House debates
Tuesday, 27 November 2012
Matters of Public Importance
Asylum Seekers
3:16 pm
Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) Share this | Hansard source
the high level of increase in costs, which we have seen to rise from $85 million a year to $113 million in 2008-09, to $292 million in 2009-10, to $879 million in 2010-11, to $1.4 billion in 2011-12, and this year to $2.4 billion—and that is based on a budget which is estimating arrivals at less than half the rate that is occurring. This is a government that has blown the borders and, as a result, they have blown the budget, too, without any hesitation of doubt.
The humanitarian consequences of these failures are the most significant, and we know of the loss of life that has occurred over the last five years—we estimate it to be over 1,000 people; how many it is, we really do not know. We also know that over 8,000 people have missed out on protection visas in Australia, waiting in places all around the world, because they did not come on a boat under this government. These are the human costs of the government's failure over the last five years.
It all results and stems from an unwillingness by the government to recognise when they have got something wrong—and I do not mean politically wrong, because that is the only thing the government ever seems to be able to come to terms with, but when they have got the policy wrong. And these policies will continue to fail as long as the government continues to cling to the failure.
Labor have decided—rather than to restore the measures that worked, as the member for Berowra was saying just before we came in here for question time—to go their own way. And go their own way they have. They decided to chance their arm, and the record of failure is as I have related to the House: the asylum freeze, the East Timor farce, and the failed Malaysian people swap, which the government itself has abandoned.
The government itself abandoned the Malaysian people swap, refusing to take any genuine action after the Houston report. We continue to make clear our objections to this policy, but the government itself has decided to just drop it, leave it alone and blame the opposition rather than take action. Yet one of the key actions they could take is this. Malaysia has a choice, and the government has a choice in its dealings with Malaysia. Malaysia could sign the refugee convention which would ensure there were binding legal protections in Malaysia. I think that is highly unlikely. I do not think it will happen. The other thing Malaysia could do, which the government could negotiate for, is to introduce legally binding protections in their immigration act. Has the minister raised that with the Malaysian government since the Houston report was handed down? I doubt it, given that a year ago, almost, he told me that they had rejected that notion.
The policy of bridging visas and community release announced just a year ago on 25 November has proved to be an absolute disaster, with over 16,000 people—well over half of the total arrivals—turning up since the government introduced that policy. After being dragged kicking and screaming to reopen Nauru and Manus Island, the daily problems of the government's inability to implement anything effectively continue to be demonstrated, and I will have the opportunity to witness that firsthand when I head to Nauru next week. The no-advantage policy which the government have thrown their arms around but are yet incapable of explaining to anyone also continues to be a thorn in the side of a government struggling and still trying to find their way on an issue where the Prime Minister herself said they had lost their way when she took office. They are no closer to finding it today. In fact, they are further away than they have ever been.
There is a different and better way forward. It is the way forward that the coalition offered when we were in government and it can turn failure around and turn it into success. It can turn it into success with policies that have worked. Those policies still have their doubters, just as they had back in 2001. In the Australian on 1 September 2001, it was said when John Howard had turned around the Tampa: 'The government is hoping its hard-line approach towards the Tampa will bear fruit. That is unlikely given the global reality of 22 million refugees, many of whom are languishing in countries on the Indian Ocean Rim.' Well, they were wrong. All those who said John Howard's policies would not work were wrong. Those who say they will not work again are wrong.
We will restore those policies, and we will ensure that this country once again has a government that believes in strong border protection and implements strong border protection. As we go to the next election, there will be a simple question: who do you trust to protect the nation's borders—the mob who have trashed our borders with over 30,000 arrivals, $6.6 billion in cost blowouts and carnage, chaos, cost and tragedy to back up that record, or a coalition who have the conviction, the belief, the policy, the resolve and the record? That is the choice. By making the choice of the coalition we can send a message to the people smugglers that they will understand.
No comments