The Claim
“Funded PNG's defence against a legal challenge to the Manus Island detention centre.”
Original Sources Provided
✅ FACTUAL VERIFICATION
The claim that the Coalition Government funded PNG's legal defence of the Manus Island detention centre is factually accurate. According to ABC News reporting, Australia spent up to $370,000 funding PNG's legal defence of the Manus Island centre, including a constitutional challenge brought by PNG opposition leader Belden Namah [1]. Immigration Department Secretary Martin Bowles confirmed the amount was "in the order of around $350,000 to $370,000 in Manus" [1].
The constitutional challenge (Namah v Pato) was filed in 2013 and eventually decided by the PNG Supreme Court on April 26, 2016, which ruled that the detention of asylum seekers at Manus Island was unconstitutional under PNG's Constitution [2][3]. Australian taxpayer funds were used to pay for the PNG government's legal representation in defending against this challenge [1].
Missing Context
The claim omits several critical pieces of context:
Labor's Original Agreement: The funding obligation originated from a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) signed by the Labor Gillard government in September 2012, not the Coalition. Prime Minister Julia Gillard and Immigration Minister Chris Bowen signed the updated MOU with PNG to reopen the Manus Island processing centre [4][5].
Coalition was honoring Labor's deal: Immigration Minister Scott Morrison explicitly stated that "the funding of legal costs in Papua New Guinea or Nauru is a result of the obligation created in the agreements met and arranged by the previous government" and that the Coalition was "honouring the commitment agreed to [by the] previous government" [1].
Labor reopened Manus Island: The Rudd Labor government had closed the Manus Island centre in 2008, but Prime Minister Julia Gillard's Labor government reopened it in August 2012 [6][7]. The Coalition did not create the offshore detention arrangement on Manus Island—they inherited it from Labor.
Bipartisan support for offshore processing: Offshore processing has had bipartisan support from both major parties at various times. It was originally implemented by the Howard government in 2001, suspended by Labor in 2008, reinstated by Labor in 2012, and continued by subsequent Coalition governments [6][8].
Source Credibility Assessment
The original source, The Guardian, is a reputable international news organization with a left-leaning editorial bias [9][10]. Media bias assessments consistently rate The Guardian as "skews left" or "left-center" while generally finding its factual reporting to be reliable [9][10][11]. The Guardian's factual accuracy has been rated "High" by Media Bias/Fact Check, though it has a clearly progressive editorial stance [9]. Given the claim relates to criticism of a conservative government, readers should be aware of potential framing bias, though the underlying factual reporting about the funding itself is accurate and corroborated by ABC News [1].
Labor Comparison
Did Labor do something similar?
Yes—Labor not only did something similar, they created the legal framework that necessitated this spending.
Labor signed the 2012 MOU: In September 2012, the Gillard Labor government signed the Memorandum of Understanding with PNG that established Australia's obligations to fund costs associated with the Manus Island centre, including legal expenses [4][5].
Labor reopened the centres: After closing Manus Island in 2008, the Labor government reopened both Nauru and Manus Island in August 2012 as part of their "Pacific Solution Mark II" [6][7][8].
Both parties have funded offshore detention: The Refugee Action Collective notes that "the Coalition government with the help of the Labor opposition rushed through legislation to legalise the funding of offshore detention and made it retrospective" in 2015 [12]. Both parties have consistently supported maintaining offshore processing capabilities, with the current Albanese Labor government also committing to keeping offshore processing arrangements [13].
Cost comparisons: The offshore processing policy has cost Australian taxpayers over $13 billion over 12 years across multiple governments of both persuasions [14]. The $370,000 for legal costs is a relatively small component of total spending that both parties have supported.
Balanced Perspective
While critics like Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young argued that "Australian taxpayer's money should never have been used to suppress a lawful human rights inquiry in PNG" [1], the Coalition maintained they were simply meeting contractual obligations entered into by their predecessors.
The key context missing from the claim is that the Coalition did not initiate this funding arrangement—they inherited it from the Labor government as part of the 2012 MOU. When the constitutional challenge was brought in 2013, the Abbott Coalition government (elected September 2013) was bound by the existing agreement to fund PNG's legal defense.
