Why this Coalition senator is calling for empathy in the immigration debate

The Coalition’s assistant multicultural spokesman Paul Scarr says parliamentarians need to inject greater empathy into the debate over Labor’s controversial deportation bill and consider the futures of young working people who face mandatory jail terms if it is passed.

The Queensland Liberal senator said the proposed legislation had “real-world consequences” for traumatised and vulnerable people in multicultural communities, and passionately urged decision-makers from all sides of politics to register the distress being caused.

“You need to be very sensitive and empathetic when you are considering issues like this and make sure the voices of those communities are heard,” Scarr said. “I think everyone in the political system has to reflect on that. We’re dealing with many communities who have been through great trauma.”

Scarr’s comments mark a pointed intervention in the debate between the Albanese government and the federal opposition over the bill, giving greater weight to the voices of community organisations and asylum-seeker legal groups railing against the severe measures.

Immigration Minister Andrew Giles blindsided parliament and diaspora groups last month after introducing laws threatening at least a year’s jail for people who resist moves to deport them.

The legislation also allows him to revisit protection findings against people who have fled from perilous situations and bars entire nationalities from travelling to Australia if they come from countries whose governments do not accept the involuntary return of citizens, such as Iran.

What does the Migration Amendment (Removal and Other Measures) Bill do?

• Labor says its bill is designed to close a loophole preventing the deportation of people who are not refugees and who have exhausted all legal avenues to stay in Australia but refuse to leave.
• The bill empowers the immigration minister to direct a person the government is trying to deport to co-operate with all efforts to remove them, threatening up to five years in jail if they don’t comply.
• Holding a genuine fear of harm or persecution if you are returned to your country of origin is not a reasonable excuse for refusing to co-operate.
• The government can also ban people from applying for a visa to Australia if they are a citizen of a country that does not accept the voluntary return of its citizens. This includes countries such as Iran, Iraq and South Sudan.
• The legislation also allows the government to reconsider whether Australia owes protection to somebody who has fled a perilous country if the government is trying to deport them.

So far, only one Labor MP, Jerome Laxale, has publicly raised concerns over the bill.

Greens immigration spokesman David Shoebridge said people across the political spectrum were “seriously troubled” by the effects of laws on vulnerable communities. “Of course, not everyone is willing to speak out when it creates internal political challenges, so when we hear these voices, it’s all the more important to listen,” he said.

Giles accused the Liberals of having “more positions on this bill than I can count”.

“Peter Dutton and the Liberal Party spent the last decade demonising migrants, refugees and their families. They are dividing communities at a time when Australians need to pull together,” Giles said.

Coalition senator Paul Scarr says there are “real-world consequences” for vulnerable communities if Labor’s bill is passed.Credit: Oscar Colman

Scarr is the deputy chair of a parliamentary committee that will put recommendations to the government by May 7 after hearing from multicultural organisations, lawyers, human rights experts, and former immigration officials, who all strongly criticised aspects of the bill, including the broad reach it would have.

The Senate inquiry also heard from Piumetharshika Kaneshan, a 19-year-old Canberra student whose family is fighting in the Federal Circuit Court to stay in Australia after arriving more than a decade ago, as well as Parichehr Shakiba, a lawyer whose mother faces deportation under the bill after failing to be granted protection.

Scarr said the women and their families didn’t fall within the cohort of more than 150 people released from immigration detention after the High Court outlawed indefinite detention in November, adding: “These are individuals who are within the thousands of other people who potentially are captured by the powers in this legislation.”

Giles and Home Affairs Minister Clare O’Neil have both said the purpose of the bill is to ensure the government can remove people who have exhausted all legal avenues to stay, but Scarr said the stories of Kaneshan, Shakiba and others like them undoubtedly presented a “complicating factor”.

Minister for Immigration Andrew Giles and Home Affairs Minister Clare O’Neil.Credit: Alex Ellinghausen

“Some people have come here as children and they are now embedded in Australia, in many cases contributing to Australia. We have an obligation, I think, to consider their interests and their concerns,” Scarr said.

“We’re talking about people, the witnesses we’ve heard from, the two young women who are contributing to the Australian community, complied with our laws and had the bravery and courage to speak before the committee, and we all need to reflect on their individual circumstances and lived experiences.”

Scarr said the minimum mandatory sentencing contained in the bill heightened the need for scrutiny, and there were questions about whether the bill sufficiently considered children’s rights, particularly in circumstances where the government could direct parents to do something on their child’s behalf.

He also reflected concerns raised by asylum seeker legal groups during the inquiry that circumstances in various countries had worsened in the time various people facing deportation were fighting to overturn their protection claims, citing Afghanistan, which fell to the Taliban in 2021.

“It is not simple. It is complicated, and we need to get to the bottom of how each and every one of those potential cohorts who have been identified by the NGOs would be impacted by this bill,” he said.

Coalition sources, speaking on condition of anonymity, said earlier this month the opposition was expected to introduce amendments after the Senate inquiry that would make the legislation fairer, including by making it easier for relatives from black-banned countries to travel to Australia.

Scarr said it was too early for him to make recommendations, adding he and Coalition home affairs spokesman James Paterson were submitting dozens of questions on notice to determine the impacts of the powers on vulnerable people.

Cut through the noise of federal politics with news, views and expert analysis. Subscribers can sign up to our weekly Inside Politics newsletter.