Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, I am glad you recognise that spirit of bipartisanship in which I assented to the amendment to the motion on asylum seekers. However, in rising to speak to the motion put forward by the member for Cook, it would have been nice to have had a copy of the amendment. I am sure one is coming over, but unfortunately I am a bit hamstrung in speaking to the amendment because I do not have a copy of it. None has been provided to me. However, I do have a copy of the original motion of the member for Cook. In speaking to that, I welcome the lifting of the suspension of processing Afghan asylum seekers at the end of last month. As I have said, I do not actually have a copy of the amendment, but in a way it does not really matter because this is not about the substantive motion that the member for Cook articulated but about mischief. There is no vision that we need to explore or policy that we need to explore. This is about the mischief that comes from those opposite when it comes to immigration. I am sure he is facilitating the handing over of a copy of the amendment to this side of the chamber.

As the government explained at the time of the suspension—when it was put in place during a fluid situation in Afghanistan last year—things have changed a little bit. Why did we do that? Let us go back to the facts and look at the Sri Lankan and Afghani situation. The overriding basis is to ensure that every claim for asylum is processed fairly and to do that we had to make sure that we knew all of the facts in Afghanistan. As the member for Cook would know, Afghanistan is a country that has been experiencing some difficulties of late and without up-to-date country information it was not possible to make a fair assessment of the claims that were put forward. I am not as familiar with Afghanistan as the Leader of the Opposition. He spent a significant amount of time there recently—on the firing range. I did not get to do that, but I am sure he would admit in his discussions with Alan Jones and others that Afghanistan has some particular challenges. That is why the Department of Immigration and Citizenship needed time to look at the circumstances on the ground in Afghanistan and Sri Lanka.

The department now has a much clearer picture from the Australian Embassy and from other governments around the world that are involved in Afghanistan and the government has therefore been able to lift the suspension of the processing. Each individual claim will be assessed on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the individual circumstances—certain legal criteria, the relevant policy considerations and the comprehensive and up-to-date country information. This is the case with all immigration matters.

In accordance with our international obligations and humanitarian spirit, we will not return asylum seekers to a place where they are likely to be persecuted. I say that in particular because many of my community are Hazara. They have particular concerns about being returned to Afghanistan. In fact, there are some suggestions from Amnesty International that up to 60 per cent of the Hazara community are being persecuted in Afghanistan. That is why I put that on the record. I have a strong relationship with the Hazara community in my electorate and I just wanted to assure them of that.

Four minutes into my speech I still do not have a copy of the amendment. In responding to the original motion put forward by the member for Cook, he quotes the United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. It is great to see that the opposition immigration spokesperson has finally found a copy of the United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. He quoted it accurately. Unfortunately, for the last 20 years the one copy which the coalition have has been gathering dust somewhere over at coalition headquarters. Thankfully, the member for Cook found it and even read it, and he is able to articulate some of the things in the convention. He well knows the progression from a convention, to a treaty and legislation, to practice on the ground. There is a progression there, which he seems to be ignoring. I thank the former member for Kooyong for sending him a copy of the United Nations convention. Either way, it seems the member for Cook has had a close read of it. Of course it does not mean that they will change their policy because, as we heard in his speech, the coalition are still committed to processing asylum seekers on Nauru, a country which is not a signatory to the refugee convention.

See this speech in context