House debates

Wednesday, 27 June 2012

Bills

Migration Legislation Amendment (The Bali Process) Bill 2012; Consideration in Detail

6:12 pm

Photo of Chris BowenChris Bowen (McMahon, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) Share this | Hansard source

The Australian people have just witnessed an extraordinary press conference from the Leader of the Opposition and the shadow minister for immigration, and this House has just witnessed an extraordinary contribution from the Leader of the Opposition. Everybody would like to see more refugees come to Australia. I stood before the Labor Party National Conference in December and said that the Labor Party should aspire to have more refugees settled into Australia. I said that we should aspire to have 20,000 refugees settled into Australia. That was a resolution that passed that Labor Party National Conference. It was welcomed by everybody, except the opposition—and the shadow minister for immigration had quite a bit to say about the aspiration of bringing 20,000 refugees into Australia. He said it was 'a desperate plan to a divided party for a failed Malaysia people-swap'—a desperate plan.

We on this side of the House have a genuine desire to see more vulnerable and desperate people have the chance for a better life in Australia. But we know that those opposite do not, because they have told us so consistently. The shadow minister for immigration has consistently said that we should not increase our refugee intake. The Leader of the Opposition is not proposing to increase the refugee intake to 20,000 because he thinks it is the right thing to do—because he does not. He is proposing it in a desperate dash for the numbers, because he knows the support is not on their side of the chamber this evening. They are so desperate that they will make this pledge to increase the refugee intake to 20,000. They have not said how they will implement it. They regularly point out that they are not the government. When will this be implemented if they are not the government?

We all want to see more people having the chance to be resettled in Australia—that is the government's policy—but it should not be part of a deal to try and get the numbers to defeat a measure which would stop people coming to Australia on the dangerous boat journey that they currently undertake.

The Leader of the Opposition said we need a bill passed through the House tonight which has reasonable passage through the Senate, and I agree with him, but whether a bill has reasonable passage through the Senate is up to him, because it would have reasonable passage through the Senate if he instructed Liberal senators to vote for it. That is the case.

I want to deal with a couple of other elements that the Leader of the Opposition has raised. He has pointed out that increasing the refugee intake is now, apparently, Liberal Party policy, done on the run in his office over the last couple of hours in a desperate measure. We have good settlement services in Australia for resettled refugees—they are recognised as the best in the world—but they do not come cheaply. What the Leader of the Opposition has just done in order to try and secure couple of extra votes in this chamber is to dedicate his party to an extra $1.3 billion of expenditure over the next four years. This is not about human lives and it is not about money; this is about a measure to try and get more votes which has not been thought through.

The Leader of the Opposition also said there is a cap of 800 on the Malaysia arrangement and that is why the opposition cannot support it. There is a cap of 800, even though the Malaysian government has made it clear they would be happy to talk about further transfers after that. But any measure has a shelf life; any measure has a cap. Nauru had a maximum capacity when it was implemented of 1,200, just 400 more than the Malaysia arrangement. You could have a maximum of 1,500 now. The shadow minister dealt with that yesterday when he said, 'Oh yes, but the people will be moving through.' Where will they be moving through to? They will be moving through to Australia, due to the fact that there would be no meaningful deterrent in place.

The Leader of the Opposition says that women and children would not be sent to Malaysia. This is something he has made up in recent hours in a desperate attempt to try and win this debate. We have been through this. He knows what I have said about the measures that will be in place for vulnerable people, with discretion applied.

Let me go back to the point I made today: does the Leader of the Opposition seriously for one second suggest that the implementation of the Malaysia arrangement, together with the opening of a detention centre at Nauru, would not save lives? Does he seriously suggest that? He cannot seriously suggest that. And, if he cannot seriously suggest that, there is an obligation on the opposition not to try these desperate measures at the last minute but to pass this legislation unamended.

Comments

No comments