Bill Debate · In Committee
Senate · Thursday 5 February 2026
Continued from Wednesday 4 February 2026.
Official Hansard for this day (APH) · Read this debate on OpenAustralia
Senator Pocock moved three amendments to restrict on-the-papers reviews to student visas and remove regulation-making powers for other migration decisions. The government and opposition opposed the changes, arguing they would reduce flexibility and undermine efforts to streamline tribunal processes. The amendments were defeated in a division.
The amendments were not passed, with 12 senators voting in favour and 32 against.
Summary in reported speech - not a transcript. AI-generated, so check the official record before quoting.
Continued the debate
Pocock moved amendments to limit on-the-papers reviews specifically to student visa refusals. The changes sought to remove the ability for regulations to prescribe other decisions for this streamlined review process. Pocock aimed to narrow the scope of decisions eligible for paper-based review to this specific category.
Government response
Green stated the government opposed the amendments because the regulation-making power allows timely responses to changes in migration case loads. Green noted the power is constrained to temporary visa types and excludes protection visa matters. Green argued removing this flexibility would undermine the effectiveness of the reforms, while noting regulations remain disallowable by parliament.
Opposition response
Paterson indicated the opposition did not support the amendments. Paterson argued that limiting on-the-papers reviews to student visas would reduce the scope of streamlined processes. Paterson warned this restriction could undermine the bill's objective of reducing backlogs in the Administrative Review Tribunal.