Steve Georganas (Hindmarsh, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I would like to thank the member for Lalor for that informative speech—especially her last point that here we have a minister setting a particular standard, and a standard that he would not pass himself with that small example that we saw from his Facebook page. And this is the measure that the government is wanting to put through this parliament with this Australian Citizenship Legislation amendment (Strengthening the Requirements for Australian Citizenship and Other Measures) Bill 2017.

Mr Deputy Speaker Vasta, I take it that you have realised by now that we are opposing this bill on this side of the House, and we are opposing it because it goes to the heart of what Australia has been and is today and what it has been for many years. If you look at our nation's history right through to where we are, we see a nation that has been cohesive; a nation made up of people from every corner of the world. It is a nation that has accepted migrants from not-so-lucky countries: migrants from nations devastated by wars and civil wars, and from places that have gone through hunger, devastation and earthquakes—you name it. We have encompassed all these people, including my own family.

What we have had going for us in this nation is our multiculturalism. We don't have those ancient tribal hatreds. We may divide on politics, but at the end of the day the political parties in Australia have a very similar goal—and that goal is for a better Australia. We may have different ways of getting to it, but we don't divide on race, politics, religion et cetera, and that has always been the way. We have had waves of people who have come to this nation, and we have opened our arms and encouraged them to become citizens. By encouraging someone to be part of a family, you make them feel welcomed, they feel part of your family and there is comfort in that for those people. But at the moment we've started changing rules and regulations and changing the goal posts on people who wish to become Australian citizens. Let me just say that the majority of migrants that come to this place, as we heard from the member for Lalor just before, want to become citizens as quickly as possible because we have set a standard over the years. That standard has been that we welcome them.

I think this bill is another diversion tactic from the government, looking at how we can divert from the real issues that affect us. I have said that many times. We have a government that is failing on jobs, a government where the economy is going backwards, a government that has done basically nothing on renewables, a government that is watering down our education system and a government that is making pensioners wait longer for their pension and is cutting their pension. This is another example of diversion. They say, 'Let's throw something in there that infuriates people and divides people,' and here we are.

Our processes for immigration and settlement have been recognised around the world. We are used as a example. We look at Europe and other places where perhaps their immigration policies have not gone as well as ours. I've had many discussions with people all around the world on this topic. One of the things they praise us for is our multicultural society and our cohesive society. Other nations recognise this. I think our multicultural society is recognised because it respects and celebrates diversity, and it's the absolutely envy of other nations. Yet this government believes the system must be reformed. You have to ask yourself why. One of the reasons for our success in Australia is that we have opened our arms to people and made them feel welcome, and we do that by giving them every opportunity and encouraging them to become citizens, not by putting laws in that make it harder for them.

By the time that people put the process in place, they are already permanent residents. You have to be a permanent resident to get your citizenship. So any checks and balances should have been done way before a particular person or resident wants to become a citizen. If that is the case—that's one of the reasons for this, as we've heard from the minister—then they are failing on their border security and their checks and balances. We know that in the history of Australia we had the Menzies government—a true Liberal government—that made laws to make it easier to obtain citizenship. Menzies did this because he had a vision for Australia. He did this because he knew that with the waves of migrants that were coming, the quicker we embraced them, the quicker we made them feel part of the family, the more cohesive a country we'd have in the future. He was right, and we did create the cohesive country that we are very lucky to live in today. Let's not forget that if migrants became Australian citizens under the current law and shouldn't have, it means that perhaps the law is flawed—that is, if we are hearing what the government is saying; that we need more checks and balances and we have to make it tougher and harder. We have had a cohesive society, so it's not flawed.

We know that people learnt English when they came here. Many, like my parents, couldn't speak any English at all when they came here. My father still has difficulty. Sometimes I question him and say, 'Dad, why didn't you learn really good English?' On the other hand, my mother could speak fairly good English. He says: 'Where would I learn it? On the production line, where the people next to me were Italian, Polish and Greek? We worked like robots. There was a half-hour break for lunch, and then we'd go home dead tired at night.' I feel embarrassed even having asked that question of him over the years. But my family, like many other families, came here with very little English and very little skill. They worked in the lowest-paid jobs and made a life for themselves because Australia opened its arms to them.

We have heard from many other speakers about the citizenship ceremonies and the joy that people have. Some of the events I enjoy more than anything else is the citizenship ceremonies. I reflect on them and think of my own family and my own story. You see people who are just so happy that they have become citizens. I am sure, Mr Deputy Speaker, that you see the same in your electorate. There are people who have had difficult journeys to come here. There are people, as I said earlier, who have been in refugee camps. Others have come here by choice on business visas. Others have a uniting family visa. But all of them have one common factor: they are so happy and so pleased when they receive their citizenship certificate. Shaking those hands and looking at the joy in their faces just proves to me that we are, or have been, a society that welcomes people, and that is the best way to have a cohesive society.

