Footnotes

CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION

[1]        Answer to Legal and Constitutional Affairs Estimates Committee question on notice, Immigration and Citizenship portfolio, received 17 July 2009.

CHAPTER 2 - PROVISIONS

[1]        Explanatory Memorandum, p. 6.

CHAPTER 3 - ISSUES

[1]        Support for the Bill was very often coupled with criticism of the Citizenship Test. See, for example, Newcomers Network, submission 5, p. 1; Chief Minister for the Northern Territory, submission 17, p. 1; Refugee Council of Australia, submission 10, p. 2; Uniting Justice, submission 4, p. 2; Federation of Ethnic Communities' Councils of Australia, submission 1, p. 1; Ms Zoe Anderson, proof committee hansard, 27 August 2009, p. 2. A notable exception to the general support received for the Bill was Mr Bob Such MP, Member for Fisher, submission 20.

[2]        Professor Kim Rubenstein, proof committee hansard, 27 August 2009, p. 25.

[3]        Professor Kim Rubenstein, proof committee hansard, 27 August 2009, p. 25.

[4]        Refugee and Immigration Legal Centre, submission 21, p. 3.

[5]        IARC/RACS, submission 9, p. 3.

[6]        Which, unless they are permanent, will not fall within the exception provided for in the Bill.

[7]        IARC/RACS, submission 9, p. 3.

[8]        Castan Centre for Human Rights Law, submission 14, p. 7.

[9]        Dr Susan Kneebone, proof committee hansard, 27 August 2009, p. 19.

[10]      Ms Zoe Anderson, proof committee hansard, 27 August 2009, pp 2–3.

[11]      Moving forward...Improving Pathways to Citizenship – Government Response, Australian Government, November 2008, p. 4.

[12]      Castan Centre for Human Rights Law, submission 14, pp 6­7.

[13]      Moving forward...Improving Pathways to Citizenship, Australian Citizenship Test review Committee, Commonwealth of Australia, August 2008, p. 35.

[14]      Castan Centre for Human Rights Law, submission 14, pp 6­7, emphasis added.

[15]      See, for example, Australian Lawyers for Human Rights, submission 3, p. 4; Castan Centre for Human Rights Law, submission 14, p. 6.

[16]      Department of Immigration and Citizenship, answer to question on notice, received 1 September 2009.

[17]      Dr Susan Kneebone, proof committee hansard, 27 August 2009, p. 17.

[18]      Department of Immigration and Citizenship, submission 11, p. 6, emphasis added.

[19]      Department of Immigration and Citizenship, submission 11, p. 5, citing Minister for Aboriginal Affairs v Peko-Wallsend Ltd (1986) 162 CLR 24 at 40 per Mason J.

[20]      Department of Immigration and Citizenship, submission 11, p. 5

[21]      Department of Immigration and Citizenship, submission 11, p. 6

[22]      Department of Immigration and Citizenship, Answer to Question on Notice, received 1 September 2009.

[23]      Professor Kim Rubenstein, proof committee hansard, 27 August 2009, p. 36.

[24]      Victoria Legal Aid, submission 6, p. 2.

[25]      Ms Rowena Irish, proof committee hansard, 27 August 2009, p. 4.

[26]      Professor Rubenstein also argued that the amendment to subsection 21(5) was unnecessary and that an acceptable policy outcome could be achieved simply through amendments to the Australian Citizenship Instructions, which prescribe the policy surrounding the legislation. The committee notes evidence from the Department, at page 47 of the transcript, of its belief that the amendment was made necessary by virtue of departmental decisions being overturned by the AAT, as in the case of SNMX.

[27]      Professor Kim Rubenstein, submission 7 (supplementary), pp. 4, 5.

[28]      Department of Immigration and Citizenship, submission 11, p. 7.

[29]      Department of Immigration and Citizenship, submission 11 (supplementary), pp 1­­­–2. The Department cited Chen Shi Hai v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (2000) 74 ALJ 775; Soondur v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2002] FCAFC 324 at [35] – [36]; Re Woolley; and Ex parte Applicant M276/2003 [2004] HCA 49 at [103], [155] in support in their argument.

[30]      Department of Immigration and Citizenship, submission 11 (supplementary), p. 5.

COALITION SENATORS' DISSENTING REPORT

[1]        Proof Committee Hansard, 27 August 2009, p. 40.

[2]        Email correspondence from Ms Renelle Forster to the Committee Secretariat, in response to questions from Senator Fierravanti-Wells, received 2 September 2009.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS BY THE AUSTRALIAN GREENS

[1]        Castan Centre for Human Rights Law, Monash University, Submission15, p. 8.

[2]        Refugee Advice and Casework Service, Proof Committee Hansard,  p. 2.

[3]        Refugee and Immigration Legal Centre, Submission 21, p. 13.

[4]        ibid

[5]        Australian Citizenship Review Committee, Moving Forward...Improving Pathways to Citizenship (The Woolcott Report) Commonwealth of Australia,  August 2008, p. 5.