Judith Troeth (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Our vote on this regulation today will not change the country. It will not pave new highways, fix our hospitals or build more schools. But it will show that we are a nation of compassion by righting a wrong that is causing needless suffering to people in our country.

These regulations amend the Migration Regulations 1994 to abolish the 45-day rule for some bridging visa subclasses and make new provisions such as for the right to work, income support and access to Medicare. Introduced in 1997, applicants must have applied within 45 days of arriving in Australia or relinquish their right to work, access to Medicare and funding for torture and trauma counselling.

It has been estimated that 40 per cent of these applicants do not meet this deadline due to poor English skills or the lack of, or incorrect, information given by well-meaning but badly-informed family or community members. Unable to work to support themselves, asylum seekers are forced to rely on the charity of churches and community groups for financial support, food, and, as many live out in the community, assistance with accommodation.

The American Vice President Hubert Humphrey once observed that compassion is not a weakness and concern for the unfortunate is not socialism. It is not a mark of pride for this parliament that successive governments have devalued these principles in the administration of this policy. The shameful burden placed on churches, community groups and benevolent individuals by this policy is incompatible with the indelible concept and revered national tradition of the fair go.

Beyond our shores, this policy seriously undermines what should be Australia’s commitment to the highest standards of international rights. As a signatory to the 1951 Convention on Refugees, Australia has an obligation to provide essential living necessities and adequate health care for asylum seekers living within our territory. We are also committed to treaties that require their member states to ensure asylum seekers have the right to seek work and somewhere to live. They include the United Nations High Commission for Refugees—ExCom, 2002—and article 24(1) of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which requires:

States Parties recognize the right of the child to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health and to facilities for the treatment of illness and rehabilitation of health.

The International Covenant on Economic. Social and Cultural Rights states:

The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right to work, which includes the right of everyone to the opportunity to gain his living by work which he freely chooses or accepts, and will take appropriate steps to safeguard this right.

These changes not only epitomise Robert Menzies’ conviction that a strong economy is the best form of social justice but demonstrate that real social justice can build a strong economy.

In 2005 the Uniting Church’s Hotham Mission Asylum Seeker project surveyed 211 asylum seekers living in Victoria and New South Wales who did not have work rights or Medicare access. Among those surveyed; 74 per cent had skills recognised on the skilled occupation list for the General Skilled Migration program occupations. They included engineers, teachers, tailors, social workers, computer programmers and agricultural scientists. Of those listed on the skilled occupation list, 45 per cent had skills that were considered in high demand, and the majority of those surveyed were willing to work in rural or regional areas. In particular, the research found that the cohort of 211 asylum seekers who undertook the skills audit would have potentially added up to $26 million to the Australian GDP over a three-year period. More broadly, it was estimated that, if 75 per cent of the population of asylum seeking bridging visa E holders obtained minimum wage employment, it would still add over $75 million dollars to the economy over three years.

The Liberal Party is having an important conversation with history on how we treat those who seek refuge within our shores. In the 1980s, we wrestled with the great economic debates of the century and emerged with a renewed commitment to an open, free market. Enabling people who are willing and able to work, who ask not for welfare but for self reliance, to sustain themselves is intrinsic to what we believe as the party of not just Menzies but Howard as well.

Today, as we hew a new path to government, the Liberal Party must arrive from our deliberations having found a confidence in our ability to defend our borders without closing our hearts. The Liberal Party has a proud story to tell on immigration, but both parties over the last 50 years have written some bleak chapters too. We find our genesis in Harold Holt’s dismantling of the White Australia policy and in Malcolm Fraser’s welcoming of Vietnamese refugees that not only made Australia’s migrant intake truly multiracial but turned the abolition of the White Australia policy into a practical reality. In 1999, the former government rightly provided Australia as a beacon of safety for 4,000 Kosovars and for 1,500 East Timorese fleeing conflicts in their respective home countries. But it also introduced legislation that had no place in the contemporary nation we aspire to be.

Debates on the plight of asylum seekers in Australia too often invoke the defence that we ought not send the wrong message to those who seek shelter within our borders from tyrannies abroad. Let us grasp a new opportunity to understand the difference between sending the wrong message to those who truly wish us harm and sending the right message to those who need our help. Australia does not have to choose between strong, secure borders and compassion for those seeking liberty and freedom. We can have both.

Many of the people seeking to reach our shores do so as a result of their flight from tyranny in places such as Afghanistan. Australia has sewn together a rich tapestry of multiculturalism. The challenge now is to weave our future as a country big enough to recognise misdeeds and small enough to administer changes that work. The changes to these regulations mark an important step that should be supported by the whole parliament. And there should never be opportunity found in human misery; there should be a united determination by all who take their place in this parliament to conquer it jointly.

Today we talk a lot about respect—respect for oneself, respect for one another. We talk about respect where we see the demise of community and often of family too. Menzies’ Forgotten People speech applies just as well today as it did in 1942. Where Menzies extols a society not reliant on government for bread or ideas, today we vote to give people the right to work, not just to sustain themselves but for the self-respect that work brings with it. Perhaps through this small token of generosity, the righting of a wrong, we can inspire a renewed respect within individuals, families and our communities and we can respect ourselves as a nation of true generosity to those who need it most, and who want most to give it back.

I commend to the Senate these amendments moved by the government.