Michael Keenan (Stirling, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Justice, Customs and Border Protection) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Joint Select Committee on the Christmas Island Tragedy, I present the committee's report of the inquiry into the Christmas Island tragedy of 15 December 2010, incorporating additional comments. I seek leave to make a short statement in connection with the report.

Leave granted.

The Christmas Island tragedy occurred on 15 December last year. Obviously, the events of that day are very well known to members of this House and indeed are very well known to the Australian people in general. They have been very well documented. The parliament asked this committee in March to look into the response of government agencies to that tragedy. We did so in conjunction with a number of other inquiries that are ongoing, in particular the Western Australian coroner's inquiry, which is yet to report on its findings.

We also did so in relation to some other internal inquiries that the government itself had undertaken. The Australian Customs and Border Protection Service undertook an internal investigation into the way it responded to this event. One of the refere­nces given to our committee was to look at that report and comment on the findings that the Customs and Border Protection Service had reached.

The events of 15 December last year are deeply disturbing. It is impossible to confirm the exact number of people who died but 30 are certainly confirmed dead and 20 are missing, presumed dead. It is also important to note, though, that as a result of the actions of Australian officers and officials on that day, 42 people survived. There is no doubt in my mind, having visited the scene of the tragedy and from the evidence that we heard, those 42 would certainly not have survived. Without the very brave actions on that day by Australian Defence Force personnel, Customs officers and Australian Federal Police, there is no question in my mind that those 42 people would not have survived this terrible tragedy.

The events are very familiar to most Australians. At around 5.40 am on 15 December, the vessel that came to be known as SIEV221 was visually spotted off Christmas Island. According to evidence we heard, the sea state and the weather conditions off Christmas Island that day were the worst for 30 years. The visual footage that we saw showed a sea state that was just unparalleled in its ferocity. It was a sea state which made it impossible for vessels to be launched from Christmas Island at any stage. The harbour at Christmas Island was closed and had been closed for a couple of days prior to 15 December.

Once the vessel was visually spotted—and I will go in a few minutes to whether it was possible that it was spotted by other means, because that was raised extensively after these events—authorities notified the naval vessel HMAS Pirie and the Customs vessel ACV Triton which were sheltering on the leeward side of the island because of the very severe weather state. They made their way as quickly as possible to the scene of the tragedy, which was Rocky Point at Christmas Island—just off the coast of the settlement.

Because of the sea state, they were forced to deploy RHIBs—the small, inflatable rigid-hull vessels that they have on those vessels—to Rocky Point. Personnel were given instructions to do all they could to help people who obviously were in very serious distress. It was not originally known that the vessel was floundering against the rocks. That became known only after the initial calls were made to those vessels.

The captains of those vessels told the men in the RHIBs to do all they could in the face of very difficult circumstances. Those people in the RHIBs who went into that sea state deserve to know that the Australian people would be very proud of their efforts. We saw footage that was taken from the naval vessels on that day. What they did was no less than extraordinary. They did so at very great danger to themselves and we can count ourselves lucky that nobody from those vessels was killed or injured. It was because of their bravery that those 42 people were saved. Without the fact that they were prepared to go in and risk their own safety in such a terrible sea state, there is no question that those 42 people would have perished along with, presumably, the other 50 people who did.

As well as the people who responded from those RHIBs, there were people who responded from the shore, including Austr­alian Federal Police officers, Customs officers and also Christmas Island residents who went down and stood on the cliffs. They tried to get safety vests to the people who were clearly in a very difficult situation with their boat floundering on the rocks. People were thrown into the water. There was a great deal of diesel in the water after it leaked from the vessel.

We spoke extensively to people on the island who had responded. They did all they could, of course, to help people but there was very little that they could do in an effective way to save lives. They told us very disturbing stories of being quite close to people who were clearly in distress and in need of their help. Even though they made their best endeavours they found it imposs­ible to get to them—with the exception of one person who jumped on the rocks and was saved that way. It was impossible for them to launch any vessels to help. It was very, very difficult for them to help from the rocky cliffs, even though, it is important to note, they certainly used their best endeavours to do so. With any tragedy like this, there is a tendency to cast around for blame. With the sea state as it was, however, this could be classified, despite the best endeavours made by Australian officials on the day, as a terrible, terrible act of God. If we are to allocate blame, it lies of course with the people smugglers who are sending people down to face these extraordinarily difficult circumstances. I think it is very important to note that, although SIEV221 will be seared in the minds of all Australians from the horror of the footage that we all saw, there are other people who have almost certainly gone missing while making that terrible journey. They are not at the front of our minds because we do not have that same visual confirmation of the terrible way they met their end. But there is certainly a lot of credible evidence that vessels have left Indonesia and have not subsequently been spotted by Australian authorities—the people on board those vessels have not been heard from again. So clearly, along with SIEV221, other vessels have left Indonesia and have met very unfortunate ends. While people smugglers continue to smuggle people down to Australia in this way, the potential for a repeat of this tragedy certainly remains.

