Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Kids need to grow up in a stable, loving environment. But, under your watch, the refugee children on Nauru are in absolute crisis. When a 10-year-old boy repeatedly tried to kill himself, your government refused to transfer him to Australia for treatment until a court ordered it. As emergency grows into catastrophe, Australia's senior medical officer was reportedly arrested and is today being deported from Nauru. Why are you slowly killing these children? Are you seriously arguing that threatening these children's lives is some kind of necessary evil—acceptable because you want to send some kind of broader message? Why won't you accept doctors' advice that it's never in a child's best interests to lock them up until they die?

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Leader of the House.

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, clearly the member for Melbourne has overstepped the boundaries, even in this building, and I would ask him to withdraw those insinuations and statements that we are trying to kill children by locking them up.

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I ask the member for Melbourne to withdraw.

Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm prepared to rephrase that part of the question.

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, you need to—

Government members interjecting—

Members on my right will cease interjecting.

Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Why is the government slowly killing these children?

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No. The member for Melbourne needs to withdraw. A rephrase doesn't do it. He needs to withdraw. There's one rule for everyone, I'm afraid.

Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw that part of the question.

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you. The Prime Minister has the call.

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Our government, when we came to government in 2013, ended the carnage of children dying at sea. We ended the carnage and we did it in three months—stopped that carnage from happening. We took 6,000 children out of detention because of our policies. We closed the detention centres that the Labor Party opened because of their inability to manage Australia's borders—as children lay face-down in the water—and at the urging of the policies of the Greens, whom they so happily went along with. So I'm not going to take lectures from the Greens movement, who are more responsible than any in this chamber, and their reckless attitude, as they seek to stand here and aggrandise themselves—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Prime Minister will resume his seat. The member for Melbourne on a point of order.

Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On relevance. It was clear from the opening of the question: this is about the children on Nauru. My question is about that, and I want an answer about that. Could you ask the Prime Minister to be directly relevant to that?

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Prime Minister is addressing the subject of the question. There was a specific element to the question. The Prime Minister's entitled to give some comparisons and to give some context, but the question was about Nauru.

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Our commitment to provide the health and medical services is on record for the facilities that were opened by the Labor Party when they were in office, and we will continue to treat every single case based on the medical advice that is received and transfers that are undertaken on the basis of that medical advice, and we will continue to pursue that practice in each and every case. I'll ask the Minister for Home Affairs to add to the answer.

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Minister for Home Affairs for the remaining time.

Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Minister for Home Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for his question. As the Prime Minister outlined, firstly there are about 65 medical professionals on Nauru at the moment. The Australian government has provided some hundreds of millions of dollars for medical services on Nauru. In fact, there have been around 200 children who came as part of family units, where a father or a mother may have come to Australia for medical assistance and they came as part of that family unit or, indeed, they came for medical assistance themselves. There are many cases where the Australian government has provided support. I make the point that we have been able to negotiate an arrangement with the United States. Now 435 people have left Nauru and Manus—people who had arrived as part of the 50,000 on 800 boats when Labor was last in government. Those people have formed part of what I hope will be a bigger number heading to the United States. We'll continue to work on a number of cases, as we are and as the minister for immigration is on a daily basis, in relation to this matter. As the Prime Minister rightly points out, we take the advice from the medical experts. We have a look at the—

Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You don't follow it. You only do it when a court tells you to.

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Melbourne has asked his question.

Peter Dutton (Dickson, Liberal Party, Minister for Home Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Again, I think Australians are better to stick to the facts because, if they don't, they are led by people like the honourable member who asked the question. What results, as the Prime Minister detailed before, could easily be repeated if that man is ever involved— (Time expired)