Joanne Ryan (Lalor, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I'm just going to give myself a moment to see what stage directions I need to give, whether the member for Wannon is going to leave stage left or stay and listen to my contribution. I note that the Leader of the Opposition began his contribution to the matter of public importance today—which I believe is a reference to this government keeping Australians safe—by giving us a commentary on the Prime Minister's steps as he left the chamber after question time. It then followed that the Leader of the Opposition immediately left the chamber as the Minister for Home Affairs took to the dispatch box to give her contribution on the matter of public importance raised by him. I watched him leave stage left. I just wonder how long the member for Wannon is going to stay to listen to my contribution about this government's diligent work, across two years, to keep Australians safe—across every portfolio of government. Side note: we know who the minister is in every portfolio of government, and there's only one of them in each.

During question time today, I was not surprised to see a question being asked of the Prime Minister about a brief that was not written by the Prime Minister's department or to the Prime Minister's department. I was not surprised that those opposite were confused about that, because, let's face it, when their former Prime Minister was the Prime Minister he was also minister for other things—therefore, briefs may have been cross-referenced across five portfolios.

Let's give some advice to the member for Wannon, who just spent 3½ minutes giving us some advice, about throwing stones in glass houses when it comes to safety. The Minister for Home Affairs went through the reports for the time of those opposite in government, in this specific area of immigration, and it's not a pretty sight. I have been wondering for some months why those opposite wanted to continue down this road of self-harm. It really is a wonder to me. I don't know how many directions have numbers. I don't know direction 99 from direction 79. A few of those opposite seem to understand ministerial directions, having left government so recently and having so many of them who were cabinet ministers still on those benches opposite.

That's why I wonder—oh, there goes the member for Wannon, leaving stage left. He is a former cabinet minister who understands ministerial directions, one would think. He's now the shadow minister for immigration, so he understands a few things. I assume he's read the report from the Nixon review. I assume he has read that Christine Nixon said:

Australia's visa system must be strengthened to resist organised crime syndicates, to ensure they don't prey upon Australia as an easy destination to conduct their exploitative and criminal business, and to protect those who are most vulnerable.

What would've inspired Christine Nixon to write those words? The review found that this government inherited from those opposite a broken immigration system, where abuse of Australia's visa system ran rampant. Abuses of sexual exploitation, human trafficking and other organised crime were running rampant in the Australian immigration system. The former Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, later the Minister for Home Affairs, who presided over that migration system that was used to facilitate some of the worst crimes in our society is now the Leader of the Opposition. And they pursue this argument around safety. As the Minister for Home Affairs said so clearly, 'They are obsessed with 150-something people released under High Court order—without an option for government but to obey that High Court order—while 1,300 criminals were released under their leader's watch.'

See this speech in context