Morrison, who was then the immigration minister, introduced legislation to expand cancellation refusal powers even further.

Archival tape -- Scott Morrison:

“The purpose of this bill is to strengthen the character in general visa cancellation provisions in the Migration Act to ensure that non-citizens who commit crimes in Australia pose a risk to the Australian community or represent an integrity concern are appropriately considered for visa refusal or cancellation.”

HANNAH:

The most significant of those changes was that visas could be mandatorily cancelled in cases where a person has a sentence of 12 months or more and is in criminal custody, and the consequences of those changes were drastic.

In 2013, just 76 people had their visas cancelled under Section 501. And by 2015, it had jumped up to 983.

And since then, there have been over 7000 visa cancellations, plus many more refusals.

Archival tape -- Scott Morrison:

“Entry and stay in Australia by non-citizens is a privilege, not a right, and the Australian community expects that the Australian government can and should refuse entry to non-citizens or cancel their visas if they do not abide by Australian laws.”

RUBY:

Right, so I’m clear - before 2014 the government had the power to deport people on character grounds. But in 2014 it passed a made changes that led to a significant increase in the number of people being deported. So why was that? What is the rationale in 2014?

HANNAH:

Most likely given the existence of the powers prior to 2014, it's a political opportunity. We don't see it as a response to any kind of crime surge amongst people who are visa holders. Rather, it would appear to be a way of cynically marrying law and order and the immigration narrative to appear tough on crime.

Archival tape -- Scott Morrison:

“Consistent with community views and expectations the Australian government has a low tolerance for criminal, non compliant or fraudulent behaviour by non citizens.”

HANNAH:

And it's been used as an effective wedge time and time again, despite condemnation from expert bodies. In fact, what it's done is caught up with thousands of disadvantaged and marginalised people and caused a lot of distressing situations for them, their families and communities.

RUBY:

Can you tell me a bit more about that when we talk about who is affected the most by these laws? Who is it exactly? Who's getting the visa cancelled and on what grounds?

HANNAH:

Well, the laws are so extraordinarily wide, reaching indiscriminate it impacts a huge range of families and communities. It captures all sorts of offences. For example, dozens of people have had their visas cancelled on the basis of driving offences and extraordinarily large numbers of New Zealanders, many of whom who have been in Australia for a very, very long time.

Archival tape -- Sean:

“I’m nervous, I’m a little bit scared about starting a new life here after 20 years….”

HANNAH:

There are no protections, for their age, whether you are a refugee, whether you've lived in Australia since you were an infant, what it means for people is detention, often indefinite detention, permanent separation from family members and return to a country where they may face harm or where they've never lived for a meaningful period.

Archival tape -- Sean:

“You know, I’ve been working pretty much the entire time I’ve been there I through I’d be right, but then once I actually went to jail I got my papers to say that I was being deported.”

HANNAH:

People say to us, I won't get to see my father's grave or when my mom is sick, I won't be able to come back and say goodbye. We've got people who came to Australia so young, they thought they were Australian citizens, and when they receive a visa cancellation notice, they're shocked.

Archival tape -- Sean:

“I mean I haven’t got words for it…. I’m just worried, I’m scared… this is like a new world to me, man. I haven’t seen my kids or family for 8 months and basically they’ve just sent me home.”

HANNAH:

It's extraordinarily serious for the people affected, it's not just removal, it's life altering and there is very little recourse to remedy.

RUBY:

Hmm. OK. And so that, I suppose, is the situation as it stands, with thousands of people who have been deported from Australia, after serving time in prison. So tell me what the government is proposing now?

HANNAH:

Look, the new changes are going to make things even worse than they've been.

They're going to dramatically increase the number of people who will automatically fail the character test, potentially increasing cancellations, five fold.

We liken it to trawler fishing instead of fishing with a rod. It's going to catch people that it shouldn't, and it's going to cause serious harm.

The changes aren't law yet, but just recently, the House of Representatives passed the bill, this time without opposition from the Labor Party, and the same situation will arise in the Senate in late March.

RUBY:

We’ll be back in a moment.

[Advertisement]

RUBY:

Hannah, we're talking about changes that the government wants to make to the Migration Act. It sounds like the final outcome of those changes would be that even more people would potentially be able to be deported from the country. The Labor Party is supporting the idea. So can you tell me who this would affect?

HANNAH:

Sure. So the bill means that somebody will automatically fail the character test if they are convicted of an offence which has a maximum sentence of two years, regardless of what sentence they receive. It could be a fine. It could be no, no penalty at all.

And that will mean offences such as a child sharing an intimate image with a friend or a responsive text regarding child arrangements in breach of an intervention order. Both of those cases will automatically fail the character test under the bill, whereas before that could have had a visa cancelled, but it would have been discretionary.

RUBY:

Ok so under the 2014 changes people convicted of a crime who served at least 12 months in prison would automatically fail the character test and have their visa cancelled. But under these proposed new changes people will have their visas cancelled even if they have never received a prison sentence?

HANNAH:

That's right.

