Menéndez March RicardoRICARDO MENÉNDEZ MARCH (Green): It's interesting what the member Phil Twyford just now from Labour calls self-righteousness. It's actually the views of human rights advocates asylum seeker - led organisations and literally I would challenge any member in this House who is supporting this bill to name a single human rights advocate or organisation that works for refugees or asylum seekers who is supporting this bill.Let's make it clear: the bill as introduced was introduced by Labour so Labour are now saying that they no longer support it without the amendments is them realising that there's no single organisation that works directly with refugees and asylum seekers who submitted on it who say that this is a good bill. In fact a large number of organisations who work with the people impacted by this bill question the need for this bill. So my question to the Minister because I thought this was about not just platitudes but about actually questioning the Minister is: can the Minister name specific groups that he may have engaged with since taking on the role because I do make the distinction—right? We had the select committee stage under the previous Government and I'm keen to understand the change in tone and position from the National Party as it indicates to me that perhaps there was some engagement or further information. So was there a specific stakeholder organisation—a human rights advocate group that works directly with people—who told him about the need for this bill?The second part was that I want to pick up on the comments. The Minister in the chair talked about and acknowledged how this bill does create discrimination—I mean he used the word—and I'm curious to know whether that discrimination is rights-diminishing because ultimately we are creating completely different ways of processing asylum-seeking claims. One of them includes basically detention and has a quite a specific set of rules effectively about how that's going to be carried out. So is he is sure that for example that level of discrimination that comes from creating a whole definition around mass arrivals doesn't risk actually compounding harm for the people who he himself actually recognised come from experiences that none of us could have ever imagined—or most of us I think would never imagine. We've certainly had former members of Parliament who have gone through those experiences some of whom were actually from the Labour Party who I could see were quite upset at the time when the bill was introduced.But I would say that it's important for the Minister to make it clear as to whether he thinks that additional discrimination for people who are fleeing genocide or who are fleeing some of the most harrowing things one could ever imagine are actually rights-enhancing or rights-diminishing because I know that he talked about the ability for the system to process asylum-seeking claims. I do have some questions in Part 2 more specifically to that. But ultimately the premise of this bill is about the chicken and egg situation: is it about needing to create a whole mass arrivals definition or is it about resourcing for example the community organisations and the judiciary who are the ones who can ensure that those asylum-seeking claims can be processed quickly.Hon Shane Jones: Security—safety.RICARDO MENÉNDEZ MARCH: And I hear Shane Jones doing his usual kind of parrot-style—he just yelled across the Chamber about safety. But the Minister himself couldn't actually elucidate specific risks or evidence that created the need for this bill. I think it's not good enough to just have the Minister say Look at one point maybe we will have a mass arrival in the future." and if so if there's no specific date line or no specific time that we think those are going to increase there's therefore plenty of time to actually do all the other things that the Casey report talked about and that human rights organisations talked about. So if there is no imminent great risk of mass arrivals coming then the question is: why didn't the Government can this rights-diminishing bill and do the right thing by working directly with the organisations who work with asylum seekers and who work with former refugees?I would encourage the members from the Government who are just doing seal clapping to take this bill seriously because it affects the people in our communities who have actually lived through the absolute worst most harrowing experiences in their lives. I look forward to the Minister actually presenting us with a bit more robust back-up around why this is required and—most importantly—giving us the guarantee that the discrimination he mentioned won't be rights-diminishing."