Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Minister for Immigration and Border Protection) Share this | Hansard source

I note the opposition's motion and I note that they have sought to bring much politics to this debate, but they have failed to grasp the reality of the very program they left to the government that succeeded them after the last election. As was flagged in the budget, there was a very clear statement about the policy the government introduced, on 13 May, under which new applications under eight family-stream visa subclasses have ceased. That was the announcement in the budget, and the government then took action to implement the announcement that was in the budget. That is the way these matters are handled every single year when a migration program is announced and is given effect to subsequent to the budget.

What has occurred is that applications have ceased as a result of this regulation, but places under these programs continue to be provided, which is something the opposition refuses to acknowledge. All applications made prior to the change continue to be queued and processed in accordance with existing legislation and policy. The government recognises that these changes will be disappointing to many people, but we are committed to a migration program that meets the needs of modern Australia and that can respond to the applications that are provided. These changes will ensure family migration is focused on the entry of close family member—of parents, of partners, of children.

The repealed visa program simply had become unsustainable, just like the budget. Those opposite seem to take no responsibility for the mess they have left behind, with applications significantly outstripping available places, creating extremely long queues. There are currently over 36,000 applications on hand in the non-contributory parent visa category, and that equates to a waiting list period of 13 years. In the other family category there are 7,600 applications on hand, which equates to around a four-year wait for carers and a 16-year wait in the case of aged dependent relatives and remaining relatives.

The ceased visa classes were ultimately unsustainable and, indeed, given the queues that had developed, it would be inappropriate to accept further applications and give people the false expectation that visas could be granted soon. What those opposite are suggesting is that we should continue to take applications for which people on the parent and aged parent non-contributory visas will pay $4,435 and $5,585, and they will get no result. They will pay that money with an expectation that their visa will be able to be processed and granted, and they will be waiting 13 years. I think that is dishonest—to go and tell people that they have a pathway when the pathway has a waiting time that will see their application either lapse or be unable to be fulfilled. If we are going to create programs and if we are going to run programs then the people who apply for them and who pay thousands of dollars to lodge their application should be able to have an expectation that their visa will be assessed and processed and, if they meet the requirements of the scheme, that they will gain a place. That is simply no longer possible under the way that these schemes have blown out over recent years. It is my sincere hope that I will be in a position to reinstate applications in these places, but once we have been able to get the backlog under control.

The 835 places that have been reduced in the parent and other family program have been increased, I stress, in the partner program, where there are an additional 300 places for partners who are also waiting for visas—partners of those who are seeking those visas; 35 extra children visas; and 500 for the contributory parent scheme. Under the previous government the contributory parent scheme was slashed and the non-contributory parent scheme was increased. This government has restored the arrangement that was in place previously, under the former government. And 1,500 non-contributory parent visas will be provided this year. There will be 500 visas provided for carers and remaining relatives and aged dependent relatives. Those visas will be provided this year. So to suggest that the number of these places is reduced to zero shows a complete lack of understanding by those opposite about how the program works.

We need to work through the backlog of cases to ensure that, for those who have already paid their money, who are already counting on a pathway and have a reasonable expectation that will be considered, we can move through that. But, if you keep adding to the list, then working through the caseload of those cases that are already in the queue becomes more difficult. The implication of what the opposition is putting forward is to make those who have already made those applications, who are already waiting, wait even longer. That would be the consequence.

Once we have been able to work through the backlog in the caseload, I would give priority first to ensuring we can get an increase in the number of carer places that are going into this program and to ensure that that is done. But we currently have a four-year wait on those carer visas. I want to see that cut significantly. I want to be able to ensure that we can recommence the carer program with suitable places to make sure that, when people make an application for a carer visa—and I stress that that visa application costs them $3,515—and pay that money to have a carer come under the program, then they have a reasonable expectation that will be handled expeditiously and that there will be a result to their application.

Parents will still be able to migrate to Australia under the contributory parent visa program, and we support the contributory parent scheme. Those who have worked their entire life in this country and have entitlements to benefits as a result of their living and working and paying taxes their whole life in this country can enjoy those benefits. Under the non-contributory parent scheme, people access those benefits more or less immediately. It is our view that, if we are going to have a balance in these programs, then we have put the balance towards the contributory parent scheme, which enables those who are coming to be reunited with family to be able to make a contribution to the support and entitlements they would receive when coming to Australia.

Those opposite disagree with that position, and they are entitled to do that. When they were in government they reversed this. They cut the numbers of places for contributory parents, which has a much-reduced waiting list time of 12 months to two years, and they decided to decrease those places and increase the places for the non-contributory parents, which places a cost on the taxpayer.

The overall saving to the budget from what has been done in this year's migration program is $31 million, a saving that was necessary to address the budget mess that was left to us by the previous government. What these initiatives do is address the budget mess and also the immigration mess not just on our borders with people smuggling but in the administration of these programs, which has seen these caseloads and queues grew longer and longer and longer.

It is important that we run a program that is fair, that we run a program that is affordable and that we run a program that is efficient, and it is important that people can have a reasonable expectation that they will be able to make an application and actually get an answer. What those opposite are doing is holding out a false hope, a false promise. They are going out into all of the electorates and saying: 'You can make your application, but don't even think about actually getting an answer to it. Hand over your $5,000. We'll take your money. But don't expect to see a parent visa any time soon within the next 13 years.' That is the inconvenient truth that those opposite will not confront. They are going to ask for people's money and then not give them an answer for 13 years. I just think that is dishonest, and I was not prepared to allow that process to continue. I think we need to get on top of the backlog.

We will continue to provide the places year in, year out for all the categories of visas for which applications have now ceased. We will continue to provide those places and we will continue to work through the long queue, which is up to 16 years in some of these visa class cases. We will continue to ensure that we can get the program back on track. But, if the opposition wants to simply whip up fear and play politics and play what is effectively a race card on this issue, then I think that is very disappointing.

We saw it last year when they were in government on the issue of 457 visas. They attacked the 457 program and they refused to acknowledge the incredible contribution made by 457 skilled migrants, particularly by those who go on to become permanent residents. The greatest number, in terms of the growth of that program, are in the Indian population, who the member for Greenway pretends to suggest she has some empathy for. She was not supporting them when it came to 457s last year. She was happy for the previous government to slag and bag the 457 program and skilled migrants then and now she pretends to be in favour of migrants. She is a fraud.

See this speech in context