House debates

Thursday, 14 February 2019

Questions without Notice

National Security

2:44 pm

Photo of Rowan RamseyRowan Ramsey (Grey, Liberal Party) Share this | | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs. Will the minister update the House on how the government is securing our borders and maintaining strong border security and border protection policies that have been so successful? Is the minister aware of any risk to this success?

Photo of David ColemanDavid Coleman (Banks, Liberal Party, Minister for Immigration) Share this | | Hansard source

As we all know, this government inherited a humanitarian catastrophe from those opposite, with 50,000 people arriving, with 8,000 children forcibly placed in detention and, most tragically of all, with 1,200 people perishing at sea. If you look at Australia's postwar policy history, it is very difficult to come across a more appalling example of failure by an Australian government. It was extraordinary.

What those opposite want to do now is to destroy the successful system that this government has built to fix the mess that those opposite created. And, as I said yesterday, what those opposite want to do is apply a lower standard for people who transfer to Australia from Manus Island and Nauru than for every other person who comes to Australia with a visa, under section 501 of the Migration Act 1958. Under section 501(6)(c) of the Migration Act—this is an important point—a visa can be refused:

(c) having regard to either or both of the following:

(i) the person's past and present criminal conduct;

(ii) the person's past and present general conduct;

the person is not of good character …

That's very broad. That applies to anyone coming here on a tourist visa or someone who is coming here on a work visa. It applies to your cousin from Canada who is coming to visit. If they do not meet that standard, they do not get a visa and they do not get to come to Australia.

But that standard would not apply to those coming from Manus and Nauru, and that is because of Labor's amendment 14 to the legislation. Under this legislation, which imposes a very, very narrow test on who can be excluded, there are so many examples of people for whom the minister could not stop their entry, such as a person who has multiple charges against them—sexual offences, for instance—or a person alleged to be a drug dealer.

There is a whole other category that I think is really worth pausing and thinking about. It would be interesting to see the opposition's input on this point. What if we don't know someone's identity? It turns out that this is a significant issue in offshore processing. These people would not be excluded under Labor's definition because they very clearly have not breached the clauses under Labor's amendment 14. The government would be required to bring those people to Australia, despite not knowing their identity. That is shameful.