Carol Brown (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

A great deal of Senator Cash’s contribution was based on some apparent divide within the Labor Party. That is coming from the coalition on a day like today. Where are they at the moment? It could be a marathon running of their party room. I just want to remind Senator Cash what was said by coalition members when the coalition changed their policy on reintroducing TPVs—temporary protection visas. We know there were a number of coalition members who spoke out against that policy. There was the member for Kooyong, the member for McMillan, the member for Pearce and Senator Troeth—all coalition members. I understand that the Liberal party room was not even consulted on the policy. Senator Troeth was quoted in the Age newspaper as saying:

I’m sad and disappointed at the change of coalition policy.

She said it was sad and disappointing but not surprising. The reason why, I suspect, Senator Troeth does not find it surprising is because she has seen it all before. It is about the fear factor. It is about trying to demonise a group of people. We know that is the opposition’s policy. They have indicated that. They have sent out their emails to their caucus members saying that this is what they are going to do. They do not want to talk about policy. They are not interested in that. They are interested, on this issue, in demonising certain people.

We are back in this place and we have begun this week again as we began last week. It would have been good to get something fresh from those opposite but, no; those opposite have come into this place with the same old tired lines that we have heard over and over again. It is nothing more than the opposition using scare tactics and political scaremongering to create trouble on this very complex issue. We heard it over and over again all last week and we will probably continue to hear it until they decide that it is an issue that is not working for them. Unfortunately on such an important and complex issue they have gone for cheap political point scoring.

We have also heard this today from my colleague the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, Senator Evans. He has provided those opposite with clear and concise answers on this extremely complex issue. It seems to me that, when those opposite do not get the answer they want to help them spin their political line, they then resort to the low road in an attempt to score those cheap political points. My Senate colleague Senator Bishop in his contribution here today talked about four issues that we are dealing with. I will highlight them again because it is very important to understand where the government are coming from. They were: (1) effective border controls; (2) sound immigration policy; (3) fairness to asylum seekers; and (4) an unrelenting opposition to people smugglers.

Senator Bishop was quite right in his contribution when he clearly articulated the government’s position. He clearly refuted the attacks by the opposition. Their attacks are all based on fear and scare tactics. So once again we are debating another MPI on this issue. We are not here debating something constructive; we are here of course for the opposition to try to create more mischief. Once again the motion that we are debating here today is another example of the opposition attempting to gain some political points. While those opposite will wallow in this attempt to sling mud, we on this side of the chamber are committed to enforcing tough border security programs.

First of all, let us get right to the crux of the issue regarding the Oceanic Viking. Right from the start let us be clear, as has been reiterated time and time again not only by the Prime Minister and the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship but also by many other government ministers, that there is no special deal for the asylum seekers on the Oceanic Viking. Contrary to what opposition senators like to think, and despite what those opposite might like to continue to spin to the public to gain political points, there is no special deal. Let me just recap the situation to clear it up again. The Australian government responded to a distress call on the high seas. This was a rescue situation. Did those opposite not want us to respond to this situation? Did they want us to ignore the calls for help? I certainly hope not. Then, under international law, the asylum seekers were transported to Indonesia. It was made clear to the asylum seekers that they would be disembarking there, and not in Australia as they wanted. That is what subsequently has occurred. No special deal has taken place. The asylum seekers have disembarked in Indonesia, as was the agreement with the Indonesian government.

Those persons disembarking the Oceanic Viking will now be assessed by the UNHCR and those persons found to be refugees will be referred by the UNHCR to countries for resettlement. This is directly in line with the normal processes which take place, so I am not sure where those opposite are getting this idea that a special deal has been done. Whilst those opposite continue to try and score cheap political points out of this complex situation, the Rudd Labor government remains vigilant about protecting our borders. A significant number of international push factors, as highlighted by Minister Evans this week and last week—and this was also highlighted by Senator Bishop in his contribution—are playing a major role in driving up the number of asylum seekers. As those opposite would be aware, international push factors have occurred in the past and they are currently occurring right now. So it is now more important than ever that we maintain appropriate actions to protect our borders.

