Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

We are a nation of migrants as the Prime Minister has outlined on numerous occasions: the Chinese, the Irish, the ten-pound Poms, even the Germans like me, the Greeks, the Italians—we came from all over the world. After World War II we saw seven million people come to this country—4.4 million of them have become Australian citizens. We took 35,000 Jewish people after the Holocaust at the end of World War II.

Eighty-five per cent of people who come to this country become Australians within 10 years, so we have a long history of being a compassionate country. Our country has been diminished by those opposite in the last 10 years in the way they have dog whistled their way for political advantage in terms of the number of people across the world who are refugees or displaced persons.

Back in 1951 when the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees was established, there were 1.5 million refugees internationally. At the end of 2011, there were 42.5 million forcibly displaced persons, including 15.2 million refugees under what we call the definitions in relation to that. There are 895,000 asylum seekers and 26.4 million internally displaced persons.

This is a massive problem and, in global terms, the number of people who have come to this country is relatively small. In America there are approximately more than 500,000 unauthorised arrivals each year. In Italy alone there were 61,000 irregular arrivals by sea from North Africa, Greece and Turkey, and yet those opposite seem bent on exploiting this issue for base political purposes and have done election after election.

The member for Berowra and others opposite talk about deterrence. I say to them: if they were interested in proper deterrence, they would agree to the Malaysia solution. The UNHCR was involved in that process—agree to it. But, no, they do not and, as speaker after speaker on the government side has outlined, the TPVs did not work and there was subsequently an increase in the number of people who came. The expert panel did not recommend TPVs be reintroduced. It recommended a number of the policies akin to the Howard government's policies be recommended to be reintroduced but not TPVs.

I would have more respect for those opposite if there were fewer sound bites and more substance, and fewer slogans and more solutions. We see the word 'illegal' used again and again and again. They would not use that word unless they focus-grouped it. They use that again and again and again for the very purpose of political advantage: to scare people and make them frightened. That is why they use it. They use a whole host of phrases, like 'turning back the boats'—when 2003 was the last time any boats were turned back. They know the model has changed.

They talk about the fact that they would tow the boats back. They talk about the facts that they have all these great policies. They do not have the courage to even mention it to the Indonesians. When the Leader of the Opposition in October last year met with the President of Indonesia, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, he did not even mention the policy—he forgot about it. The reality is they are courageous here but when they go to meet with the leaders of countries in the region, they seem to forget about their policies. It is one voice here, one voice back in their electorate for base political purposes and another voice when they meet with international leaders.

They know their policies will not work and the truth is all about slogans—and the member for Berowra has form on this. The Leader of the Opposition screams and shouts in front of the media, in front of the cameras, but when he comes in front of other countries, he forgets about his own policies because he knows they will not work. He knows they did not work when it came to the TPVs and he knows they will not work again. That is the truth of the matter. Guess what? They are lions here but mice back in Indonesia when they go and meet with Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono.

They know that TPVs did not work and they talk about humanitarian programs. We have seen a number of speakers—the member for Mitchell mentioned this: we are raising through the humanitarian program up to 20,000 people being taken, brought into this country, given its wealth and opportunity, given opportunity in a great land. Guess what? They supported it then opposed it; then they opposed it and supported it. They flip-flopped all over the place— (Time expired)

Debate adjourned.

See this speech in context