Andrew Giles, Minister for Buck-Passing

We are used to the art of political spin whereby the flaws in a proposal or negative consequences of some ill-advised decision are minimized and the pluses, if any, are magnified.  All sides do it, and, although we may roll our eyes, we generally put up with it.

But what happens when the stuff-up is monumental? We should be able to expect the politician responsible to cop it sweet.  But not under our current Albanese government.

One of the tactics now regularly used by Albanese & Co in deflecting inconvenient questions about the actions of detainees prematurely released by his hapless Immigration and Home Affairs ministers, is to seek refuge from criticism in the fact that at least one of the released detainees is in the dock and facing criminal charges. “This is a matter which is before the court, so I can’t possibly comment”, they intone, smugly channelling Francis Urquhart, while totally glossing over the fact that the question goes not to the truth or otherwise of the allegations made against, say, Majid Jamshidi Doukoshkan, but to the undeniable fact that he was out on bail and unmonitored after numerous breaches of the law.  All of that, plus no preventative detention order having been sought against him. Regardless of his guilt or innocence in allegedly beating senseless the elderly Ninette Simons while robbing her Perth home, his case presents an indisputable failure of governance. It staggers me that experienced journalists let them get away with the standard “sub judice” obfuscation.

But now there is an even more egregious example of the contempt with which these politicians and their mouthpieces hold both the press and the public. It was reported in The Australian recently, in relation to the ongoing detainee debacle:

Decisions about visas issued to this group are extremely likely to be the subject of legal challenge and as such it is critical that they be informed by independent, expert advice,” said a spokeswoman for Mr Giles.

These decisions are delegated to officials within the department, at arm’s length from politicians.

This is absolute nonsense. Certainly, criminal matters are handled independently of politicians, for very obvious reasons, but many administrative decisions, not just the issue of visas, are subject to legal challenge. The fact that they may be made personally by the relevant minister does not make them more or less likely to fail legally.  We don’t pay ministers the big bucks just to give press conferences and announce dodgy policies, although you might be mistaken for thinking so.

Delegation of responsibility isn’t made to protect the relevant minister; it works this way to prevent the minister from being overwhelmed with minutiae.

To ensure that his or her valuable time and intellect (debatable in Andrew Giles’ case) can be concentrated on the most important aspects of his portfolio.  Has Giles, or his flacks, ever heard the term ‘ministerial responsibility’?  Departmental officials are not at arm’s length from their political masters.

Finance Minister Katy Gallagher repeated this line on ABC Insiders on Sunday, stating that the Immigration Minister is the one most litigated against and, therefore, these decisions have to be made departmentally at arm’s length from him. One of the ABC show’s invited commentators noted that the High Court might rule that the imposition of an ankle bracelet is a form of punishment and, therefore, it would be unconstitutional unless determined by a court.  Even if the decision were made by the Community Protection Board, such a ruling would not be immune from legal challenge because it would be implementing government legislation.  But it didn’t make a decision!  Its remit is to make recommendations to the ABF Commissioner and the Minister.

From the government’s own website:

The Albanese Government is strengthening its community safety framework, by establishing the Community Protection Board to provide evidence-based recommendations regarding the management of individuals required to be released from immigration detention by the High Court.

The Board consisting of Australian Border Force, Department of Home Affairs and former law enforcement officials met for the first time in Canberra yesterday.

The Board will advise the ABF Commissioner and Minister for Immigration on the management of individuals in the group released due the decision of the High Court.

To repeat, the decision was made by the Minister’s delegate.  Ipso facto, by the Minister himself.  To their shame, the Insiders panel did not call this out, agreeing among themselves that it was a grey area. This government obfuscation is no mere spin.  It is deception, pure and simple.

It has become the shambolic hallmark of the Albanese government and its incompetence.

And, in this case, one might imagine that the location and conduct of non-citizen convicted criminals would be high on the list of important topics over which the Minister might want to exercise personal oversight.  Particularly, given the propensity of members of this group to re-offend, which has been a recurrent theme since November, when the detention centre’s gates were thrown open.

Perhaps Minister Giles has other matters on his mind to be bothered about the safety of Australian citizens, such as Ninette Simons.