All these people, people that came from all over the world—from Europe, from Africa or from Asia, including Vietnam and China—have enriched our country. They have all contributed and made this nation great and the nation that it is. They have all raised families, who all have had the amazing wealth of being able to move between two or more cultures or languages, which is something fascinating that we don't see in other countries. We have such a rich tapestry and people that contribute to our nation, and this works because Australia managed to create an environment that was welcoming to immigrants. The language we used was inclusive. The language that politicians used was inclusive. This is all part of welcoming people, making people feel comfortable in our nation and making them feel as if they are Australians as well, and that is the end goal.

I know that we've enjoyed this peaceful diversity for many decades, but let's not take this for granted, because if we start changing the language that we use in government as politicians, if we start tinkering or if we start to accept the type of divisive language that we've seen from different politicians, we start to slowly chip away at the kind of society that many generations before us have fought so hard for. This government would have people believe that this government is designed to strengthen citizenship. That is absolute nonsense. Nothing could be further from the truth. I'd like to know how it strengthens citizenship when we make it harder for someone to become a citizen. When you tell someone, 'No, we don't want you; we don't think you are ready; we don't think you're quite right yet,' I think that is more divisive than anything. It doesn't strengthen citizenship when it creates a society that divides people into us and them. This creates division and, as I said, it chips away at our harmonisation and the wonderful things we've had. It doesn't make sense.

We can only assume that it's once again an attempt by this government to pander to those on the extreme right, to those conservative elements in the government and on the crossbenches, who have a very particular idea of what it means to be Australian. This, again, only divides people. You have to wonder why a bill like this is before the House when it does absolutely nothing to strengthen citizenship. I go back to what I opened my speech with, and that is that this is again another diversion policy to take away from the things that we should be debating in this place, like education, health, and jobs. On this side, as we've heard, we won't stand for it and we're not accepting it, and we will be voting this bill down.

This legislation also aims to increase, as I said, the residency requirements to be eligible for Australian citizenship from 12 months permanent residency and a total of four years living in Australia on some kind of visa, to a minimum of four years permanent residency. We're just extending the time. Checks and balances are done before people get here, while they are applying for visas. They're not done at this point, so this does absolutely nothing.

Then we have the issue of the language requirements. I gave you a small example about my family. There are millions of people who, for whatever reason, didn't learn English because of the circumstances they were in—factory workers, people who clean buildings and mums that stayed at home. Of course it's good to be competent in English and able to speak and read and write, but currently the only English test required for citizenship is the test itself in English. But again we see this government wanting to go from the current system to one that requires English at the IELTS level 6, which is university level. It's extraordinarily harsh, especially for refugees, people in their 30s and 40s and people—women, for example—who are much older and stay at home and don't converse as much as their partners who are at work.

Our governor in South Australia, Hieu Van Le, came to Australia from Vietnam on a boat. When he first landed here, his English was extremely minimal—and today he's the governor of South Australia. Under this bill, we would be excluding people of the calibre of Hieu Van Le from becoming citizens—and that's why we oppose it. Good people who would make great citizens would have to wait longer. That is divisive. It tells people, 'We don't actually want you right now; we're going to make you jump through a million hoops.'

Surely if the government expects a level of proficiency it also needs to provide adequate English lessons. But we have yet to see adequate English lessons and training for migrants. If you are genuine, increase classes. If you are genuine, fund English classes appropriately so people can actually learn English. But we have seen nothing on this side of it. Otherwise, this just becomes an exercise about stopping people from becoming citizens.

According to experts, language testing does not reflect the ability of applicants to communicate under all circumstances in which they would be actively engaged in Australian society and the economy. If you look back at the millions of migrants who have come to this country, the majority would have been excluded from citizenship under this particular test that this government is providing. Unfortunately, many people would not pass this test who would make great contributions to this nation, as we have seen many migrants do.

Instead of creating different classes of migrants, as has been the aim of this government, the government should find ways of strengthening our social cohesion, strengthening the things that we do well. And one of those things is multiculturalism; it will ultimately make Australia a better country, a safer country and a stronger country. Migrants have helped this country build it the way it is. They and their children and grandchildren have become integral parts of our society's fabric. This government should be ashamed of itself for undermining the very thing that makes Australia so special and unique—the pride that we have in our multiculturalism and diversity.

See this speech in context