Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer the Prime Minister to the arrival yesterday of another boat carrying 58 unauthorised arrivals 100 nautical miles off the Western Australian coast. I remind the Prime Minister that this takes the number of unauthorised arrivals to 54 boats and more than 2,400 people since he weakened Australia’s border protection policies in August last year. Will the Prime Minister now explain to the House what plans he has, if any, to stop this dramatic surge in unauthorised arrivals, or is he simply telling Australians that they had better get used to the idea of another day, another boat, another policy failure?

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would have thought that on a day like today, when the nation is debating the future of climate change, we could have had some discussion in this chamber of this important challenge for the nation as well, but apparently not. The honourable member raises a question concerning the arrival of boats in Australia. Could I draw to his attention the following: so far in the year 2009 we have had 45 boats arrive—

Don Randall (Canning, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Energy and Resources) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Forty-five too many!

Kevin Rudd (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The honourable member interjects, ‘Forty-five too many.’ In the year 2001 there were 44, which brought a total of 5,516; in the year 2000 there were 51 that brought just under 3,000 individuals to Australia; and in 1999 there were some 86 vessels and those 86 vessels brought 3,721 individuals. Can I draw those facts to the honourable gentleman’s attention opposite and to his interjecting colleagues.

Furthermore, in relation to the government’s border protection policy, first of all, when it comes to the change that the government introduced for temporary protection visas, those opposite did not object to those changes when they were brought into this parliament—that is the first point. The second is that those opposite, when we indicated that we were not going to continue with the Pacific solution, were led by the indefatigable member for Murray, who, when asked her position on this change, ‘Did she support it?’, answered, ‘I do.’ That is the second element of policy. As for children behind razor wire, I assume that those opposite are not planning to reintroduce children behind razor wire. So, when those opposite talk about what difference in policy they would have for the future, I would be very interested to know wherein that change lies.

For the period that the Howard government was in office nearly 250 boats arrived in Australia carrying some nearly 15,000 people. Every government in Australia, past, present and future, will deal with the challenge of border protection. This will largely be shaped by international security circumstances. In the period 2001 to 2003, as those opposite know, the total number of global exits from countries like Iraq, Afghanistan and Sri Lanka went down significantly. They were the numbers I referred to the House yesterday. Those opposite would also be aware of the fact that, because of changes in security circumstances in Iraq, Afghanistan as well as in Sri Lanka, since 2005, globally, the number of exits from those countries has gone up as well, which is why, for example, you now have thousands if not tens of thousands of Sri Lankans heading in the direction of Europe and heading in the direction of North America by one means or another. It is why you have had 130,000 or so move across the waters separating Sri Lanka and India to the Indian mainland, and why on top of that this represents a global challenge.

Against those numbers I would draw to the attention of the House that as of now we have had from Sri Lanka some 600 to 700 arrivals against the 130,000 who have gone next door to India and the thousands if not tens of thousands who have gone to other parts of the world. Once again, I would suggest that when those opposite engage in debate about border protection they reflect honestly on the past, reflect objectively on the historical circumstances which confront all countries at the moment and embrace a rational policy for the future on this important question.