Stephen Smith (Perth, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

of all our problems—and you said that that is right—but you will not say whether if you were elected to office you will reintroduce them.

A lot was said by the Leader of the Opposition today in question time about the 78 asylum seekers on the Oceanic Viking. Let us be absolutely crystal clear about three issues that are currently before the Australian public. The first is that a boatload of over 250 Sri Lankans were intercepted by Indonesian authorities within Indonesian waters and taken to the port of Merak. There have been over 80 interceptions and interdictions by Indonesian authorities within their territory over the last three to four years. This one was very significant because it was the first occasion in which an interdiction in Indonesian waters was made by Indonesian naval authorities. We welcome that very much. We have heard the Indonesian authorities say that they will wait until the asylum seekers on that boat want to get off. Then they will be processed in accordance with the UNHCR procedures in Indonesia—bearing in mind that there is of course an immigration directive in Indonesia from 2002 which says that anyone claiming asylum in Indonesia will be treated in accordance with UNHCR procedures. That is one issue before the public eye. And we welcome very much that interdiction. I have seen very many criticisms by the opposition of Indonesia and what is occurring, and I certainly hope that they are not criticising that.

The second issue is the Oceanic Viking. Let us very clearly understand what the Oceanic Viking situation is all about and what the opposition have said about that matter. Australia authorities received a request from Indonesian search and rescue authorities to render assistance in Indonesia’s search and rescue area. We did two things. There was a check made of whether any commercial ships were in the vicinity to see whether they could render assistance. There were not. So HMAS Armidale came to the ship’s assistance to discharge our humanitarian and our safety at sea obligations.

When that was done, we knew only too well that there would necessarily be immigration, refugee and humanitarian consequences flowing as a result of that. The view which we put to Indonesia was: ‘We have picked these people up at your request in your search and rescue area. We believe that they should go to Indonesia.’ The Indonesian President said: ‘Yes, I agree with that. They should come to Indonesia.’ That is in the process of being effected. Indonesia said, ‘Yes, they can come to Indonesia.’ It is now a matter of discussion between Indonesian officials and Australian officials on board the Oceanic Viking as to how that embarkation will be effected.

What I find very unclear is whether the opposition, firstly, believed that the refugees in the boat should have been picked up. There have been questions in this House which go to whether the boat was in distress because it had been disabled by those people on board. We have questions today about whether it was within the capacity of the Oceanic Viking and, I assume, HMAS Armidale to pick people up because there might have been a numerical difficulty.

Secondly, the opposition have been very unclear as to where they believed the Oceanic Viking should go. Our view was that it should go to Indonesia; that was the Indonesian President’s view. The shadow minister for immigration, on 20 October, was asked, ‘What should they do with these people who are on this ship?’ The response was, ‘You should ask the federal government about that.’ A question from a journalist was, ‘What do you think?’ After about half a page of transcript, the answer was, ‘These people should be taken to Indonesia.’ The shadow minister for foreign affairs, Ms Bishop, was on News Radio on 21 October and said ‘we welcome the decision of Indonesia to take the 78 people’. But I was confused by her on 25 October when in a doorstop interview a journalist asked: ‘Should that boat continue on to Indonesia, then? What does the coalition think should happen to the boat? Should they come to Australia?’ Ms Bishop said, ‘The coalition is not in government.’ Malcolm Turnbull on the doors today was asked, ‘Mr Turnbull, who should take the asylum seekers, Indonesia or Australia, on board the Viking.’ Mr Turnbull said, ‘This is a question that you should ask Mr Rudd.’

Maybe they are all taking the advice of the former minister for immigration, Mr Ruddock. He was asked on 28 October whether Indonesia or Australia should take the Oceanic Viking passengers. He said, ‘I’m not going into micromanagement.’ On 23 October on Sky News he was asked the same question and Mr Ruddock said, ‘I’ve advised all my colleagues that that is the question that they shouldn’t answer.’ We have the Liberal Party opposition in here giving lectures to the Australian parliament and the Australian people about how to deal with asylum seekers. They have a hide. They have a hide to come into this House and seek to give lectures about how people should be treated and then say—on their own admission today—that all of these ills have been caused by the government making three changes, including abolishing temporary protection visas and taking women and children out from razor wire, while not saying that they will reintroduce them. (Time expired)

See this speech in context