Administrative Review Tribunal and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025; In Committee

Opened the debate

Green moved three government amendments to refine the bill's scope and administrative provisions. The first two amendments replaced specific references to student visas with broader terms covering temporary visas, allowing regulations to prescribe which decisions undergo on-the-papers review. The third amendment clarified rules for appointing acting presidents and delegating powers to non-judicial deputy presidents. Green argued these changes ensured consistency and efficiency in handling high-volume visa cases.

Government response

Green opposed the independent review amendment, stating that existing mechanisms such as Senate estimates, data publication, and the Administrative Review Council provided sufficient scrutiny. Green argued that a statutory review was unnecessary given the existing independent review provisions in the Administrative Review Tribunal Act. Regarding the discretion amendment, Green maintained that standardised on-the-papers processes ensured certainty and that granting presidential discretion would create administrative burdens and potential litigation.

Opposition response

Kovacic supported the government amendments, noting they broadened the scope of on-the-papers reviews to include all temporary visas. Kovacic argued this allowed the tribunal to direct resources to cases requiring oral examination while resolving simpler disputes promptly. However, Kovacic expressed concern about delegating power to expand reviews via regulation, insisting that Parliament should determine limits on oral hearing rights through legislation rather than executive regulation.