Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

If I lived in any other country in the world, I would do anything—almost anything—to get me and my family to our great land. But I can be thankful that my grandparents and my great-grandparents made that effort several generations ago. I recall the story of my wife's grandfather, who arrived in Australia at the end of the First World War as a young man by ship. It was not until he was in his eighties that he sought to obtain an Australian passport to return to visit England. Despite living and paying taxes in our country for almost 60 years, when he went to get that passport our government said, 'We have no record of you' and they asked, 'How did you get into Australia?'. He said that when the ship arrived in Circular Quay he simply walked off. There was no-one there and he went on his way.

But the world has changed in close to 90 years. Today, there are millions, perhaps 15 million, in refugee camps around the world, and there are many millions more that would take the risk, that would risk all, to come to Australia. I think of the over 10 million Coptic Christians in Egypt and the uncertain future that they face. So our first decision as a nation is to determine: do we have open borders or do we attempt to have some type of organised process? I believe that every thinking Australian understands that we need to have an organised process. The question is: what should that be?

With respect to the debate we are having here today, we have been in this position before. We all know the history, but I think it is worth repeating. Back in 2001 we had more than 5,500 people make the dangerous sea voyage, attempting to come to Australia. Boats were lost at sea and lives were lost. In an attempt to try and introduce an effective deterrent, the Howard government implemented what was known as the Pacific Solution. After this policy was introduced, there was only one arrival in 2002 and the low level of boat arrivals continued throughout the entire Pacific Solution period. When the Howard government left office, it is worth remembering that there were just four people in detention. Many of those in the current government dined out on the Howard government's border protection. Taking the high moral ground, they preached a policy of kindness and compassion claiming the opposition policies were too harsh and sought to vilify those policies of the Howard government. We have all seen the tragic results of that mistaken policy.

Today our nation is looking for leadership. A true leader would come into this parliament, stand up and say, 'I have made a mistake. It was a policy error to undo the policies of the Howard government and I will reinstate them in full.' We could leave this parliament tonight knowing we have achieved something. A true leader would stand up and say, 'If I cannot get my legislation through parliament, if I cannot get it through the Senate then I will call an election.' That is what a true leader would do. But, instead, this government seeks to support the implementation of what is effectively the Malaysia people swap solution, a policy that would see our proud nation resort to trading in human beings—trading 800 human beings for 4,000 others in Malaysia. Is this what the modern Labor Party truly stands for today?

We need to think through the effects of this policy. Under the Malaysia people swap deal, the government has stated it will not send women and children to Malaysia. Let us think through what will happen. We have seen how ingenuous the people smugglers are. They will simply fill the boats with women and children. So if we think the tragedy we have seen today is terrible, just imagine how much worse it could be if those boats were filled exclusively with women and children—because that is what this policy will do.

In considering the amendment moved by the member for Cook, I would ask members of this government to recall the words of the Prime Minister back in July 2002: 'I would rule out anywhere that is not a signatory to the refugee convention.' That is simply what the member for Cook's amendment seeks to do. I know there are many on that side of the House whose conscience is troubled by this. I call on you to put your party politics aside and support the amendment moved by the member for Cook.

See this speech in context