RUBY:

OK So what’s the government reasoning behind making these further changes?

HANNAH:

This has been a troubling part of the narrative.

Archival tape -- Member for Sturt:

“Will the Minister update the House on the Morrison government’s legislation to protect Australians from foreign criminals, and is the minister aware of any contrary approaches?”

Archival tape -- Speaker:

“The minister for Immigration has the floor….”

HANNAH:

Last year, the Minister for Immigration, Alex Hawke, said the changes were needed to address a gap by ensuring visa cancellation in cases where people are convicted of crimes but receive a reduced sentence, for example, following a guilty plea.

Archival tape -- Alan Hawke:

“I do want to update the house that this bill will come back here and we will continue to pursue this legislation everyday and every week until we’re able to do this and secure better laws to protect Australians from serious criminals who don’t come from Australia.”

HANNAH:

And last month, the prime minister said that judges are deliberately handing down reduced sentences to ensure a non-citizen offenders don't fail the character test.

Archival tape -- Scott Morrison:

“If a judge goes and gives them a sentence of less than two years, even though that crime carries a sentence of two years, then they can appeal against the decision to toss them out. And all they have to get is a judge who's prepared to do that, and they get to stay…”

HANNAH:

So that's the rationale the government has given for the bill, but those arguments don't really stack up because the government can already cancel the visa of basically anybody that it wants to.

We've seen cases where the minister has cancelled the visa of a person who has no criminal history whatsoever.

RUBY:

And it sounds like this is similar to what happened in 2014. The government saying they need more powers to cancel peoples visas, when they can really already do that. So why do you think this is all coming up again now, in such a similar kind of way?

HANNAH:

The only reason that this bill has been resurrected, it appears to me, is for political reasons. It's given the government a talking point about being tough on crime. Just prior to an election. And they've explicitly said the bill is a test for Labor.

Archival tape -- Alan Hawke:

“The government does intend to put this bill into the House today, and the test for the leader of the opposition is to abandon his green allies finally and come into this parliament and vote on it.”

HANNAH:

Historically, Labor's been reluctant to support this legislation, and they've listened to the experts on it. In October last year, they opposed it because they didn't want to exacerbate diplomatic tensions with New Zealand, and because of the harm for victims and survivors of family violence, which is likely to arise from the bill.

Archival tape -- Kristina Keneally:

“Let’s talk about this bill. First of all I'm a little concerned that the Minister for Immigration fails to understand he already has the power to deport perpetrators of domestic violence. He fails to understand that women and children who are the victims of domestic violence, whether they are on temporary visas, are Australian citizens at the hand who suffer violence at the hands of visa holders. They are often at risk, those women and children. If they report domestic violence, their visa status is also at risk.”

HANNAH:

And even when it was being debated last month in Parliament, Labor seemed unsure whether or not they would support it.

Archival tape -- Scott Morrison:

“It's the entire Labor Party when it comes to these issues, John, they just, they just don't have the strength and it's not easy, but you have to do it. That's what keeping Australians safe means. And I've been doing that all throughout, from when I was an Immigration Minister through to a Prime Minister.”

HANNAH:

But after a couple of days of pressure from the government,

Archival tape -- Scott Morrison:

“You know, I don't flinch on these things. But Labor, they balk. They balked on turning boats back. They balked on the Pacific Solution. They balked on all of these things. They balked on defence spending. They balk on all of these issues.”

HANNAH:

Labor caved and waved it through the House of Representatives.

It's a political wedge that's been effective.

RUBY:

Mm-Hmm. And so if Labor is now on board with these changes, does that essentially mean that this is now a done deal that this these laws will go through?

HANNAH:

Well, that's not clear. Later in March, the 29th and the 30th, the Senate is sitting for the last time before the election.

And we're very concerned that although Labor understands the concerns that experts have raised, that they're going to do the same thing as they did in the House of Representatives and pass the bill.

If this bill passes, the effects are going to be dramatic for people affected by visa cancellations.

These numbers are extraordinary on a global stage. Other countries do deport people on the basis of character, but not in this politicised environment and not where we're seeing the extraordinary harm that this regime is causing to families and communities.

RUBY:

Hannah, thank you so much for talking to me about all of this today.

HANNAH:

It's a pleasure. Thank you very much, Ruby.

[Advertisement]

RUBY:

Also in the news today…

Parts of Sydney have been issued with evacuation warnings after the city’s main water source began to overflow on Wednesday morning.

The Bureau of Meteorology issued severe weather and flood warnings across the NSW coast as the heavy rain system moved south, leaving tens of thousands of homes inundated and more without power in NSW and QLD.

Twelve people have died from the flooding since the beginning of last week.

---

And in his first ever State of the Union address, US president Joe Biden said Russian President Vladimir Putin must pay a price for his actions in Ukraine.

In Capitol Hill on Wednesday, Biden said that Putin's war was premeditated and unprovoked, and that he would continue to pay a high price over the long run.

I’m Ruby Jones, This is 7am, See you tomorrow.