Angie Bell (Moncrieff, Liberal National Party, Shadow Minister for Early Childhood Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, why have we fast-tracked visas for nearly 3,000 people from the terrorist-controlled Gaza war zone since 7 October, yet our allies like the UK have taken in 168 and the United States only 17? Many comparable countries require face-to-face interviews in third countries or biometric tests to apply for a visa, conditions the Albanese government has waived. Was this decision based on security advice or political expediency?

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The minister for infrastructure will cease interjecting before the Prime Minister has begun.

Government members interjecting—

Order! Members on my right will cease interjecting immediately.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

All visitor visa applications—and this goes to a previous question as well—are decided with the involvement of departmental staff. None are fully automated. We have dealt with this process as people would be aware, and I'm sure the member is aware. The Rafah border crossing is closed. Those opposite said nothing about these issues when the visas were actually being introduced. Now they're not being delivered because people can't get out of the Rafah crossing—and those opposite know that. But that's not the real point of this question, is it? It's not to get an answer. It's not actually to get information. It's to sow doubt and to stoke division and to create fear, and everyone knows it.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The Minister for Industry and Science, it's highly disorderly to interject before I take a point of order. The member for Wannon, on a point of order?

Dan Tehan (Wannon, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It goes to relevance. The question was very straightforward. Was this decision based on security advice or political expediency? Very simple.

Government members interjecting—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Members on my right, the same principles will apply as they did for the member for Wannon. The Leader of the House.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The last two words that were just quoted show exactly why this answer is in order, because he is referring to the political expediency that is dealing with question after question for processes that were the same as have been used in Australia for years.

Honourable members interjecting—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Wannon is entitled to raise a point of order. This question was different as it didn't specifically ask for a fact or a figure, which we've been dealing with during the week. It was a very different question, with a question regarding political expediency at the end. If you're going to ask a question about that topic, obviously the Prime Minister, or a minister, is able to respond regarding that issue.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm certainly speaking about the political expediency of those opposite—political expediency that isn't concerned about cost-of-living pressures, that's not concerned about jobs, that's not concerned about wages, that's not concerned about our economy, that's not concerned about social policy, that's not concerned about the environment or tackling climate change or any of the issues that Australians are talking about in their households. It is more concerned about the Middle East than Middle Australia. This exposes their political expediency, because they don't have an agenda. They're yet to come up with a single costed policy. I think that people will be having a look at this bloke, who, ever since he walked into the parliament as a new member, has always looked to divide, has always looked to bring Australians apart, not to bring Australians together. Even when he has left this parliament, as he did during the apology, it was all about divisions—and then he apologised for it. He said that Lebanese migration was a mistake under the Fraser government, and then he said he apologised for it. It's just that he apologised to Annabel Crabb, not to anyone in the Lebanese community. He hasn't yet apologised to Africans in Melbourne, for when he said that people couldn't get out. He continually looks to pretend that he is so strong, but nastiness is not strength. Punching down on vulnerable people is not strength. But that is what this bloke does. It shows Australia who he really is every day.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I just remind all members regarding reflecting on members during the course of answers and questions.