As I have stated, governments in the past have also had to deal with push factors; and senators on the other side of the chamber would be well aware of this, because, after all, between 1999 and 2001, on the watch of the Howard government, we saw 12,000 asylum seeker arrivals. And of course back then the Liberal Party certainly did not claim that pull factors were the cause of the movement of so many unauthorised boat arrivals. How could they? It was aspects such as the brutal regimes of the Taliban in Afghanistan and Saddam Hussein in Iraq which were causing people to flee their own countries and seek asylum in other countries around the world. After the fall of the Taliban regime at the end of 2001, 2002 resulted in a large-scale voluntary return program of many Afghan people who were residing in Pakistan and Iran. Then, in 2003, Iraq was invaded and the regime of Saddam Hussein was brought to an end, and, not surprisingly, we saw a dramatic decline of boat arrivals in Australia. And so, push factors, such as the ones which saw an increase in boat arrivals between 1999 and 2001, are starting to become prominent once again and have caused an influx of asylum seekers entering our waters.

In fact the UN Secretary-General highlighted these factors in a recent report to the UN Security Council where he stated, ‘2008 ended as the most violent year in Afghanistan since 2001.’ This was backed up by General David Petraeus of US Central Command, who indicated that violent unrest in Afghanistan has risen by 60 per cent compared with last year. According to the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan, the armed conflict intensified significantly throughout Afghanistan during 2008 and during the first six months of 2009. This has consequently seen a rise in the number of civilian casualties and a reduction in the area of humanitarian space. Thus it will come as no surprise to anyone that increased irregular movements by Afghan asylum seekers have occurred as a result.

In fact in 2008 there was an 85 per cent increase in the number of Afghani asylum seekers claiming protection in industrialised countries worldwide. It is worth noting, especially for those opposite, who seem to be deniers of push factors, that this was the largest increase seen among the major countries of origin for asylum seekers. The UNHCR highlighted this by stating that applications for asylum in industrialised countries by Afghans were actually up by 52 per cent during the first half of this year compared to the same time last year. We all know that Australia is not immune from this global trend, and we have seen an increase in asylum seekers from Afghanistan requesting asylum here in Australia.

Another significant push factor, which we are seeing directly increase the number of asylum seekers entering our waters, is due to Sri Lanka emerging from the aftermath of a long-running civil war. Violence in Sri Lanka increased significantly in 2008 and climaxed in the final stages of the conflict earlier this year. The UNHCR estimated that the number of people displaced by the final stages of fighting exceeded 100,000. Again, it is clearly not surprising that there has been a spike in the irregular movement of Sri Lankans. In 2008 there was a 24 per cent increase in the number Sri Lankan asylum seekers claiming protection in industrialised countries worldwide. This trend has seen an increase in the number of Sri Lankans coming to Australia seeking asylum.

Whilst we have seen an influx of asylum seekers into Australia in recent months, the number of arrivals to Australia still remains low by world standards. The overwhelming majority of asylum seekers still head towards Europe. Amongst industrialised countries in 2008, 96 per cent of Afghan, 97 per cent of Iraqi and 82 per cent of Sri Lankan asylum seekers sought asylum in Europe. There were over 162,000 asylum applications lodged in industrialised countries worldwide during the first half of this year.

Australia has taken its share of those seeking asylum over the past two decades—in fact, this figure has averaged about 1.5 per cent of the total number of people seeking asylum around the world. What these facts and figures clearly tell us is that irregular boat arrivals are driven by significant push factors such as persecution and conflict. To help protect our borders from these push factors, the Rudd Labor government has maintained a tough and stringent border security regime since coming to office. In this year’s budget we committed $650 million to combat people smuggling. This was in direct response to the push factors I have already mentioned and which are currently resulting in a heightening of activity amongst people smugglers.

I place on record some of the funding initiatives we have put in place to combat people smuggling. We have included as part of the budget announcement $324 million to increase maritime patrols in our northern waters, as well as a funding increase of almost $63 million for aerial surveillance, including $16 million in extra funding to deliver two new aircraft to help patrol our coastlines for asylum seekers and illegal fishing activities. We have also committed $22 million over four years to establish a dedicated area in the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service to tow and dispose of those vessels we intercept.

The Rudd Labor government is committed to continuing to operate its strict border protection regime. We will stick with the processing of asylum seekers on Christmas Island and we will conduct security, health and identity checks on these people. These are the policies which are proving effective in helping to combat this complex situation.