11th Dec 2013, 12:13 PM – Representatives Migration Amendment (Regaining Control Over Australia's Protection Obligations) Bill 2013 - Second Reading - Read a second time

The majority voted in favour of a motion to read the bill a second time.

This means that the majority of members agree with the main idea in the bill, which is to remove complementary protection as a ground for the grant of a protection visa.(Read more about complementary protection in Australia here. )

Background to the bill

Complementary protection was added as a new ground on which a protection visa can be granted by the Migration Amendment (Complementary Protection) Act 2011. The term 'complementary protection' is used to describe a category of protection for people who are not refugees but who still face some real risk that will suffer particular harm if returned to their home country.(More information about this bill and its background is available here. )

Australia's non-refoulement obligation, which is the obligation to not return such people to their home countries, arises expressly or impliedly from the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the Convention Against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CROC) to which Australia is a party.

This bill removes 'complementary protection' as a ground for protection visas. Instead, Australia’s non-refoulement obligations under the CAT and the ICCPR will be considered through an administrative process, as was the case prior to March 2012.(See the explanatory memorandum for more information.) This change gives effect to the government’s position that it is inappropriate for complementary protection to be considered as part of a protection visa application and that non-refoulement obligations are a matter for the government to attend to in other ways.