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

My question is addressed to the Prime Minister. As the government considers how to persuade the 78 asylum seekers on the Oceanic Viking to leave that vessel, will the government rule out making cash payments to the people aboard for the sole purpose of seeking to induce them to leave the boat? I refer the Prime Minister to the fact that two of his ministers have been asked this question twice today and neither of them has responded with the indignation and venom that he has treated us to in the House.

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

The honourable Leader of the Opposition’s question goes to this: is the government considering—or has it decided on—the provision of payments to individuals on this particular vessel ‘for the sole purpose of leaving the boat’? My advice is that is not the case. I also add to and reinforce what I said to you before, which is that international agencies—the IOM and the UNHCR—routinely provide sustenance payments to individuals in circumstances like this and they are in turn supported by governments around the world. That is the answer to the honourable gentleman’s question.

But what is quite plain from all of this is that the Leader of the Opposition is again trying to find some ground, a bit of atmosphere, to whip up the old censure motion, because it sort of started to rock a bit last time around. The bottom line is this: if you are going to get onto the business of a censure motion—I assume it is coming, or maybe it is not, as it is Thursday—then it is probably useful to have an alternative policy. Because when you censure a government for doing something you have to be saying what the government should be doing instead. That is it, I think, and I really have not seen much of that so far. But we know, however, from the Ronaldson tactics handbook that it is not about policy; it is all about stereotyping and it is all about those in the tactics room—all 40 of them squeezed in the room, half of the entire parliamentary party and Rabbit’s friends and relations—dreaming up the censure motion, working on the key lines and themes, working on who we can stereotype next time, but not one single word of policy. Our position is clear.

I also draw attention to a media release from the Australian Federal Police dated 29 October stating:

Four Indonesian men who allegedly facilitated a people smuggling venture to Australia in September 2009 were charged yesterday by the Australian Federal Police … with people smuggling offences.

The four men will appear in Perth Magistrates Court today.

I draw that to the attention of the House.