Peter Andren (Calare, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

My question is to the Attorney-General, as the minister representing the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs. Minister, given the Prime Minister’s reported comments yesterday, that the Migration Amendment (Designated Unauthorised Arrivals) Bill 2006 delivers a ‘consistent message in relation to people who seek to come to Australia unlawfully’, how is a policy that removes to Nauru or Manus Island people seeking refuge in Australia as the country of first asylum consistent with the removal of asylum seekers reaching Australia as the country of second or third asylum, which was largely the basis of the government’s justification of the so-called Pacific solution policy?

See this speech in context