I wanted to touch very briefly on two other issues. Those issues are the surveil­lance issues—what might have been known about the arrival of SIEV221—and the intelligence issues raised with the committee in relation to the SIEV221 tragedy. Firstly, with the surveillance issues—and there has again been some media reporting in relation to this over the weekend—there is no surveillance system available to the Australian government which is able to detect wooden hulled boats in such a terrible and violent sea state. The committee looked extensively at these matters—whether it would have been possible to have had or whether the Australian authorities did have advance notice of SIEV221 arriving—and we have been able to confirm that SIEV221 was not able to be spotted by regular surveillance and that, as a result, the first time it was spotted was when it arrived on Christmas Island on that morning. It was just spotted visually by someone on the island. I think that is very important because we certainly had submissions made by people putting forward a different view. We have been able to satisfy ourselves, both with the public evidence and evidence heard in camera, that the first time SIEV221 was spotted was when it arrived on the island that morning.

Secondly, as touched on in the committee report, there is a very robust intelligence process in relation to illegal arrivals coming down to Australia. It gets information from many sources which is then distilled by a grouping every day. They obviously need to use their best efforts to sort credible intelligence from the myriad sources from which they are getting information on any given day. The committee heard evidence in relation to that and I was also given a private briefing in my shadow capacity. I feel very satisfied that the intelligence community did all they could, based on the information they had, in relation to the arrival of SIEV221. The committee can certainly say, I think with some positivity, that the intelligence processes worked reasonably well in the case of SIEV221 and that no Australian authority had any prior knowledge of its impending arrival on Christmas Island on 15 December.

This is a report that all members of the committee were able to put their name to: members of the government, members of the opposition, members of the Australian Greens and—now former—Independent Senator Steve Fielding. I think that is very important. These were terrible events and it is a good indication that both houses of the Australian parliament can come together, look at the events and make findings that all members of the parliament are comfortable putting their name to. I am proud of the efforts of the committee. I thank the chair, Senator Gavin Marshall, for his efforts and I thank the other members of the committee. I believe that this is a good example of the parliamentary process working as well as it can.

Ed Husic (Chifley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I follow the member for Stirling in addressing the report of the Joint Select Committee on the Christmas Island Tragedy. By virtue of our election to this place, we are required to participate in a number of different committees. This committee was one where our participation took on a solemn element because, on so many different levels, this was particularly difficult—absolutely so for those people who had to endure the events of that day, 15 December. By that I mean not just those people who were on the vessel on that day, 15 December, but also the range of people who were required to respond and extend assistance to those who had found themselves in what turned out to be such harrowing circum­stances. Those circumstances resulted in loss of life for 30 people and there are another 20 missing. Those 20 people are now presumed to have been taken by the ocean. For me, it was, in many respects, an eye-opening experience.

For a lot of people, due to television, Christmas Island appears closer than it is. Because they appear on our television screens, the events that occur on and about Christmas Island appear to be relatively close. But getting to Christmas Island takes a significant effort, given its location—its distance away from the Australian main­land—and it also requires an effort for those who would seek to improperly enter our shores and seek asylum. The events of that day were reflected upon by the member for Stirling but were also, importantly, the subject of reflection by the people of Christmas Island themselves—the people who appeared before the committee. They told us in clear terms that weather conditions such as those experienced on that day had not, in living memory, been witnessed by the people who were there or by people who had been there previously. The conditions that had been reported on by the Bureau of Meteorology and the swells that had been recorded in the period leading up to 15 December and shortly thereafter were simply beyond belief. Again, as has been noted by the member for Stirling, that proved a challenge to and tested the responses of a variety of government agencies, not only in the immediate aftermath but also in regard to detection and being able to ascertain whether what people were looking at was a small wooden vessel or a wave, even using modern surveillance techniques. There was a lot of discussion after the event about what could have been done to detect the oncoming vessel using radar but, as has clearly been shown, most modern radar would have been extremely tested and it would probably have been impossible to detect a vessel in those conditions.

