Andrew Giles (Scullin, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

I'm pleased to have the opportunity to respond to many of the issues raised by colleagues in this debate. I will start with the member for Fowler. I did touch on the improved processing times that we have achieved. Due to the hard work of staff and additional investments, they are significantly lower, and we have reduced the backlog enormously, if you look to particular visa categories.

Perhaps I will make the offer here in the Federation Chamber: obviously the member for Fowler knows how to find me. I would be very pleased to go through those issues and our vision for the AMEP with her. She would be aware in the previous budget there was an additional investment made to identify some of the efficiencies and some of the ways in which you can reach more people to ensure everyone gets the English language skills they need to be an effective citizen and to fulfil their potential in our country. I welcome her contribution, as always, and look forward to further discussions.

The member for Cowper made a great contribution which went beyond my portfolio responsibilities but I will convey his remarks to the Attorney-General and reiterate that everyone in this parliament stands against modern slavery and stands resolved to ensure that our legislative framework and our enforcement regime are fit for purpose. The same goes for migrant worker exploitation, which is within my direct responsibility. I was pleased to hear his reflections based on his experience in a former life. I said to him that we have heard from people like him who have said we do need a firewall so that people who have been exploited in the workplace can come forward without fear of their visa being cancelled. We have acted on advice that he has given me in this chamber now and advice others have been given, and I'd be very pleased to go through the details of that with him.

The member for La Trobe raised a number of issues as did the shadow minister for immigration, Mr Tehan, and I will respond to some of them; time doesn't permit me to respond to all of them. Can I ask both shadow ministers to reflect from time to time on some of the language which they use because on some of these issues we really need to think about how what we say impacts people's lives and their decisions. In respect of Afghanistan, I think this is particularly challenging. I acknowledge the member for Mitchell and the work he did at the time of the evacuation, which was an extraordinary time. I am proud as an Australian of the efforts of the Australian government and all of our forces, in Home Affairs, in the military and in other departments, to get people to safety. I acknowledge that here we disagree on many things, but I admire the work that he did. The challenge since then has been great for both governments, and we acknowledge that we have an enormous demand from people who are particularly vulnerable because of the work they have done for and with Australians.

We have around 160,000 applications before us from Afghans. We are determined to do what you did in government—you, the current opposition—and give effect to the priorities that were determined by the former government in consultation with the Australian Afghan community. Shadow minister Wood, I think you should reflect on the language that you used about the priorities. I think you should reflect on your language, and the reference you made to the current Australian government is unworthy of any member of this parliament.

I will answer that question to say that we have committed to implementing in full the Thom report. You should read it, and you should speak about it accurately. You should read it, and you should reflect accurately. You should stop misleading people, and you should tell the truth. That should not be too much to ask. These are very difficult issues that we are grappling with in government, as you grappled with these issues as a government.

You well know the answer to that question.

The member for Wannon also raised a large number of issues, and I will respond to a couple of them very quickly. Again, I ask him to reflect on the language he uses, the inflammatory and frankly wrong language that he uses, the divisive language that he uses about immigration and its impacts, particularly given the comments he made like, 'Well, we need to get our international students back, we need to get working holiday visa holders back and get all those people back as soon as we can.' He said that, but he seems to have forgotten about it, when these of course are the people who are returning after the pause in the pandemic and who are impacting temporarily the NOM. He should reflect on that. He raised an important individual case, and I will say this: as he well knows, I can't comment on the individual case in this place, and he should reflect on that. Secondly, he should know that I take very seriously every representation made by members of parliament, and I consider them on their merits in accordance with the law.

Proposed expenditure agreed to.

See this speech in context