I don't think that's right, Kacy, it has changed since the last time I understood it too.
Leaving the merits of overall asylum-seeker policy to the side for just a short space:
As far as I read, after the 2 doctors sign off, the minister has 72 hours to overrule the recommendation, and that suite of reasons to overrule has increased from terrorism to include heinous crimes.
If the minister overrules the recommendation for another reason, then it goes to an 8-member medical panel who will not be paid for the work or the outcomes. From memory they include a rep from the AMA, a rep from clinical school of psychiatrists or something, rep from medical officer of Border protection, rep from another border-protection type source, and someone with strong pediatric expertise.
I'm not entirely sure if the final recommendation from the panel of 8 can be contested by the Minister or whether it just happens after that.
What I am pretty sure of is that the legislation specifically only pertains to those already on Manus and Nauru. Others who might come afterwards would not be subject to the medical evac option.
That doesn't discount the possibility that future legislation might be enacted to extend the treatment to newer arrivals, and is probably the main concern for those that are anywhere remotely close to vote-swinging on the subject of long-term detainees, but I do imagine it would be quite a stretch for any but the bravest of incumbent governments to roll those dice any time in the next decade.