This is not unique to the Coalition. Offshore detention has been a bipartisan policy at various times, with both major parties implementing, suspending, reinstating, and continuing the policy. The legal funding was a contractual obligation flowing from agreements signed by Labor, and both parties have since passed legislation to legitimize offshore processing funding.
TRUE
6.0
out of 10
The claim is factually accurate—Australia did fund PNG's legal defense of the Manus Island detention centre, spending approximately $370,000. However, the claim creates the misleading impression that this was a Coalition initiative when in fact it was an obligation arising from a Memorandum of Understanding signed by the previous Labor Gillard government in 2012. The Coalition was honoring existing contractual obligations, not creating new funding arrangements. The omission of Labor's role in establishing the legal framework that required this spending represents a significant lack of context that alters the political implications of the claim.
Final Score
6.0
OUT OF 10
TRUE
The claim is factually accurate—Australia did fund PNG's legal defense of the Manus Island detention centre, spending approximately $370,000. However, the claim creates the misleading impression that this was a Coalition initiative when in fact it was an obligation arising from a Memorandum of Understanding signed by the previous Labor Gillard government in 2012. The Coalition was honoring existing contractual obligations, not creating new funding arrangements. The omission of Labor's role in establishing the legal framework that required this spending represents a significant lack of context that alters the political implications of the claim.
📚 SOURCES & CITATIONS (13)
-
1
Funding of PNG, Nauru legal costs 'honours' Labor's asylum deal
Australia is meeting the obligations of the previous government in funding the legal costs of offshore detention centres, says Immigration Minister Scott Morrison.
Abc Net -
2
PNG's Supreme Court rules detention of asylum seekers on Manus Island illegal
Papua New Guinea's Supreme Court orders the PNG and Australian governments to immediately take steps to end the detention of asylum seekers on Manus Island.
Abc Net -
3
Australia/Papua New Guinea: Supreme Court Rules Asylum-Seeker Detention Unconstitutional
(May 2, 2016) On April 26, 2016, the Papua New Guinea Supreme Court ruled that the detention of asylum seekers at a facility on Manus Island, Papua New Guinea, which was established under an arrangement with Australia, is a breach of their right to personal liberty under the Papua New Guinea Constitution. (Namah v Pato [2016] […]
The Library of Congress -
4
Australia, PNG sign offshore processing agreement
Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard has signed a new memorandum of understanding with Papua New Guinea to reopen an asylum seeker processing centre on Manus Island. An agreement had already been signed, but it was revised after a High Court challenge to the Government's Malaysia solution. Ms Gillard says the new agreement means that work can start on the Manus Island centre within three to four weeks.
Abc Net -
5
Australia and Papua New Guinea sign updated memorandum of understanding
Parlinfo Aph Gov
-
6
The sordid history of 12 years of offshore detention
Refugee Action Collective (Vic) | Free the refugees! Let them land, let them stay! -
7
Australia to deport boat asylum seekers to Pacific islands
Julia Gillard's government accepts experts' recommendations to reopen processing camps on Nauru and Manus Island
the Guardian -
8PDF
Kaldor Centre Factsheet: Offshore Processing
Unsw Edu • PDF Document -
9
The Guardian - Bias and Credibility
Mediabiasfactcheck
-
10
The Guardian Bias and Reliability
Ad Fontes Media rates The Guardian, a British news website that reaches 110 million in the U.S., as skews left in terms of bias and as most reliable in …
Ad Fontes Media -
11
Is the Guardian biased
Factually
-
12
Nauru: Why Australia is funding an empty detention centre
The last refugee has left Nauru, but Australia will keep spending vast sums to keep the centre open.
Bbc -
13
Twelve years later, $13 billion, no plan: Offshore processing drags into its thirteenth year
More than 130 people are still trapped offshore after being sent there by the Australian Government — with no plan for the vast majority of people there, no resettlement, and no end in sight.
Asylum Seeker Resource Centre
Rating Scale Methodology
1-3: FALSE
Factually incorrect or malicious fabrication.
4-6: PARTIAL
Some truth but context is missing or skewed.
7-9: MOSTLY TRUE
Minor technicalities or phrasing issues.
10: ACCURATE
Perfectly verified and contextually fair.
Methodology: Ratings are determined through cross-referencing official government records, independent fact-checking organizations, and primary source documents.