Ms Julie Bishop (Curtin, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Hansard source

There is an old phrase: lies, damned lies and statistics. Never has a government been more deserving of that rebuke than this Labor government with its misleading use of statistics as it seeks to deny its policy failings. And nowhere is that more apparent than in its excuses for the failings of its border protection policy. Yesterday the Prime Minister was asked to take responsibility for the changes his government implemented to our border protection system, which have led to a dramatic rise in boat arrivals. As every Australian knows, since the Labor government softened our border protection laws in August 2008, 42 boats—which I believe is the figure as of today—carrying around 2,000 people have been intercepted by Australian authorities or arrived on our shores. But the Prime Minister yesterday deliberately used selective statistics to insinuate that these figures are just average, nothing out of the ordinary. He indicated that, as Labor has been in government for two years, that is only 20 boats on average for each year. And he said, ‘That is basically the average over the period of the Howard government.’ But he is damned by his own misleading use of statistics.

It is a fact that up to the years 2001 and 2002 there were a significant number of boat arrivals as part of an increasingly sophisticated people-smuggling trade through increasingly sophisticated criminal organisations. But the Howard government took action in response. It took tough decisions. It took responsibility. It was not easy, but it put the security of our borders as a No. 1 priority, and it made the integrity of our orderly migration program a priority. The Howard government introduced a series of initiatives that collectively sent a message to people smugglers that Australia would not be a soft target for their trade. That message was sent, and that message was heard, because the statistics speak for themselves. In 2002-03 there was not one boat arrival. In 2003-04 there were three boats. In 2004-05 there were no boat arrivals. In 2005-06 there were eight boats. In 2006-07 there were four boats. In 2007-08, up to the point that the coalition’s policy remained intact, there were three boats. That is an average of three boats over the six years after the border protection policies were toughened.

But in the 14 months since Labor weakened the policies and thus sent a message to the people smugglers that Australia is a soft target, there have been 42 boats. But Labor would have you believe—and the Attorney-General was doing it again in this MPI—that this is just an unhappy coincidence, that it is nothing to do with Labor policy failings. They are refusing to acknowledge the pull factors. It is no coincidence according to the Australian Federal Police. In a report finalised in March this year—which has been suppressed by the government ever since—the AFP stated that the changes to the laws were making Australia an attractive target for people smugglers. It is not a coincidence according to the Indonesian Ambassador to Australia, who said people smugglers are using the weakening of the laws as a marketing tool. It is no coincidence according to the International Organisation for Migration’s chief in Indonesia, who said people are well aware of the weaker laws and are ‘testing the envelope’. It is no coincidence according to the many asylum seekers in Indonesia who have been interviewed by the media and confirm that the Labor government’s weaker laws have encouraged them to make the trip to Australia believing it is now much easier for them to get in.

What is really disturbing about this debate is the government’s hypocrisy. Yesterday the Minister for Foreign Affairs lectured us on the inhumanity of the Howard government’s border protection policies. Yet in 2004, a year in which only three boats arrived, the then shadow minister Stephen Smith said in a press release dated March 2004:

The arrival of a boat on Ashmore Reef should be a wake up call for the Howard government to adopt Labor’s tough stance on people smugglers.

So, if one boat is a ‘wake up call’, what are 42 boats? Thanks to Laurie Oakes’s demolition of the Deputy Prime Minister’s credibility on this issue on Sunday, Australians now recall the 2003 press release of the then shadow minister for immigration, Julia Gillard, with a headline screaming ‘Another boat on the way, another policy failure’. This was in 2003-04, when there were three boats in total. So, if ‘another boat’ is a policy failure, what are 42 boats? Apparently, three boats in one year is a policy failure but 42 is a policy triumph—according to Labor. Labor was right onto that third boat in 2003-04 with yet another press release from the now Deputy Prime Minister: ‘Boat proves government has no solutions’. So, if one boat proves ‘no solutions’, what do 42 boats prove?

Yesterday the foreign minister, in a barely controlled outburst in which he denied the pull factors, demanded to know if the coalition would introduce temporary protection visas—another example of the Howard government’s supposed inhumanity. Temporary protection visas—just like the temporary protection visas that the Deputy Prime Minister, when in opposition, announced were Labor Party policy. Temporary protection visas were a policy announced by the then shadow minister for immigration and now Deputy Prime Minister. The hypocrisy of Labor has to be witnessed to be believed.

The AWU is the most influential union in Australia and one of the most influential factors within the Labor Party. When the head of the AWU said that we should roll out the red carpet to the people smugglers, when he called people smugglers ‘liberation heroes’, the Deputy Prime Minister said that the AWU has no influence, direct or indirect, on the Labor Party. Nobody believes that—certainly not Comrade Shorten, the former head of the AWU; certainly not, Comrade Smith, a current member of the AWU; and certainly not Comrade Emerson, a current member of the AWU. Labor suggests that the AWU, which likens people smugglers to liberation heroes, has no influence at all over government policy. It is simply unbelievable.

And still Labor refuse to take responsibility for their policy failure. They blame everyone and everything. They outsource the problem to Indonesia. They call the Indonesian President in a panic and make it Indonesia’s problem. They wash their hands of it. The Deputy Prime Minister said of the boat that was intercepted at the Prime Minister’s request: ‘Oh well’—she shrugged her shoulders—‘it’s Indonesia’s problem now.’ Instead of admitting policy failures and fixing them, Labor seek to blame the coalition for not coming up with the answers. They demand that we come up with the solutions to fix the problems that Labor have caused. They constantly demand that the coalition provide the policies to fix Labor’s failures. The coalition has a policy that we have an orderly migration program. We have a policy that we manage the flow of migrants to this country. But we also have a policy to deter the people smugglers from plying their trade. The former border protection system acted as a strong deterrent to people smugglers and allowed Australia to maintain the integrity of our orderly humanitarian and refugee program with an intake at record levels.

Labor inherited a strong border protection system but took it for granted. Labor changed it. Labor sent a message to people smugglers that Australia is now a soft target. Labor must fix it. Back in 2003—remember, that is the year of the three boat arrivals—when the then shadow minister for immigration, Nicola Roxon, was asked what the opposition would do, her response was: ‘I think you should direct those questions to the minister.’ Precisely! The Minister for Immigration and the Prime Minister must tell the Australian people what they will do to fix the failings of their border protection policy and stop the people-smuggling trade which has seen 42 boats arrive since Labor changed its policies and weakened our border protection system. (Time expired)

See this speech in context