What we were left with on that day was basically a mammoth response, testing the limits of responders themselves and also Christmas Island residents—and we had an opportunity to hear their accounts when they appeared before the committee. A lot of us saw footage from that day, and the committee also had the benefit, if I may use the word in a misplaced sense, of the Royal Australian Navy footage that showed the strength and the force of the ocean and what those people who serve for us in the RAN had to go through on that day to save lives. The member for Stirling mentioned the diesel cast into the ocean when the vessel broke. As I remarked in the House a few weeks ago, the diesel made it extremely difficult for rescuers when they were trying to drag into the RHIBs these people, who were flailing in the water. The rescuers were trying to pick them up but the arms of the people wanting to be saved were slipping through their grasp. The fact that 42 were saved is remarkable in itself given what the RAN had to go through.

I also think of the desperate plight of those on the shoreline, watching as the vessel broke up before their very eyes and they were unable in any way, shape or form to save people other than by throwing out lifejackets or other sorts of flotation devices. Their efforts were remarkable. They tried to do whatever they could but in many respects, as they told us, they felt completely and utterly helpless when faced with those conditions. They were unable to reach out and help those people who were in such terrible and diabolical circumstances.

As people have said many times over, the responses by people from the RAN, from Customs and from the Department of Immigration and Citizenship, and by onshore health providers as well, were phenomenal. We could still see the after-effects in the people who appeared before us—people who are professionals but who, as much as they obviously seek to carry out their functions in a dispassionate way and in a way that is as efficient as possible, were still clearly traumatised by the events of 15 December. That is why the committee recommended that ongoing support be provided not only to the people who were on SIEV221 but also to the people who responded and tried to provide assistance on that day. It is clear that they are still, in their own way, reliving these incidents themselves. The hearts of committee members are with the survivors and families who lost loved ones but they are also with the residents, Customs and Navy officials who were involved on that day.

The report clearly outlines the great difficulties faced, and it finds no fault with the response by government agencies. A range of consensus recommendations were put forward by the committee which we would encourage the government to examine and act on as soon as possible. Clearly there are limitations on how much detail we can go into while a coronial inquest is being carried out, but I share the sentiment expressed by the member for Stirling that the actions of those people who seek to profit from the desperation of others by putting people onto vessels that they know are simply not seaworthy are to be deplored. I represent a seat in Western Sydney and, as I said at the outset, going from Western Syd­ney to Christmas Island takes a significant effort. People are mistakenly encouraged to embark on a journey that takes two solid days on seas that put them, put their loved ones, put children, in peril. I simply cannot fathom how in some quarters we seek to glorify the role of people who put others on vessels and profit from that and believe they are doing human good. Clearly people's lives are being put in serious danger.

The RAN said they could never, with a clear conscience, put people on their own vessels in conditions like this—and bear in mind the significant differences between the vessels the RAN command and these other vessels that people are being put on. They are being made to endure two days of travel in terrible seas to get here. The RAN says they could not even imagine putting some­one into these conditions, if they had concerns for the people they were respons­ible for, on their own vessels let alone the vessels being used—in particular the vessel on that day—to bring people here. As I said before, I cannot fathom that we would believe that seeking to profit from that in that way is a responsible course of action; it clearly is not.

My participation in this committee has clearly highlighted to me that we need to take steps that some people outside of this place, and even people who are close to me who have different views, would say we should not undertake. I submit to this place that that trip, with the elements that people face and the massive risk to those and their loved ones on those vessels, is simply too high a risk and we should take whatever steps we can to prevent people from even thinking about getting on vessels that clearly are not seaworthy. This report highlights the tragedy that hit the families who attempted this crossing and the impact it had on the people who tried to save them.

In closing, I would also like to thank the chair, Senator Marshall, and the deputy chair, the member for Stirling, and the other members on the committee. I thank the secretariat for working tirelessly to bring this report together. As my friend and colleague the member for Moreton has said about border protection, as a country we have to patrol an area equivalent to 11 per cent of the world's oceans, but we do not have 11 per cent of the world's population. That we have to patrol 1.4 million square nautical miles and then prepare a response to the circumstances that confronted people on 15 December is simply extraordinary. I hope that the report opens eyes to what people suffered and endured on 15 December. The great lengths that were gone to by the people who responded on behalf of Australians to help those in desperate need on that day were simply extraordinary. I certainly commend the report to the House.

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Does the member for Stirling wish to move a motion in connection with the report to enable it to be debated on a future occasion?

Michael Keenan (Stirling, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Justice, Customs and Border Protection) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the House take note of the report.

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In accord­ance with standing order 39, the debate is adjourned. The resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.