Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development) Share this | Hansard source

Migration in the 20th century achieved great things, like the Snowy Mountains Scheme, but it came with great sacrifice from the migrants themselves, many of whom came here to work, living in camps and dongas while they were built. Entrepreneurial migrants from across the globe have built this great country. I was in Mandurah last weekend, speaking to two young men from the Punjab who'd chosen to buy a business in this country town in WA and raise their families there. They were excited about the opportunity that our country provided them. They made a point of discussing with me, in this small-town conversation, the common values that they shared with Australia and that not all migrants do share those common values and want to see a prosperous, sustainable and sovereign Australia going forward and that we do need to be careful about who comes to this country, how many come to this country and where they live.

So having a rational, respectful conversation through a Senate inquiry of our economics committee, whose terms of reference are quite benign, should be welcomed. Then, if you don't agree with Senator Roberts's motion, you can bring witnesses to that inquiry and have the open debate—it's public—in a respectful way, chaired by whoever's chairing the economics committee today. I'm sure they'd do a fabulous job. There's nothing to be afraid of in having this debate. It says more about those opposed to this motion that they're concerned that there's something nefarious about what the impact is. Let's understand the impact so we can stop having these rhetorical arguments about the heavy migration impact that Labor's imposed on our community.

I believe that migration must be calibrated to the nation's capacity—its capacity to build housing; its capacity to provide infrastructure, water and roads; and its capacity to ensure that young Australians aren't pushed aside in their own country. Economic growth that drives GDP up while homeownership, family formation and fertility rates fall is growth that is failing the very people it should serve. The question for parliament is simple. Do we want a country where the next generation can own a home, start a family and get on with ordinary life? If we can't deliver the basics then all of us are failing in the most basic of responsibilities that we have—to actually leave the next generation better off than the last.

At in Western Australia at the National Party state conference this weekend I said, 'When you can't expect to partner, to get a home and to have some kids and do all the normal things that have meant humanity has grown, prospered and progressed over centuries and millennia, we really do have a problem, and we shouldn't actually be scared about having the conversation, no matter how much certain senators detest One Nation.' The actual substantive motion itself is quite a sensible debate that's overdue in this country. Instead we're turning to high immigration to actually solve the problems of a birthrate so low. There are deeper cultural problems about not being able to just get on and do regular life. We've got to solve that problem. That's the nut we actually have to crack.

Let's start first with a sensible migration number, a number that we can actually have the capacity as a country to service, so that we're not getting waiting queues in our public hospitals, that we can deliver high-quality public education to everyone, that you don't have to wait for an hour and half in your car to get to work because you can't afford to live near your—

I know WA's very different. You've got beautiful roads over there, but come to the east coast, Senator Steele-John. If you're living in the peri-urban sections of Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane because you cannot afford a house if you're a teacher, a nurse, a police officer or a bank teller, then there is a problem. I'm happy to introduce you to any of these people who struggle with this. We need to make sure that people who share our values—such as individual liberty and dignity; every person's equal worth; freedom of faith and expression, including the freedom not to believe; the right to speak and associate peacefully; upholding the law, where we actually have one law for all citizens accountable to the courts; democratic self-government; laws made by elected parliaments, not by religious or secular codes outside democracy; the fair go of mutual respect, tolerance, empathy for the disadvantaged and a quality of opportunity for everyone; English as our unifying national language; and equal opportunities for all, regardless of where you live, your ethnicity or your national origin—and who want to help build a safe, sustainable and prosperous Australia should be welcomed. But we should have a right and indeed a responsibility to the next generation as a country to say, 'No; those who denigrate and despise those values are not welcome here.'

In a country as developed, welcoming, kind and rich as Australia, we're top of the pops for people from all over the world who seek a better life for their families. So it is beholden to those of us who hold the government benches and the immigration portfolio, who get to make these decisions, to make sure that the people that we welcome in to help us build this country share those values.

We have the opportunity to have a choice. We want people who love our country as much as we do, who believe that nation-statehood is a thing. Globalists we don't want so much. To be a patriot of Australia, no matter where and how you've come to this place, like the young men from the Punjab I spoke to in Mandurah on the weekend—we actually want to welcome those people, and those who don't share those values can go try and live somewhere else. The National Party will be supporting Senator Roberts's motion so that the Economics Committee can examine these issues in a rational, calm and respectful manner.