Ewen Jones (Herbert, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Migration Amendment (Character Cancellation Consequential Provisions) Bill 2016. Before I get to the nuts and bolts of the bill, I want to tell you why immigration and migration are good for our country. This evening, out in the courtyard of the parliamentary annexe here, we had the very first concert for the Parliamentary Friends of Australian Music. It is called the Parliamentary Friends of Australian Music, but who was there? A young Scottish immigrant by the name of Jimmy Barnes, who came across here as a 10-pound Pom sort of thing. What about Suze DeMarchi? That is hardly an Australian name. The whole thing about immigration in this country is about what people add to us—the depth of flavour and the depth of character that immigration brings to our country. While we are talking about the music industry, look at Glenn Shorrock. He is English. Then there is John Farnham, Tina Arena, Michael Hutchence, Joe Camilleri and the boys from Hunters and Collectors—who have strong Irish roots. It is all about who we want in this great country. It is about what they add to us.

Wave upon wave, generation upon generation, decade upon decade, century after century, people from all walks of life, from all around the world, have come to our country to make a better life for themselves and their family. We are without doubt, and with great pride, the single most successful migrant nation on the face of the earth. Whilst—

Mr Husic interjecting—

my good friend sitting at the table there, the member Chifley—we do make sweeping assertions about people, by and large Australians take people as they come, as individuals. It is not about the colour of your skin. It is not about your ethnic background. It is not about whether you are Catholic or Protestant. It is about whether you are prepared to muck in and have a go.

There is a lot of talk about the way we change these things, and I always talk about my great-grandfather, who arrived here in 1902. He was a qualified civil servant in Wales before he came here, but he could not get a job in the Queensland civil service because he was a Catholic. Tiger O'Reilly said that he would have played a lot more test cricket if the Don were not a Mason and Tiger were not a Catholic. When we talk about migration, we are talking about the barriers put in front of migrants and how they work around them.

I have done many jobs in my life. My favourite job and the one I most identified with was as an auctioneer. I worked in sheds where we had a forklift driver and foreman who could not read or write English. He was of Italian background. He had actually served with the Italian army during the Second World War. He used to call all us auctioneers 'Mr Touchy', because we used to touch the people who went past as we took their money. He could not read or write English, but he never got run over, he never missed a load and he could read a docket perfectly. He knew which set of Z-purlins was going on which thing. He could do the whole lot because he had been given that opportunity.

In the last 25 years, we in this country have made it very hard for immigrants to get that start. For the Italians the Greeks, the Polish, the Irish and everyone who came to Australia post the Second World War, there was the opportunity to get a start doing anything. No matter their background, the ability to get a start in a shed or a factory or push a broom and build on that for their family was always there. But, little by little, things like workplace health and safety—and we do not want unsafe workplaces—and red tape have precluded a whole non-English-speaking generation from being able to get a start in Australia, get that job that they want, and it is mainly men. As men we are largely identified by what we do.

When someone comes across to Australia and does not speak English, it is very difficult. I would hate to go to another country where I had to learn to speak another language; at my age, I think I would find it incredibly difficult. I would seek out another Australian, going as far and as wide as I could possibly go to find them. I would accept and obey the laws of the land, but I would find it very hard to adapt and, if nobody gave me a start, I would find it very hard to provide for my family.

I think one of the biggest challenges today when it comes to immigration is: how do we get a first-generation migrant, especially one who does not speak English, into the system? How do we get them that start to be able to provide for their family—to get that grubstake and put the pole in the ground and say, 'This is mine; I'm going to work for it'? No matter what kind of people have come through, it was the first generation that worked hard and took any job there was. The next generation became doctors, solicitors and accountants. They were the ones that made sure they did so because of what their parents sacrificed for them. The migrants that come to Australia now are no different, but they have been precluded, by red tape, from being given that go.

In my city of Townsville, we had a whole heap of trouble trying to get African migrants, Somalis and the like, into rental accommodation. When they turned up, the rental agents were not really keen on it because they did not understand their customs. The migrant resource centre came to me. I rang one of the local real estate agents who had a big rent roll and I said to him, 'You won't just be getting that family; you'll be getting the entire community. The entire community will come round and make sure that that person does the right thing by that property.' Once that barrier was knocked down and they got an opportunity in that space, they went on to prosper. Those people are now part of our community. When you came to Townsville to our intercultural festival, you will see how proud we are of our different ethnicities and of our diversity.

There are exceptions. There are people who come here and bring bad habits from their land. There are people who come here and abuse what is given to them by the Australian people. They are the people that this bill is about. They are the people that we do not want here. Out of five million Vietnamese, to pick a number, there might be 25 or 1,000 or 50,000 who are no good. They are the people that we do not want in our country. That is what this bill is about.

This bill is not about persecuting people. This bill does not mean 'one mistake and you're out'. This bill is not about that. This bill is about the kind of people that we do not want in our land. People who are chronic criminals or violent criminals who make that their life's work and go out of their way to do that do not belong in our society, and they should go home and never be allowed back here. It is a fairly simple proposition.

