Steve Georganas (Hindmarsh, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I say from the outset that this Migration Amendment (Reinstatement of Temporary Protection Visas) Bill 2013 to reinstate TPVs is a bad policy. It was a bad policy when it was introduced in 1999 by the then Howard government. We repealed TPVs in 2008 and they are still a bad idea in 2013. We hear the issue of migration raised continuously in this chamber and in the other chamber, and we hear about refugees constantly.

One point I really want to make is that for many, many years in this country, people have been arriving by boat. My parents arrived by boat after World War II. The place they came from was absolutely devastated by a world war, by a civil war and then by an economic crisis. As a child, sometimes I would ask my mother why on earth she came to this country: 'Why would you leave everyone behind? Why would you leave your family, your siblings, your mother, your father and everything you have known your entire life to go to the other end of the world, where you knew nothing?' She said to me, 'The answer is that, as human beings, we need the ability to dream and I did not have that ability in Greece at that point in time.'

We made our way to Australia, just to have the ability to be able to dream and perhaps realise those dreams. That is why millions of people have made their way here to Australia. In her case, she had a choice and she took that choice. But many of the people who are coming today—what we call 'unauthorised boat arrivals'—do not have that choice. Their only choice is to stay where they are: to be executed, to be discriminated against, to see their children suffer and to know that there is absolutely no hope in the world for them. What we have done here in this place, over the last 10 years or so, is make this an issue for political gain—without thinking of those human lives and those human beings.

When I go overseas I make a point of always asking politicians, mayors and people in authority about the refugee issue in their country. Throughout Europe, wherever I have been, I ask that very same question: 'What is the approximate number of unauthorised people that have crossed your borders?' In one instance, in Athens last year, when I met with the Mayor of Athens, I found that 500,000 people living in the city of Athens had gone there without any papers; they had found their way there. In Italy, there were 6,000 arrivals per day. In Spain, there were similar numbers. Yet, here in this place, we make an issue of a few thousand per year. Why? Because of what I said earlier—for political gain.

This is a bad policy. Temporary protection visas were a bad idea in 1999 and they are still a bad idea today in 2013. That is why I do not support the bill. At the time of their introduction, TPVs did not exist anywhere else in the world and were subject to widespread criticism. The worst feature of the TPVs is that asylum seekers found to be owed protection have to undergo the entire assessment process again every three years. This is very unfair and I find it very inhumane.

Let me read to you a direct quote from Ebrahim, who lives in Adelaide in South Australia and who was a temporary protection visa holder. These are his exact words:

Who could explain the unfairness of TPV better than myself who had to live over 5 years of his life in absolute uncertainty of what future holds.

It wasn't the length of time away from my family, but the uncertainty of whether this country would recognise me a refugee before I have lost my whole family.

My hope went so down and life got so dark that at one point human beings started seeming so careless about my suffering and my beautiful kids' right to life.

As a result of total mental breakdown I was forced to try ending my own life. I couldn't see no future and no life ahead neither for myself and nor for my kids.

Ebrahim

That gives you a small insight into what we were doing to people in their mental capacity and their mental suffering. The people on these visas can never have certainty of a new life in Australia. A total of around 11,200 TPVs were granted between 1999 and 2008, when they were abolished, as I said, by the incoming Labor government. A relatively small number of unauthorised air arrivals were granted a TPV—around three per cent. The remainder were granted to irregular maritime arrivals. Temporary protection visas did not lead to people leaving Australia. That is fact. The vast majority of people holding temporary protection visas were ultimately granted permanent protection and are still here today. More than 95 per cent of people ever granted a temporary protection visa were found to be genuine refugees and granted a permanent visa—95 per cent. So we know that they do not work as a way of sending people back, as we heard from the previous speaker. And we also know that they never worked as a way to stop people coming to Australia in the first place. Whilst there is destruction, whilst there is famine, whilst there are wars and catastrophes around the world, refugee and people movements will continue, no matter what you put in place. As I said earlier, those people are leaving because they have no choice. That is why they get on a boat and come here.

The fact is that the TPVs were a spectacular failure. In the year they were introduced by the former government, there were 3,722 unauthorised boat arrivals. During the next two years there were 8,459 unauthorised boat arrivals, including 5,520 arrivals in 2001—that is, after TPVs were introduced. In summary, TPVs have been tried and were a failure. They only succeeded in keeping mostly genuine asylum seekers in years of limbo, as we heard from Ebrahim, with the prospect of being returned to the place of persecution hanging over their head.

Let me read out another comment, which was provided to me today by the CEO of the Australian Refugee Association in Underdale in my electorate, by Peter Laintoll. He says:

From ARA's perspective there were a number of key issues that were raised and voiced on a number of levels regarding TPV's. In the early days of TPV's being issued, asylum seekers were told they may never have access to permanent residency. This had a catastrophic effect on the mental health of many asylum seekers as they were in a continual state of insecurity and felt they did not belong in Australia, knowing they could not return to their home country.

So, not only were they still suffering from the stress and anxiety of having to leave behind family and country, they were exposed to many years in detention with few support services (at least this has changed over the years) but they were released into a community where many could not speak the language with very minimal support.

They also were unable to access trauma counselling so this compounded their isolation and mental health issues making it even more difficult to successfully settle into Australian society.

Another issue of TPV's was the inability to access family reunification, meaning more women and children were risking their lives in the ocean to be reunited with their husbands, fathers, families, etcetera.

Often TPVs were also excluded from English classes and job training, making it near impossible to access meaningful employment. Further their trade skills were not recognised in Australia. The positive of the TPV story is that, whilst most were told early on that they would not be able to access permanent residency, most if not all received their protection visa.

These words are from the CEO of the Australian Refugee Association.

TPVs are not good enough for our nation, and we can do better. That is why, unlike those opposite, we engaged the best in the business to give us expert recommendations on the best and fairest way to process asylum applications made by people coming to Australia. I am not saying it is perfect, because in a perfect world people would not have to flee for their lives. And in a perfect world no-one would have to make the terrible choice to stay in an unsafe place— (Time expired)

See this speech in context