Senator BARTLETT (5:45 PM) —The Democrats will not be opposing this piece of legislation. I think a number of the measures in it are positive ones. While some are basically administrative changes, there are some positive changes in here. There are one or two areas where we could quibble, but, given that the opposition is supporting the bill in any case, I do not see much point in pressing those issues too significantly through this particular piece of legislation.

As Senator Cooney said, the Migration Act, including migration issues more broadly, is a very important and very significant piece of legislation and quite central in many ways to the future and the present functioning of this nation. Senator Cooney mentioned briefly schedule 9 of the bill, which relates to judicial review, and it is worth commenting on. The issue of the appropriateness of people's ability to seek judicial reviewor inability, in some circumstances—is of concern and I believe needs further examination. But, in the context of this particular piece of legislation, that schedule basically seeks to maintain consistency between the requirements for judicial review under the new Migration Review Tribunal and those applied under the old Immigration Review Tribunal. In that context, that was a legislative decision that had been made by this parliament in the past. I think it is appropriate to apply consistency in that regard, despite some broader issues surrounding judicial review.

There are a couple of positive measures in here that are worth noting. Oftentimes in this place, we focus on the negative. In particular, in some areas to do with migration policy and this government, I have focused on the negative. But there are a couple in here that I think are worth highlighting. Whilst they are not monumental changes, they are nonetheless positive ones. The extension of merits review of decisions to refuse applications for permanent migrant spouse or interdependency visas which are made offshore is a positive one, bringing the offshore migrant visas into line with the merits review available for onshore spouse and interdependency visa classes. That area of consistency is a positive, as is the extension of the ability for merits review of refusal decisions.

The other areas that are worth pointing to include the ability to provide for the granting of visas to applicants who would be otherwise adversely affected by visa capping provisions which have been in place in the past. Perhaps the area that is most worth highlighting is the extension to two years of the period in which a points tested visa applicant who meets the pool mark for the grant of a visa may have their visa application held in reserve. That is for those who have not necessarily met the prevailing pass mark but did meet the lower pool mark. Currently, they would stay in that pool for 12 months. They will now be able to stay in that pool for two years. That is potentially beneficial in itself, but the particular benefit arising from that that is worth highlighting is that it does provide more opportunity for people interested in settling in regional Australia to be able to be contacted by employers in regional Australia. It increases the pool and the range of skills available within that pool for employers in regional areas.

That is an issue that the Democrats have strongly supported for a long time. The movement of people into regional areas is encouraging, not just migrants from overseas but people from our capital cities. The flow of people out of many regional centres to the capital cities or the larger towns is a widely acknowledged problem in Australia. The component of the Migration Act that does provide for incentives for people to migrate and work in regional areas is one that the Democrats support. It is currently being considered in some detail by the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Migration. The committee is looking at some of those schemes and the operation of them. It is not a particularly large scheme at this stage. I hope that the committee can explore opportunities for expanding that scheme. This particular measure in this legislation is one small way of going down that path. I would like to note that, support that particular measure specifically and encourage the government and all senators to examine other ways that we can encourage people to move into regional areas, particularly areas where there is a need for people with particular skills.

It is quite clear from the parliamentary committee inquiry I mentioned previously, even from our initial hearings and submissions, that there is a need in various parts of regional Australia. The migration system is one way, amongst others, of meeting those needs. Indeed, we have seen in recent times some tentative statements by people such as the Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Anderson, noting the possible need for regional areas to increase their migrant intake. It is seen as a potentially sensitive area because of perceived antagonism towards migrants from particular parts of the world in some parts of regional Australia. I am not convinced that that antagonism is as extreme as people may fear, particularly if people have the opportunity to be made aware of the positives that can be provided to that community if they take advantage of the skills, enthusiasm, ideas and fresh approach available to them from people from other places. The parliamentary committee has already received evidence about some of the values and benefits that people have brought to particular parts of regional Australia under the program, which provides incentives for migrants to work in regional areas. The Democrats particularly support measures in that direction. We support the government for this particular small, but nonetheless positive, measure and encourage any further measures that may go down that path in the