Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Hansard source

I seek leave to move a motion of censure against the Prime Minister.

Leave not granted.

I move:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Leader of the Opposition moving immediately the following censure motion:That this House censures the Prime Minister for softening Australia’s border protection policies, for denying that his changes have caused a surge in people smuggling, for refusing to take urgent action to address this policy crisis of his own making; and with each boat, another policy failure is exposed, further weakening our nation’s borders.

What we have seen from the Prime Minister today is another desperate attempt to distract attention from his own colossal failure of policy. We have seen an extraordinary failure in policy. It is the government’s stated objective to bring an end to what the Prime Minister has called ‘the vile trade of people smuggling’ and prevent unauthorised maritime arrivals of people smugglers into Australian waters. That is the Prime Minister’s objective, as it was the objective of the previous government—and I have no doubt it would be the objective of any and every Australian government.

The fact of the matter is this: the Howard government took hard decisions to stop the flow of people smugglers—and it worked. In 2001-02 there were 19 boats with 3,039 people. In 2002-03 no boats arrived. Over the next five years there were a total of 18 boats carrying 301 people. On average, 60 asylum seekers arrived by boat each year. Since the government’s changes in policy in August last year, we have seen 43 boats arrive, carrying nearly 2,000 people. Today we saw the Prime Minister confronted with another boat arrival. When his Deputy Prime Minister was the shadow minister for immigration, she used to issue press releases which said ‘Another boat, another policy failure’. By that measure, there have been 43 policy failures since the Rudd government changed the border protection policies of the Howard government. We saw today the Prime Minister’s desperate attempt to distract attention from this matter. The more he bellows and shrieks with his confected outrage, the more he confirms his own failure to protect our borders.

He drew attention to some remarks by the member for O’Connor. Let me say this. I reject any statement which suggests that asylum seekers are, or are likely to be, terrorists—full stop. I made that perfectly clear today. I make no criticism of asylum seekers. I note that the member for O’Connor issued his own statement today in which he said that he did not state that asylum seekers were terrorists. The member for O’Connor and I do not always agree—that is well known. The fact is that the person with control over our borders at the moment is not the member for O’Connor; it is not anyone in the opposition; it is the Prime Minister of Australia, and he seeks constantly to find distractions from his own colossal failure of policy.

We come back to this fundamental point: we have two objectives and we should address them in a calm and measured way, as I did earlier this week in the House—and I was complimented for doing so by the Attorney-General himself. This is no place for hysteria; this is no place for any type of hyperbole. We have a simple factual problem here—the Prime Minister’s policy has failed. The Prime Minister says that the changes to domestic policy, the so-called pull factors, have had absolutely no influence or impact on this huge surge in arrivals—over 2,000 people—since August last year. That is his contention. He pulls statistics out of the air. It is misrepresenting statistics to suggest that there has been an extraordinary increase in the push factors. The fact is that the push factors are enormous. They have always been enormous. There are millions of refugees around the world, each and every one of whom would love to come to Australia. According to the UNHCR, the number of refugees and people in refugee-like situations over the course of 2008 declined by eight per cent, but it is still an extraordinary number and an incredible toll of misery and tragedy. That is the enormous push factor that exists all the time.

And so every Australian government, regardless of its political persuasion, has to try to balance two objectives. One objective is to protect our borders and ensure that there is an end to people smuggling and that we do not have unauthorised arrivals of asylum seekers coming into our waters and onto our shores. That is a clear statement of policy. The other objective is to treat asylum seekers humanely and compassionately in accordance with the UN convention on refugees. Balancing those two challenges, those two objectives, is the work of every Australian government.

The challenge for the Rudd government is this: they say that nothing that they have done has affected the flow of refugees. They say there is no pull factor at all. And yet we know, insofar as the enormous push factors are concerned, that the enormous pressure from refugees around the world has changed over the last 12 months. The numbers have, according to the UNHCR’s own report, declined somewhat. I concede that the push factors are enormous and that they will always be enormous. So the question then is a factual one. This is why we should approach this issue in a calm and rational way—not with the hysteria, the character assassination, the venom and the viciousness that the Prime Minister displayed today. Let us simply look at the facts. The push factors are huge today and they will always be huge. They may be somewhat larger in some years, but they are massive. That is a given.

We know from reports, and also from the AFP report that the government is so reluctant to publish, that people smugglers would market recent changes to Australia’s immigration policy to entice potential illegal immigrants. That makes perfect sense. People smugglers are demanding thousands of dollars—this is a large sum even by Australian standards, let alone by the standards of desperate people, whether they come from Afghanistan, Iraq or Sri Lanka—so they have to be able to promise with credibility that they can deliver residency in Australia. So, plainly, that is a marketing tool. On 22 April, Indonesia’s Ambassador to Australia said that he thought the traffickers may use this—that is, the government’s change in policies—as a trial to organise more flows of refugees, because they get more money for it. We saw the UNHCR’s regional representative, Richard Towle, confirming that Australia’s changed immigration policies are a marketing tool for people smugglers. On 16 October, he said:

… I think perceptions of policy can certainly play a role in people smuggling. They have a product that they need to market, and to show that Australia is a place where refugees can get fair and effective refugee protection is something that is understood.

Finally, we have seen in the media so many reports from interviews with asylum seekers themselves. On 24 April an Iraqi refugee in Indonesia told the ABC:

Kevin Rudd—he’s changed everything about refugee. If I go to Australia now, different … Maybe accepted but when John Howard, president, Australia, he said come back to Indonesia.

So there is no question that these pull factors have been absolutely critical. The Prime Minister’s policy has failed and no amount of hyperbole, of hysteria, of venom and of vicious personal character attack will distract Australians from the fact that this government’s policy objective of protecting our borders has comprehensively failed.

See this speech in context