Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

Maybe Senator Mason believes in the speech he just gave, and it may be relevant at some time. Unfortunately, it is not relevant to the urgency motion that is before us today. That urgency motion, provided for under standing order 75, contains three major points:

The need for the Australian government to unequivocally guarantee that the latest group of boat people, reportedly including 83 asylum seekers from Sri Lanka, will immediately have access to independent assistance, have their refugee claims assessed openly and fairly and will not be subjected to the risk of refoulement, consistent with our international obligations.

That is what the debate in the chamber is about. What Senator Mason went to—and I took very careful note of what he said—consisted of reliance on the government’s record. That might be something that Senator Mason wants to trumpet, but the Labor Party does not, because that record harks back to ‘kids overboard’ and the deceit surrounding that. As far as I can see, to date this government has only put out one press statement dealing with this issue, titled ‘Group transferred to Christmas Island’ and released on 24 February 2007.

Senator Mason did not go to that in any detail other than to make the sweeping statement in his opening remarks that he agreed that people should not face persecution and that it is wrong to return people to countries where they would. I agree with that: it is wrong. Then Senator Mason went on to a range of other matters which are not related to the motion although worthy in other debates. It is true that many refugees have settled in Australia and that Australia openly embraces them. The Labor Party agrees with all of those sentiments. It does not agree with offshore processing—that is clear.

There is a problem, though, with Senator Mason’s speech in that he did not go to the issue at hand—I will point out why. Although this motion relates specifically to the group of Sri Lankan asylum seekers that are now on Christmas Island, in the absence of the full details of their circumstances this debate really goes to the principles of how we process claims for asylum. Labor has sought a briefing from the government on the specific circumstances of this group of asylum seekers which will take place later this afternoon. But the Howard government have form in this area. Their form is deception and misinformation. Earlier I mentioned the ‘children overboard’ affair, where the then Minister for Defence produced photographs in the middle of an election campaign, stating that they depicted children who had been thrown into the water by their parents. So, when we examine the issues, we must constantly remind ourselves of just how little credibility the public statements by the government have—that everything they say must be taken with a grain of salt and viewed through that prism.

Labor’s principles in this debate are clear: Labor want to see people smugglers prosecuted to the full extent of the law. So, to the extent that Senator Mason diverged into the area, we agree. We do not want them to be given a second shot at smuggling people into this country and we do not want to see refugees returned to a country where they face persecution. We agree on that. Most of what we now know about this matter, though, comes from reports in the media. I was hoping Senator Mason might have been able to contribute on some of the issues actually relevant to the debate. But the government has not, and perhaps the government’s second or third speaker in this debate might be able to contribute some factual details of the circumstances, or at least provide a little more than the minister has to date.

As I said, the minister has made some public statements on the issue; they are far from complete, and his last formal statement was the press release of two days ago that I mentioned earlier. This is what he has told us: 85 people were intercepted by HMAS Success on 21 February, 83 claiming to be Sri Lankan and two claiming to be Indonesian. We know that the group has been moved to Christmas Island for health checks and information gathering. We know that the government is considering a range of options for the handling of this group. But there remains plenty that we do not know. Hopefully, the remaining government speakers will not do what Senator Mason did but will in fact provide some of the answers. We cannot know what options the government is considering. We can only speculate about what the claims of these asylum seekers actually are. So it would be helpful if the government could provide information on the options it is considering and the claims of the group.

At present there do remain conflicting accounts about the details and circumstances surrounding this group of asylum seekers, and Labor wants the government to clear the air. You have the opportunity to provide some of those answers today. You can lay all the facts of these issues on the table here and in this afternoon’s briefing. Labor will be seeking a complete chronology of the events, such as the interdiction, the origin of the ship, the current circumstances on the processing and the current state of negotiations. The government must fill in the blanks on those questions as well as the many others that surround this group of asylum seekers.

Let me reinforce the principles which underpin Labor’s approach. We do not want to give people smugglers a second shot. Labor want to see people smugglers prosecuted to the full extent of law. The government must make sure that its policy does not see people smugglers set free to breach our borders again. At the same time, we must make sure that we meet all of our international commitments in this area. In particular, Labor do not want to see refugees returned to countries where they face persecution. Labor want to see effective international cooperation to fight people-smuggling and strong penalties for criminals who engage in this despicable action.

It can only be Mr Kevin Andrews and Mr Downer who would allow the debate to date to continue without the full facts. There is an onus on the government to provide the circumstances that surround this issue, because otherwise you end up with various reports in various papers about what the circumstances are, which does not help the debate here. It certainly does not help the people who are being processed, and it does not help this government’s prosecution of the issue.

It has been reported that Sri Lanka’s Ambassador to Indonesia said Australian and Indonesian officials had told him the asylum seekers would be sent to Jakarta and then returned home. He expected the men to arrive in Sri Lanka within days. Australia and Indonesia had said they would help with the repatriation, he said. In their statement, of course, Mr Andrews and Mr Downer said the government would not allow the refugees to be returned to a country where they faced persecution. It went on to say that, while the government is considering its options, clearly no action would be taken which would breach our international obligations.

But this type of speculation continues. It is not the media that are speculating; it is Mr Downer and Mr Andrews who are allowing the speculation to continue. They can bring it to a conclusion quite easily and provide the information as to what the circumstances are. Therefore, we can have a situation where we get proper and appropriate media comment and reporting of the issue. Instead, to date, we have heard from the government a potted history and a slightly one-sided view of the history of people-smuggling, and offshore processing more particularly. (Time expired)