Scott Morrison suffers historic defeat as border protection election looms
12, 2019
Sydney Morning Herald
Prime Minister Scott Morrison has suffered a humiliating defeat in Parliament on refugee medical transfers in a rout not seen by any government in decades, sparking an incendiary debate on border protection and questions about an early election.
Opposition Leader Bill Shorten secured the support of the Greens and crossbench MPs to overpower the government on the floor of the House of Representatives and pass the legislation over Mr Morrison’s objections.
Crossbench MPs Kerryn Phelps, Julia Banks and Rebekha Sharkie celebrate after the bill passes the House of Representatives.
The government lost a series of votes by 74 to 75 in a defeat on significant legislation that has not occurred in federal Parliament since 1941, leaving the Prime Minister exposed to demands he call an election.
Mr Morrison said the outcome could not be "contorted" into a vote of no confidence in the government and the election would be in May, after the April 2 budget.
"Votes will come and they will go, they do not trouble me," he said.
"Where we will always stand and the Australian people can always trust us to do is to have the metal to ensure the integrity of our border protection framework."
The government slammed the “shameful” move by Labor to pass the bill in the face of legal advice that the changes breached the constitution, which in turn led to warnings that the Coalition’s ability to hold power was at risk.
Mr Morrison warned the changes claimed to be humanitarian but would encourage people smugglers and risk more deaths at sea from asylum seeker boats.
The government is preparing to ramp up its attack on Labor by announcing "contingency measures" to discourage boat arrivals, with one option being the reopening of the detention centre on Christmas Island.
Mr Shorten dismissed the government claims and declared Labor would uphold national security but still treat people humanely.
"The government tells us that this bill is a constitutional crisis. The fact of the matter is this bill is about providing treatment to sick people," he told Parliament.
"We can have strong borders while still fulfilling our duty of care to the people in our care.
"This bill and our amendments are about Australia's character. It's about how we treat sick people in our care."
The final vote, shortly after 6pm on Thursday, delivered a stunning victory for Labor, the Greens and crossbench MPs to enforce new rules to give doctors more say over the transfer of refugees from Manus Island and Nauru for treatment in Australia.
The bill will go to a vote in the Senate on Wednesday, where the government does not appear to have the numbers to stop the new scheme becoming law.
Labor made a strategic move to avoid turning the bill into a test of confidence in the government, withdrawing part of the medical transfer scheme that required funding to pay for medical experts to review transfers.
The move cut short a furious debate over whether the vote in the lower house could be seen as a vote on a money bill and was therefore a vote of no confidence in the government itself.
Constitutional expert Anne Twomey, a professor of law at the University of Sydney, said the Labor decision to cut the cost of the medical panel changed the implications of the loss in Parliament.
"Now that it is no longer a money bill, and given that the government did not declare it to be an issue of confidence, the government can continue governing," she said.
"If the lower house has really lost confidence in the government, it could always move a no confidence motion, but so far it has not done so."
Professor Twomey said one parallel with the government's loss in the House was the fall of the Fadden government in 1941, when the budget was amended to reduce it by the nominal sum of one pound.
Another parallel was the fall of Prime Minister Stanley Bruce in 1929, when he went to an election after introducing an industrial relations bill and lost a key vote by 35 to 34.
Mr Shorten proved the government’s vulnerability by gaining support from five independent and one Greens MP to gain 75 votes on the floor of the House of Representatives to pass the new rules for refugee medical transfers.
In a surprise legal twist just hours before the vote, the government cited legal advice from the Solicitor-General to argue the bill would incur additional expenses by creating a panel of medical experts to rule on refugee transfers.
This launched an argument over section 53 of the constitution, which states the Senate “may not amend any proposed law so as to increase any proposed charge or burden on the people”, and led Labor to remove the cost of the medical panel to side-step the threat.
Section 53 is "non-justiciable" and therefore a court will not decide if a law is valid, meaning the government cannot challenge the medical transfer bill in the High Court.
Forum
Pages: 1 
