I had so much feedback, and it took me ages to work through it, but here’s what I’m doing on the immigration detention phone ban bill. lambienetwork.com.au/surveyresults
Here’s a thread as well:
Don't give the government the power to do something you don't want them to do. It's as simple as that.
I'm not comfortable banning the phones of people who aren't doing anything wrong with them. Most of the people in immigration detention came to Australia legally. They're stuck in detention because they don't have a visa anymore.
Most of them are using their phones to text friends. They're using it to watch videos about cats or whatever. They're not using it to organise bloody riots. They're using it the same way I've been using mine. I'm not going to stop someone calling their dad on his birthday.
To be fair, this bill doesn't ban all phones. It just gives the government the ability to do it.
They say they don't intend to use it that way. And I can trust that, and still reckon that, if you don't want to use the power to do it, don't ask for the power to do it.
And that's what I'm voting on. That's what I'm opposing.
When I asked people what they thought about this, over 100,000 people wrote back to me. 96 per cent of them wanted me to vote no. To be honest, the raw numbers for and against aren't the only thing I took into consideration. But it was an important one.
Election day shouldn’t be the only time that voters get a direct say over the decisions that are made in Parliament every sitting week.
My harshest critics (and there's a few) would still admit, if there’s ever a time I need to step up and pass an unpopular bill to protect our country, I won’t think twice. I don’t care if Twitter hates it. If it’s necessary to keep us safe, it’s happening.
That’s because I know how important it is for the Government to keep control of our borders. If people are going to come to Australia, they're going to have to come the right way.
And I'm not going to apologise for being absolutely firm on national security. If the laws need to change to keep us safe, then I'll change them.
But this bill isn't keeping us safe. Anyone who's using their phone to commit crimes can have it taken away by the police, whether or not they're in immigration detention.
And this bill isn't stopping people from destroying evidence. You can delete your browser history all you want, but your metadata isn't going anywhere.
It's just a bill that extends too far for me. Most of the people in immigration detention are New Zealanders. I don't think they're paedophiles or terrorists.
I just think they're stuck, bored, and they want to use their bloody phones. They want to share goofy memes with their mates. They want to hear music. We can afford them, at least, this minor kindness.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
So much flat out spin and bloody-minded cynicism in Christian Porter’s comments in this article, I’m staggered anybody would put their name to it, let alone a minister. Won’t all fit in one tweet (shocker) so here’s a few: theaustralian.com.au/nation/politic…
“Dr Bernadette Boss was appointed on an interim basis to allow for her to be ready to commence her inquiries immediately once the legislation was passed.”
Mate, your own gov’s evidence in Senate Estimates said her work has commenced already, and DIDN’T NEED THE LEGISLATION.
“Most importantly, he said, the office of the national commissioner would be a permanent, ongoing body, which, he insisted, “in effect makes it stronger than a royal commission”.”
You’d think he knows he can fire the Commissioner whenever he wants? How’s that permanent?
Hundreds of people at AAP have jobs because of this. That’s huge! Hundreds of regional papers who rely on AAP content to keep their audiences informed - they’re staying alive too. Papers like my locals, @theadvocatetas & @ExaminerOnline.
But you know, the ones I’m most relieved for? They’re the ones who read, listen and watch AAP stories every day, and never even know they’re made by a small team working day in, day out, to keep Australians informed, no matter where you are.
They bring the world to Burnie, and they don’t ask for credit, praise or recognition. They just do it, and I’m so bloody grateful they can keep doing it. That’s thanks to this $5m lifeline.
I’m open to looking at “gardening leave” for ex-MPs if it gives the parliament something we can do with rule-breakers. It’s a carrot and a stick. Right now we‘ve got neither. There’s no reward for following the rules and no penalties for breaking them. No wonder they’re useless.
Of course we can just keep insisting people follow the rules and keep getting shocked when they don’t. But what we’re doing isn’t working. Once we stop paying them, we lose any power over them. And they’re running riot.
A temporary payment for ex-MPs who are subject to a cooling off period would give them skin in the game to actually do the right thing. If they break the rules, they refund the money, and pay a financial penalty like one year’s salary. Tell you what, that’d scare them.
I’ve sat eyeball to eyeball with John Setka and asked him what he’d prefer – the government's IR laws, or his leadership. Because if he can live with these laws, then so can I. smh.com.au/politics/feder…
John Setka is doing more harm to the union movement than any law could do. If you want an electable ALP you should want him gone. If you want a strong union movement you should want him gone. Members, leaders, politicians want him gone.
So if one union official can overrule everybody else and fail to put the interests of the movement above his own, and nobody can stop him, then we need laws to compel him to leave. He's a billboard for the problem.