What exactly does it mean to “reopen” Christmas Island and why is it being done?

Politically, the Morrison government is trying to play two-faced with the medevac bill, which was rejected by parliament this week.

It sought to spark a mini-Tampa crisis by exaggerating Labor’s support for a modest measure to facilitate medical transfers from Manus Island and Nauru.

Will it succeed? The short answer is definitely “no”; the long answer is that it’s an issue that could cost Labour dearly. The point is, no one knows how it will turn out – and until the polls and focus groups have their say, both parties are going with their gut.

The Liberals believe anything to do with “the boats” will be fatal to Labor; Labor believes community attitudes have changed but is very concerned about how the debate will develop once the boats appear.

There is no doubt that Bill Shorten is in a difficult position. The government’s attacks have been fierce, exaggerated and fear-mongering.

But the Coalition’s strategy is also risky at a policy level. Scott Morrison is playing both sides of the same coin. He claims Shorten’s support for the medevac bill undermines offshore processing and signals a porous border.

He went on to say that the government, and himself in particular, was ready to protect Australia from a new wave of the pandemic. Everything the BroadCast Unitedligence advisers wanted would be done. The border would remain strong.

Mr Morrison rejected suggestions the details of the legislation limited the motivations of people smugglers, insisting they did not have to worry about “nuance”.

Indeed it is. So which unvarnished message will smugglers hear from Morrison? That the policy is being repealed, or that the border is being fortified?

There is also a danger, some critics say, that the Nauru government’s comments about the large number of suspected criminals on Nauru and Manus Island could make the United States even more reluctant to take in refugees (it has so far accepted only 456 people, out of a maximum of 1,250 under the agreement).

read more:
Explained: What impact would the ‘medical evacuation’ bill actually have on sick asylum seekers?

What the government is actually doing is hard to pin down. Take the reopening of the Christmas Island detention facility (or more accurately the “chain of detention facilities” there), which has attracted big headlines and overseas attention.

What does “reopening” mean? Going in with the vacuum and mop so the center is functional when needed? Or setting things up right away on top of day-to-day operations?

How convincing is Morrison’s reasoning for the reopening being to “deal with the prospect of transfers”?

The government says space is tight with many detention centres closing, but Christmas Island is not the best place to get medical care if people are being transferred because they are sick.

Perhaps some of those currently held elsewhere would be moved to Christmas Island to make room for the new arrivals. But wouldn’t it be cheaper and simpler — and less conspicuous and noticeable — to simply rent some accommodation near the facilities currently operating?

In any case, while some of those transferred will remain in detention, previous experience suggests that many could be allowed into the community.

True, the Home Affairs advice envisaged a scenario in which a Christmas Island facility might be needed, but it had the feel of a worst-case scenario. (With the prospect of an election and a change of government raising questions about the future of Home Affairs Minister Mike Pezzullo, one can’t help but wonder what he thinks of the government’s open use of the department’s advice to undermine Labor.)

If the government is serious about “reopening” Christmas Island in any significant way, it may find itself spending a fortune there to serve only a handful of people. If this is a fake reopening, it is just propaganda and should be called out.

read more:
Refugee law expert weighs in on a week of ‘reckless’ rhetoric and a new approach to processing asylum seekers’ claims

The medical evacuation bill passed despite the minority government’s best efforts to block it, including a Senate filibuster on the last day of last year to delay the bill from reaching the House floor.

On Thursday, a rather panicked government replayed the scene of that December day.

This time, the Senate passed a motion calling for a royal commission “to investigate violence, abuse and neglect against people with disability”. The motion was opposed by the Coalition. Labor expects the motion to be introduced to the House of Representatives on Thursday afternoon and is ready to push it through with the support of crossbench MPs.

The government said they knew the message had not yet reached the Senate as question time was about to end. But they were frightened by the opposition’s tactics and worried about what Labor might be doing. So they just let question time go on for about 150 minutes, a record.

Earlier in the day, the House of Representatives appeared ready to amend the bill to prevent the government from providing guarantees for coal projects, so it had to withdraw the bill that would have imposed a “big stick” on non-compliant energy companies.

The government said it would implement its “big stick” plan before the election. But its failure to implement the plan before the election is another example of a long history of failures in the energy sector.

A vote on the disability motion will take place on Monday, with the Coalition not opposing it – despite its opposition in the Senate – and the government saying it would then consider what action to take.

Abuse of people with disabilities is surely as important as abuse of the elderly. With public demand growing that facts and culprits be uncovered where there is evidence of wrongdoing, there would be policy and political value in setting up a Royal Commission alongside an inquiry into aged care.

Parliamentary life was tough for both parties this week – the government failed to take control of the House, while Labour failed to take control of the debate, which it wanted to focus on banks rather than ships.

Then again, nothing could compare to the suffering of One Nation, whose leader Pauline Hanson has been accused of sexual harassment by former colleague Senator Brian Burston and whose right-hand man James Ashby has publicly feuded with his accuser. It has been an awkward party.