[ad_1]
Jane Hume barely had to lift a finger.
Sitting in a studio at Parliament House, the Liberal frontbencher watched on as Sunrise presenter Nat Barr grilled Home Affairs Minister Clare O’Neil over the actions of her junior minister Andrew Giles.
Giles’ ministerial career hangs in the balance and it was left to O’Neil, appearing in a regular slot on the breakfast program, to explain why the immigration minister should keep his job after more revelations about the alleged conduct of people released from detention.
He’s now considering again trying to deport around 30 non-citizens, initially deemed too poor of character to get visas but who were allowed to stay after an independent tribunal overruled that decision.
Among the group are people with serious criminal histories, including several convicted of child rape and another recently charged with murder.
For three minutes, an eternity in breakfast TV land, all Hume had to do was sit and nod as Barr unloaded a barrage of questions at O’Neil.
Barr put to O’Neil that a decision Giles made last year meant “rapists used it to stay here”.
She alleged that “25 women and a child” had been “attacked” among the “heinous crimes” that “some foreigners” were accused of committing, after being allowed to stay in Australia “because of a directive made by the minister”.
A day earlier in the House of Representatives, the Coalition peppered Giles with questions about the so-called Ministerial Direction 99, issued in early 2023 to placate the concerns of successive New Zealand governments which had complained about Kiwi criminals being deported across the Tasman despite having little to no ties to the country.
O’Neil repeatedly told Barr that Giles was “a good minister” but it wasn’t lost that she repeatedly used terms like “reiterate what Minister Giles has said”.
In other words, I might be here but this is his circus.
O’Neil and Giles have been in the middle of a political firestorm after the High Court up-ended Australia’s immigration detention system late last year.
The ruling, that indefinite immigration detention was unlawful, prompted the release of more than 150 non-citizens. Managing that cohort has been a headache in itself for the ministers and left them facing uncertain futures.
But this week’s focus on the fallout of Giles’ ministerial directive has left him standing solo in the firing line – at least for now.
Loading…
Giles future rests with prime minister
The future of Andrew Giles hangs with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese.
On Wednesday, in a rowdy question time, Albanese was sticking with his minister and vowing the independent tribunal would receive a new directive to place a greater priority on community protection.
The Coalition senses Giles is vulnerable and has firmly set its sights on making him the first Labor frontbencher to lose their job. It’s not just the opposition calling for him to go, breakfast TV programs are now questioning how he can stay.
The situation before Albanese comes after an unrivalled period of stability in recent political history.
The Labor government recently marked its second anniversary in power and Albanese’s ministry has remained as it was since it was sworn in.
Some insiders say Albanese was keen to go full term without changing his team. If he had to reshuffle, a neat solution would have been to link it to Cabinet ministers announcing plans to retire closer to the election.
Others in the party now say its unviable to wait and Giles needs to be moved on.
The former refugee lawyer was never a natural fit for a portfolio where Labor’s hard-line border policies echo those of the Coalition.
But sacking Giles will give the Coalition a win Albanese doesn’t want to concede.
The added complication for the prime minister is Giles is a senior leader in Albanese’s own Left faction.
Upsetting the applecart so close to an election risks unsettling the backbench at a time when the PM needs stability. Not acting too risks upsetting others in the party who want to see Giles moved on.
One factor in Giles’ favour is the suggestion that he’s been let down by his department, or decisions beyond his control (as is the case with the independent tribunal).
Home Affairs secretary Stephanie Foster late on Tuesday confirmed her staff had failed to alert Giles to problematic cases.
The trouble for Giles is the Westminister system means the buck stops with him, not the department.
Loading
Breakfast TV can make and break careers
Appearing on Sunrise has brought with it a convenient excuse for Clare O’Neil in the face of accusations she’s been in hiding when the government has faced backlash over migration matters.
Her staff point to the regular appearance alongside Hume as a sign she’s out and about.
She does that segment because breakfast TV, even if the evening TV news attracts much bigger audiences, has the ability to make political careers.
Once seen as a rising star in Labor, O’Neil likely looked at the fortunes Sunrise and Today afforded Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott in the years before each became prime minister.
Giles didn’t even need to be on the program to be the focus, with Barr almost apologetic at one point that she was having to ask the questions of O’Neil instead of the immigration minister.
Just as breakfast TV can make political careers, Andrew Giles might soon learn it can break them too.
Posted , updated
[ad_2]