Coalition urges amendments to deportation bill as Labor accused of trying ‘to outflank Dutton to the right’

The Coalition, led by Peter Dutton, pictured, says it supports the ‘policy intent’ of Labor’s deportation bill but has concerns. Photograph: Lisa Maree Williams/Getty Images

Peter Dutton’s Coalition has called for extensive amendments to Labor’s deportation bill, including mandatory consideration of the best interests of children and diaspora communities before exercising new ministerial powers.

On Tuesday the Senate’s legal and constitutional affairs committee gave its verdict on the controversial bill, which could be put to a vote next week, despite widespread concern from human rights experts and asylum seeker advocates.

The bill contains mandatory minimum sentences of one year in prison for a non-citizen who refuses to comply with a ministerial direction to facilitate their own deportation, as well as powers to blacklist whole countries from new visa applications if they refuse to accept involuntary removals.

Despite Labor for Refugees noting mandatory minimum sentences breach Labor’s national platform, the government senators on the committee recommended the Senate pass the bill. In a report by the chair, Nita Green, they said the minister should “consider community impacts” when blacklisting countries. In a dissenting report, the Greens said the bill should be rejected in full.

The Coalition is now in the box seat, able to insist on amendments and vote the bill through with the Albanese government or combine with the Greens to block it, handing a major defeat to Labor. The Coalition has not determined its final position.

In a statement, the shadow home affairs minister, James Paterson, and the inquiry deputy chair, Paul Scarr, accused Labor of a “flagrant disregard for multicultural communities and legal experts”.

“Coalition senators remain concerned about the potential unintended consequences created by this bill, particularly after the Department of Home Affairs acknowledged the bill has the potential to serve as a pull factor for illegal boat arrivals,” they said.

In a dissenting report, the Coalition senators said they support the “policy intent” but have concerns. They recommended amendments, including specifying that people who have legal cases afoot can’t be given a direction to cooperate with deportation and that, before giving a direction in relation to any child, the minister must conduct an assessment of whether the direction is in their best interests.

Amendments would also increase parliamentary oversight, requiring the minister to table documents every time they issue a removal pathway direction and specifying that any move to add visa classes to those who can receive directions can be disallowed by parliament.

The Coalition called for the power to blacklist countries to be redrafted to require the minister to consider factors which must be considered before a decision, including the impact on diaspora communities.

The opposition also called for the exemption to the prohibition on applying for visas to expand the definition of family to include parents of independent children, grandparents, siblings and dependent persons.

The independent senator David Pocock also issued a dissenting report, calling for a new process to review people whose protection claims were assessed by the fast-track system.

The Greens’ immigration spokesperson, David Shoebridge, said that “every single witness and submission to this inquiry, apart from those paid by the commonwealth, demanded this bill be rejected”.

“The Albanese government has chosen to try to outflank Dutton to the right on immigration,” he said. “This is a contest they can never win.

“This bill can’t be fixed by amendment. It is so fundamentally flawed it must not be allowed to become law.”

On Tuesday the high court revealed that on Friday it will deliver judgment in the ASF17 case, a ruling on whether the government must release people from immigration detention even if their refusal to cooperate is a cause of the fact they cannot be deported.

The government expects to win but estimates the case could affect more than 170 people in immigration detention if it loses.