Bob Debus (Macquarie, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Home Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

in reply—I am pleased that the opposition supports the Customs Amendment (Enhanced Border Controls and Other Measures) Bill 2008. The measures that are contained in the bill have been developed in consultation with relevant Commonwealth agencies and industry. They are in fact designed to ensure that Customs can continue to effectively perform its law enforcement and regulatory role and function. Ironically, although this bill actually enhances the powers of Customs and its officers, the opposition has suggested that the government is soft on border protection and soft on peoplesmuggling. I believe I should respond to those particular arguments, for they are indeed entirely untrue. Peoplesmuggling is a global problem. Peoplesmuggling is not determined by domestic policy; it is determined much more directly by international circumstances: for instance, by ongoing conflicts in countries like Iraq, Afghanistan and Sri Lanka, which see thousands of displaced people seeking refuge in safe countries like Australia. It remains the case that people smugglers exploit people at their most vulnerable and there is increasing evidence that they are recruiting customers at the present time in source countries. That is to say they are recruiting them in places like Iraq, Afghanistan and Sri Lanka, and getting much more sophisticated in their recruiting and organising operations.

The Commonwealth government of Australia works closely with its regional neighbours to prevent peoplesmuggling as far as possible at its source and it maintains extensive patrols at its border. Our maritime surveillance operates every day of the year, and that will never change under this government. The recent interceptions of vessels that have been attempting to smuggle people to Australia show that the surveillance arrangements of the Australian government remain strong and effective. Since September last year eight vessels have been intercepted—a total of 185 arrivals. The fact is that people smugglers have been taking advantage of seasonal conditions to arrange those voyages, but the numbers are quite comparable to numbers in previous years. The number of people smuggled in the last years of the Howard government are very similar to the number of people smuggled in the first year of the Rudd government.

I think it is important that we keep this question of peoplesmuggling in some kind of perspective. It is obvious that geography is not on the side of Australia, and it is obvious that we will never be able to eliminate entirely the phenomena of peoplesmuggling. The number of departure points in our region is simply immense and we have to deal with an enormous coastline. Think about the scale of the Indonesian archipelago and the Australian coastline on the one hand and compare them with the coastlines of Italy and North Africa on the other. One is immensely greater than the other. Nevertheless, there have been fewer than 200 arrivals in Australia in the last year while the figure for Italy is 30,000. That is the kind of difference we are talking about, and it does suggest the necessity, as I say, to keep these matters in reasonable perspective. The only reason not to do that is if you want to play the politics of fear as was so prominent during the administration of these matters in the time of the Howard government.

There is constant pressure from people smugglers in our region. Peoplesmugglers have never gone out of business, and so you cannot reasonably say that they are back in business now. They have always been there. They will always take advantage of those people who are fleeing conflict. Conflict is endemic in some parts of our region and in the Middle East. Thousands of displaced people continue to seek refuge in safe countries like Australia for one reason or another.

I point out that Border Protection Command has 12 aircraft flying more than 2,400 missions of surveillance every year. I also point out that we have announced plans to strengthen border security arrangements with the creation of the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service. It is a serious misrepresentation to suggest that the government is in this respect merely changing the name of an organisation. It is changing the name of our Customs department to that of Australian Customs and Border Protection Service because it is changing the function and reorganising the functions throughout the government to ensure that we are actually more efficient in detecting and deterring peoplesmuggling activity. The new organisation, as it continues to develop, will have the capability to better analyse intelligence, to better coordinate surveillance and to better engage with other countries to address and deter people smuggling to our shores.

I also remind the House that the government has maintained a system of excision and mandatory detention on Christmas Island for all unauthorised boat arrivals and it is, I think, clear enough that, under the sensible and compassionate administration of our colleague the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, the systems in place at Christmas Island have been working well and sensibly. They have been working, however, without resort to the pointless cruelties that so often characterised the administration of illegal immigration under the Howard government.

