4 | Releases from Hotel APODs being released under significantly different conditions, and with different transitional supports being available to them. The inconsistencies in both the decisions about when individuals were released and the circumstances into which they were released, have created additional confusion and anxiety amongst the individuals concerned. It should also be noted that this has occurred to a group of people – namely the Medevac cohort – who are recognised as being particularly vulnerable given both the lengthy time they have spent in detention (both within Australia and offshore) and the complex physical and mental health conditions that led to their being transferred to Australia in the first place. There have been a number of significant reviews and reports examining ministerial discretion in migration matters and highlighting ‘a pressing need for reform’.99 These include the 2004 report of the Senate Select Committee on Ministerial Discretion in Migration Matters100 and the 2008 Proust Report,101 which both considered the use of ministerial discretion in migration matters in the general sense, and other reviews that have considered specific aspects of these powers.102 While the progressive release of the Medevac cohort from hotel APODs into alternative community-based arrangements has been welcomed, the manner in which these releases occurred highlight the continuing need to consider reform with respect to ministerial discretion in migration matters. 50 4.2 The Process of Release The Commission holds particular concerns about the way that releases were conducted, both in terms of the timing and the limited notice that was provided before releases took place. While it is acknowledged that the process by which releases were conducted appeared to improve considerably over time, there were significant problems highlighted with the way that the earlier releases in particular were conducted. For example, there were reports of a number of releases occurring on Fridays either close to the end of the working day, after business hours, or in one case immediately before a long weekend. This inevitably made it more difficult for those released to access essential support and services, with the failure to notify community support organisations of the releases only adding to these difficulties. Media reports described one individual being told at 9pm on a Friday evening that he was going to be released and that he had 15 minutes to pack his belongings.103 There were also reports of no accommodation having been arranged for those who were amongst the first groups released, and there did not appear to be any support plan in place prior to an individual being released to assist them in transitioning to living in the community after a prolonged period in detention. This placed a considerable burden on communitybased organisations who described receiving little or no notice of the early releases, but who were essential in providing immediate support to the individuals who were released. All of the community-based organisations that we spoke to described feeling under significant pressure at short notice due to the way in which the hotel APOD releases were conducted. They further