Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Shadow Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Hansard source

When I first became the federal member for Riverina back in 2010 I can well recall my predecessor Kay Hull saying to me to be very mindful of writing letters of support for people who want to come to this country even if it were on a temporary basis, even if it were for a wedding or funeral, should I not know that person. She warned me because she had written a letter of support for a person to come to this nation for a family event and they absconded—they did a runner. The authorities, police and even the family couldn't find this particular person.

The local mayor had written a letter of support for this person. The local family were agitating. Of course, the local press, as you'd imagine and expect, also said, 'Why can't this person be allowed in the country just on a temporary basis, just for this event?' Of course, Mrs Hull, being the great member that she was, wrote the letter, and then regretted it later. It was a valuable lesson she learnt and a valuable piece of advice she passed on to me. Sure as night follows day and day follows night, it wasn't long into my stewardship of the federal seat that indeed a similar situation arose—the same mayor, the same place, the same situation. I said no. I said no and I copped the wrath of the mayor, the press, the family and the community, and yet, in my heart of hearts, I knew it was the right decision to take.

As members of parliament, sometimes we have to make those tough calls. Sometimes we have to make the tough decisions and not do as some people would ask us to do and not fall into the trap of succumbing to a vigilant local media who, when situations like this do go awry, are the first to then criticise and say: 'Why didn't you do this? Why didn't you do that?' It makes it difficult, particularly if the person does a runner, absconds, goes into hiding, takes up a job and goes into the black cash economy. If they don't break any laws as such—any criminal laws; they are breaking the law by staying in the country when they haven't got the visa arrangements to do so. If they don't break any actual criminal laws or commit violence, then people might say, 'So what?' But it's not 'So what?' It's a situation where we need to have the strongest possible migration laws, the strongest possible laws to keep our nation secure.

Keeping our borders safe and keeping the integrity of our visa system intact was one of the hallmarks of the Abbott-Truss, Turnbull-Joyce, Morrison-McCormack and Morrison-Joyce governments. We kept our borders intact. We didn't fall into a situation where we took the easy out or the easy option. It's always easy when you get anecdotal evidence pushed by local media or national media, whatever the case may be, to just give in and to just say yes. But it's when these situations go astray that we are the ones who cop the blame: 'Why did you allow this person in? Why did you sign the reference to permit this person to stay, albeit briefly?' Mrs Hull's advice was sound, and so are the amendments being put forward by the shadow minister for immigration and citizenship, the member for Wannon, and I support them.

It seems to me that the government is playing a bit of catch up when it comes to migration and immigration. We saw this just last week with the sunsetting of the situation in Nauru. I know members opposite have talked a big game when it comes to the Pacific. I know they are talking about the failure of the coalition in arrangements in relation to all matters in relation to the Pacific. They are really pushing this point. It's on all their talking points and in all their speaking engagements. They seem to forget that there was a situation with COVID that actually prevented much of the ability to visit the Pacific islands. They seem to forget that we absolutely made sure, through then Minister for Health Greg Hunt, the member for Flinders, that vaccinations were first and foremost for the Pacific islands along with our own people. But the point is this: Nauru and the situation there was just completely forgotten. The other side just dropped the ball when it came to having those arrangements in place in Nauru so that our national borders were safe. Of course, they made up for it last week, with urgent emergency legislation brought into this place. Again I say they've completely mishandled that situation.

In many ways and in many cases, I do worry. You only had to read the front page of the Australian newspaper this morning in relation to Labor's election pledge to end the use of temporary protection visas. This paves the way for about 19,000 refugees who arrived by sea to stay permanently in Australia. I know the situation with many—some might say all—of those refugees is certainly not perfect, but what we saw when Kevin Rudd first took over as Prime Minister was that he said that there wouldn't be a cigarette paper's breadth between what his arrangements were on boat people and arrivals and what the situation was under the Howard government. Yet we all know what happened under the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd governments. What we saw was boats arriving in their numbers: 50,000 people arriving on more than 800 boats.

People got so uptight, particularly on the other side, about the use of the phrase 'illegal boat arrivals'. Well, they were illegal. I'm sorry, but they were illegal. No-one denies somebody wanting to come to a country such as Australia for a better life for themselves and their children, but what we saw in many cases was people actually throwing their identifications overboard. People who had the capacity and the money to be able to try to get here by many means then arrived illegally. Then, whether it was under us or, indeed, under Labor, they were then put into situations where, yes, it was hard on them and particularly on their children, 8,000 of whom were forcibly placed in detention. Was this the fault of the government? Was this the fault of their parents? The fact is that there 8,000 of them, among 50,000 people. The cost to taxpayers of managing illegal boat arrivals under Labor blew out by $10.3 billion. So there were 800 boats under Labor, 50,000 people under Labor, 8,000 children under Labor and a $10.3 billion cost blowout.

What did we do? We fixed it. We stopped the boats. This was, I have to say, one of the important things that we said we'd do, and under then Minister for Immigration and Border Protection Morrison we did it. We make sure that we stopped the boats. We didn't just stop them because it was illegal for those boats to come; we stopped them to protect the people who were trying to come to Australia. And why wouldn't people want to come to Australia? It's the greatest nation on earth. It's a ticket to freedom. It's a ticket to the best life that you can possibly have in this world. Australia—make no mistake, and I know it gets talked down often—is the best place in all of the world.

I really worry about this situation where these TPV and safe haven enterprise visa holders who arrived before Operation Sovereign Borders commenced on 18 September 2013 are able to apply for permanent residency with family reunion rights and a path to citizenship. Some might say they deserve it. Some might say that it's the right thing to do. But is it going to reignite the desire to return the boats? I hope not. I know we've had boat arrivals and turnbacks already, and I appreciate that this isn't an easy area. I appreciate that we don't want to see what we saw on Christmas Island—those bodies being washed up on the rocks, which was just awful.

I encourage members to support these amendments put forward by the member for Wannon. Our amendments are important. They are going to give the minister extra powers to be able to consider the factors in relation to the nature of the conviction, and that's what this bill is about. I appreciate that the bill has been put in here parliament with good intentions. I appreciate that the bill has been put before parliament with national security in mind. But I don't believe that the bill goes far enough. That's why, I know, the member for Wannon has come in with these amendments—to solidify the bill to make it better. Surely if we can make something better—

See this speech in context