The changes in this bill are necessary to ensure that the substantive amendments made by the Migration Amendment (Character and General Visa Cancellation) Act 2014, or the character act, are given their full effect and that the character provisions are dealt with consistently throughout the Migration Act.

On this side of the parliament, there is a general will to make sure that the first order of government is to secure its country's borders and keep its people safe. That is our first order. Whether it is Scott Morrison, the member for Cook and now Treasurer, or Peter Dutton, the current minister, we hold that duty very close to our hearts. If we stop the boats, if we make sure that our borders are secure, then we can move in this space and be the generous nation that we are. That is why we are able to not only raise the migrant intake limit from 13,750 to 18,000 but also to take an extra 12,000 on top of that. We will take our time to make sure that they are the right people—that they are the most at risk, the most persecuted; that they are the people that most want a second chance; and that they are the people that want to come to Australia.

No system is infallible. But, if someone steps out of the line over here and continues to step out of line, committing a violent crime or dealing drugs or doing any other sort of crime, they do not deserve to be in this country and we will send them home. That is what this bill is about. These amendments enhance the government's ability to address character concerns presented by noncitizens in the Australian community. The bill demonstrates this government's clear and continuing commitment to ensuring that noncitizens who pose a character risk to the Australian community are dealt with effectively and efficiently.

In Queensland bikie gangs have been running roughshod in areas on the Gold Coast. When the Liberal-National Party coalition was in power, they brought in the VLAD laws and made sure that the bikies were shut down in Queensland. We do not want them in our country. Some of these bikers are from other countries; some of them are not Australian citizens. They should be excused from being in Australia and sent home.

Due to the complexity of the Migration Act several consequential amendments that should have been made to the Migration Act were not identified until after the character act commenced in December 2014. This says that we are doing this as we go along—when we find the holes, we will plug them up. We have made a commitment to the Australian people that we will make sure we are ever vigilant on this. The price of vigilance here is a lot less than the price of being slack, the price of letting border policy go and letting these people stay in the country. It costs a fortune to keep someone in jail, and I know they will serve their sentence here but we will send them out after that.

The new removal powers being introduced in this bill will put beyond doubt that noncitizens who do not seek revocation of a subsection 501(3A) cancellation decision in accordance with section 501CA of the Migration Act within the prescribed timeframe, or whose request for revocation is refused, are required to be removed as soon as reasonably practicable. Removals are currently being conducted under a different removal power but this will put the matter beyond doubt. We are serious about this, and we are saying to people that we welcome you in our country and we will make sure that this is a great place to be, but you must respect our laws, you must respect our customs, you must respect our people, you must respect that you live in a society which does not condone this sort of action, so what we have to do is make sure that these things take place.

This bill will ensure that confidential information that is critical to decision making under the mandatory cancellation provisions receive the same level of protection that is currently afforded to confidential information relating to the other character provisions. This is important during the revocation stage; the Australian Federal Police— who are doing a fantastic job—may have information significant to the decision but which would be detrimental if it was made available to the person seeking revocation, for example a man has been convicted of a child sexual abuse case and has served six months but the AFP advise that he is being investigated for being part of child internet pornography ring. That is a fairly stark example and is not the sort of thing that many people are comfortable with, but we should make sure that we are trying to deal with these things.

The mandatory cancellation provisions introduced in December 2014 have resulted in an initial spike of noncitizens having their visa cancelled and subsequently being placed in immigration detention. Noncitizens who have had their visas mandatorily cancelled are able to seek revocation of that decision. A noncitizen awaiting a revocation outcome may remain in immigration detention or leave Australia and await the outcome of their revocation request in their home country. If the revocation decision is favourable, that person would be able to return to Australia. We are not saying it is impossible—we are not saying it is an open and shut case. What we are saying is that we want a country where people feel safe and we will attack the individual who has transgressed; we will not attack an entire cohort of people.

It is similar to the lockout laws in Queensland and Sydney, where everyone has been punished for the actions of a few. If we apply the same logic that the Queensland government is applying to the lockout laws in Queensland, particularly Brisbane, with live music and that sort of thing, we would see an entire cohort of people expelled from Australia. That is not fair, that is not right. What is fair and what is right is that the person doing the damage, the person throwing the punch, the person committing the crime, the criminal, the grub, the dross of society, should be made accountable and we should go to the ends of the earth to make sure they are put out of our country. It is the same as the drink safe precincts in Queensland—we should be attacking the individual who is transgressing, we should be making the fines appropriate. At the moment they ban people from drink safe precincts for 10 days. These people are only going out once a fortnight. Make the sentence correct—get rid of these people out of the drink safe precincts, make sure that criminals are no longer welcome in Australia, and make sure that we are doing the right thing for everyone. We will end up with a better and more welcoming Australia and better people in this country. We have a great country—we are a multicultural country, I am from a multicultural state and my city is very proud of its heritage and traditions. We should be proud and we should support this bill.

See this speech in context