Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Manufacturing) Share this | Hansard source

The government's citizenship legislation is flawed and it is discriminatory. It is flawed because there is no national security evidence that there are any problems whatsoever with the existing process. It is flawed because there is no justification for this legislation at all. It is flawed because it flies in the face of the Nationality and Citizenship Act 1948. It is flawed because it goes against every notion of justice and fairness that people in this place would like to believe we stand for. And it is flawed because it has been roundly criticised by almost every community organisation out there, including industry sectors and the like. Indeed, there is no major community group out there at all that has come out in support of this legislation. In the second reading speech from the minister, he couldn't point to a single one. It is also flawed because a Senate inquiry has found so, and a committee chaired by Senator Ian Macdonald has agreed that the English literacy test needs to be changed.

This legislation is even worse, because it is discriminatory. The coalition governments in this country have form when it comes to playing the race card when they are tracking badly in the opinion polls. In 2007, the Howard government brought in the Australian citizenship test for the first time, at a time that the government was in trouble politically. The tactic didn't help that government at the time, and it will not help this government either.

It is flawed and discriminatory because this legislation affects a particular cohort of migrants. They are the migrants that have come to this country in more recent years, migrants who have come here from China, southern Asia and from the Middle East. I will quote the chair of the Federation of Ethnic Communities' Councils of Australia, Mr Joe Caputo, who said: 'We have fought for months to oppose this oppressive bill. The bill seeks to create a permanent underclass of residents, denied the rights and opportunities of being welcomed and included as Australian citizens. There is no place for the kind of extremist ideologically-driven provisions which will be included in this bill'.

In his second reading speech, the minister praised the success of the Australian citizenship process over the years. That process has indeed been changed many times over the years, possibly 30 or so. But if the process has worked so well and the minister comes into the House and applauds and lauds it, then why change it? There has been no call to do so by the community, no security advice to do so and no evidence that it is needed. The process is indeed working well for Australia and the minister wants to change it. He wants to change it on a falsely based perception that changing the Australian citizenship laws will increase security for this country. I want to raise three matters in respect of that.

Firstly, if security is the issue then the real test, and the test that really matters, is the test we apply when a person is granted entry into this country, regardless of which type of visa they are given—particularly when they are given a permanent visa to this country. Secondly, if a person has been in Australia for four years and has worked in this country for four years, what difference does the type of visa make to the person's understanding and integration into Australian life? It makes no difference at all, because the person is in the very same country, working amongst the very same community. Thirdly, under the existing laws, no residential period, none whatsoever, guarantees citizenship at the end of it. If there are any doubts about a person's character at the time they apply for their citizenship then their application can be deferred or rejected. So no period of time provides the certainty that members opposite would have you believe.

It is not a tougher citizenship test or a meaningless values test that makes a good citizen. Half a century of nearly five million new citizens successfully settling into Australia without the draconian measures proposed in this bill proves that. What more evidence is needed than to understand that the government's citizenship legislation is flawed and politically driven? It does not unite Australia, it indeed divides it.

I will finish on this point: there are about a million Australians who currently do not have citizenship. Most of them don't have it because they are not confident of passing the current test. If you make the test harder, that will mean that even more people will never, ever become Australian citizens.

See this speech in context