To return to the bill at hand, it will amend the Customs Act 1901 to clarify the current powers to patrol areas and to moor Customs vessels. It will provide that the current power to board ships without nationality can be exercised in any area outside of the territorial sea of another country. It will clarify that the current power to board vessels in the safety zones surrounding Australia’s offshore facilities relates to offences committed within those zones. It will clarify that the present power to use reasonable force as a means to enable the boarding of a pursued ship encompasses the use of devices designed to stop or impede a ship. It will require notices issued by Customs to state the legal effect of the notice. It will modernise the language relating to the requirement for a ship or aircraft to only be brought to a proclaimed port or airport. These are all amendments which will ensure that officers of our Customs and Border Protection Service are clear about the powers that they are able to exercise as they deal with ships or vessels that are attempting or are reasonably thought to be attempting to engage in some illegal activity within our contiguous zone.

To strengthen Customs’ ability to effectively operate in offshore maritime and seaport environments, the bill will align the requirements of Customs boarding powers with other Commonwealth legislation and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. It will place a requirement on the master of a vessel that is to be boarded at sea to facilitate the boarding. It will introduce a new requirement for port and port facility operators to facilitate the boarding of a vessel that is located in port. It will modernise Customs arrest and warrant powers to ensure consistency with the Crimes Act 1914. It will create a new offence for intentionally obstructing or interfering with the operation of Commonwealth equipment located at Customs places and it will remove the requirement for copies of warrants to be marked with the seal of the relevant court. Again, these are all measures that seek to clarify the operation of legislation and to ensure that Customs officers are able to go about their business with the confidence that they are exercising their powers in a legitimate and valid fashion.

To recognise practical constraints in providing reports to Customs, the bill also provides more flexibility for reporting arrivals of vessels, pleasure craft and cargo. It is, I think, in line with community expectations that the bill will strengthen the ability of Customs to request an aircraft to land to include circumstances where it is suspected that the aircraft is carrying goods that are related to a terrorist act or are likely to prejudice Australia’s defence or security. We do not want ambiguity about the power to order an aircraft to land. It will protect the Australian community from goods which, if imported, would be prohibited goods. That in turn will be achieved in two ways.

First, Customs officers are going to be able to seize without warrant goods that are located on board a ship or aircraft and which are not listed in part of the cargo report, not claimed as baggage belonging to the crew or passengers and are otherwise not accounted for. That can include items such as certain types of pornography or weapons located by Customs officers during a ship search but not claimed by the crew. I understand that it has been sometimes the circumstance in the past that these items would be located but nobody would claim them, for obvious reasons, and Customs would then have difficulty in seizing them.

Second, all items on board a ship or aircraft that have arrived in Australia that are either stores or personal effects of the crew and that would be considered a prohibited import if they were imported into Australia are now going to be required to be either locked on board the ship or aircraft or taken into custody by Customs until the ship or aircraft departs Australia. Again, that is an assertion of an arrangement which will make it clear that Customs has the power to secure items of that unpleasant sort. Finally, this bill will create a new offence of failing to keep safe goods which are subject to the control of Customs or failing to account for such goods if they are required to do so. So what this bill does is allow the new Australian Customs and Border Protection Service to perform its role more effectively and more efficiently, protecting the community and at the same time supporting legitimate trade and travel.

It is interesting to see that the role of Customs has been transformed over a generation or so. Customs was a major revenue collecting agency of the Commonwealth when it was first created. These days its role is much more strongly focused. In fact, it is overwhelmingly focused not on the collection of revenue but on the security of borders. Indeed, all of the measures that are included in this bill to improve the efficiency of the department are focused on that issue—making the borders of our country more secure, making the operation of Customs more efficient.

I pay tribute to two groups of people. I pay tribute to those members of this House who have given support to the bill and to the officers of our Customs service, who continue to so effectively ensure that this is a safe place with borders that are, if not impenetrable to illegal activity, far more secure than is common in most countries around the world. Mr Deputy Speaker, I commend the bill to you in those terms.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

See this speech in context