House debates

Wednesday, 27 June 2012

Bills

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

3:15 pm

Photo of Andrew RobbAndrew Robb (Goldstein, Liberal Party, Chairman of the Coalition Policy Development Committee) Share this | Hansard source

In adding to the sentiments expressed by all of my colleagues here this afternoon on the Migration Legislation Amendment (The Bali Process) Bill 2012 I make the point, which has been made again and again by those opposite as well as on radio and other programs over the last 24 hours at least that Kim Beazley indeed agreed with the coalition 10 years ago. He looked at what was being proposed by the prime minister of the day, and he agreed in the end that it was a way forward. In fact, the reason we are here today debating this issue again is that those opposite dismantled what Kim Beazley agreed to. Kim Beazley agreed 10 years ago, but we are here because the government today dismantled what he agreed to. It dismantled the position that Kim Beazley and those who were here at the time agreed on with the government of the day.

It is instructive to examine whether what Kim Beazley agreed to worked or not, because in the end we are all here looking for an effective solution. Did what Kim Beazley agreed to in 2001 work? I will recap some figures, because I often see commentators in the media saying that there is really no solution to this issue. Back in 2001, 54 boats and 4,137 people arrived. In 2002, 19 boats and 3,039 people arrived. That was when the decision was taken. The next year, 2002-03, saw no boats and no people arrive. In 2003-04 there were three boats and 82 people for the whole year who turned up on our shores. In 2004-05, again there were no boats. In 2005-06 there were eight boats and 61 people. In 2006-07 there were four boats and 133 people. In 2007-08 there were three boats and 25 people. In the space of the six years after this decision was taken, which Kim Beazley quite rightly supported, there were 18 boats in total, and in two of those years there were zero boats.

What have we seen since the decision that Kim Beazley supported was recanted on by those opposite, who dismantled the policy position supported by Kim Beazley and his colleagues at the time? In 2008-09 there were 23 boats, which far exceeds the total of the previous six years, and 1,033 people. In 2009-10 there were 117 boats and 5,600 people. In 2010-11 there were 89 boats and 4,900 people. In 2011-12 there were 106 boats. The evidence is there for all to see. There have been literally hundreds of boats, and it is expected there will have been something in the order of 19,000 people by the end of this year as a consequence of changing the legislation that Kim Beazley and the Labor Party supported 10 years ago. This is a fundamental issue. The policy, before it was dismantled, was effective; it worked.

What we are debating today is the opportunity to return to an effective policy if the Leader of the Opposition is given the opportunity to put that legislation before the House—or we can go to an alternative. What is on the table is really no different from months ago. (Time expired)

Comments

No comments