Luke Howarth (Petrie, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs. Will the minister please update the House on how the government's strong border security and border protection policies, such as Operation Sovereign Borders, have been so successful? Is the minister aware of any threats to this success?

David Coleman (Banks, Liberal Party, Minister for Immigration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We know what happened under those opposite in this policy area: a humanitarian catastrophe. Twelve hundred people lost their lives, including children. We'll never know how many children, but 1,200 people lost their lives. Eight thousand children were forcibly placed in detention by those opposite—that's what happened—and 50,000 people arrived unlawfully. In the June quarter of 2013, across the entire Australian youth justice detention system, there were 956 people in detention. At the same time, under those opposite, there were 1,820 children merely in immigration detention—twice as many as across the entire youth justice system.

We know what we did. We stopped the boats. We got 2,000 kids out of detention. We closed 19 detention centres—we're going to have to come back to that, aren't we? We've resettled more than 450 people in the United States. Very importantly, secure borders—and the confidence that comes with that—underpin a generous humanitarian program: this government has increased the size of our humanitarian program by 35 per cent since it came to office. This government has provided medical care to those who need it. There are 64 medical professionals on Nauru and there are 418 transferees—that is a ratio of one medical professional for every seven people on Nauru.

Those on that side say there's no medical care, but that is absolutely false. They also say that the bill that they voted for is about people who are critically ill, but the bill that they brought to this House does not require people to be ill. The bill merely requires that those people be brought to Australia for an assessment. That is an extremely low threshold, and the consequence of that is clear.

I want to talk about something else in their bill called amendment (14). It goes to this issue of who this bill will allow into Australia. At the moment you might have relatives or friends or family who want to come to Australia. They're assessed under the Migration Act character test. For skilled employees, tourists, students—everyone—an extensive list of criteria are applied before those people are allowed to enter Australia. Under amendment (14), for people coming from Manus or Nauru, those criteria do not apply. So somebody's relative coming to visit them from overseas will have to meet a higher character standard than someone under this bill. It's another failing of those opposite. (Time expired)