Trish Crossin (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Sorry, we are not sure what the Liberal Party Policy is now; we are very sure what the Labor Party policy is, and that is because we have a definite plan. We are waiting for the Liberal Party and the coalition work together with us to resolve this issue, to get on board and so we finally have an end to the politics and the division that is happening here.

The Liberal Party argument is very simple. It wants to do three things: Nauru, TPVs and turning back the boats. The Houston report looked at all three of those issues and they only supported one. They rejected the TPVs and they rejected the issue of turning back the boats. It was interesting to hear Senator Johnston talk a minute ago about the role of the Defence Force in turning back the boats. We know quite clearly that the Defence Force has said that to turn back the boats would be an extremely dangerous thing for the Defence Force or the Customs and Border Protection Service to be involved in. If those opposite were really concerned about the role of the Defence Force and about the welfare of our men and women in all of those services they would drop the notion of turning back the boats. If they had read the Houston report they would know that it has categorically ruled that out as not a viable policy option—not at all.

In the Houston report we have picked up the key principle that no advantage would be gained in circumventing the regular migration agreements. Let us get really clear as to what that is about. That means that if you arrive in this country by boat there is no fast track, no fast lane, no express lane. Under the Houston report, there would be no advantage to be gained in trying to get around the regular migration arrangements.

I have not heard the coalition support that principle. I have not heard the coalition stand up and say that the way to solve this matter is to treat those people arriving by boat like every other person in the world who is seeking to get to this country as a refugee. I have not heard any of the speakers from the opposition this afternoon say that the very least they could do is support the underlying principle of the Houston report. I have not heard them say that whatsoever. And we will not hear them say it because it is about politics for them; it is not about people. If it were about people, then they would be ensuring that there is no advantage in getting here by boat and in circumventing the regular migration arrival pathway to this country. But we cannot even get the people opposite saying that at least they support the main underlying principle of the Houston report. We cannot even get them to say that. The message is very clear. The Labor Party's policy is that, if you come to Australia by boat, you are subject to being transferred to Nauru or PNG. There is no advantage in coming to Australia by being put on a boat by people smugglers. But I have not heard the people opposite even endorse, espouse or support that underlying principle.

Labor has signed the legislative instrument designating Papua New Guinea as a regional processing country under the Migration Act, which means we have put in place recommendations 8 and 9 from the Houston report. We have increased our humanitarian intake to 20,000 people, which is recommendation 2, and we have strengthened cooperation with Indonesia on search and rescue operations, which is recommendation 20.

We endorse all 22 recommendations and we are going to ensure that, as a package, that report is put in place. We have not heard at all what the Liberal Party plan to do in relation to their response to the Houston report. The report made it very clear that embarking on a policy of towing back the boats, stopping the boats—that reckless, endless negativity we hear from Mr Abbott and those opposite—creates a risk to the lives of ADF personnel and would only ever work with the agreement of other countries, something that Indonesia has categorically said would not happen. I am not sure why the opposition continue to peddle the line. Where would you tow the boats back to, where would you turn the boats back to, when even the Indonesian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Marty Natalegawa, has said that it is 'not on' and that they will not agree to it and they will not do it? I am not sure where that takes your policy and I am not sure why you peddle that myth.

The report also examines TPVs, temporary protection visas, a measure that in the past saw 68 per cent of refugees permanently remain in Australia because they knew that, once they got a TPV, they were here permanently. So it did not stop the boats. If you have a look at the figures that have been presented time and time again to the Senate's legal and constitutional committee during estimates you will see that immediately TPVs were introduced the number of boats coming to this country increased. Not only did it mean a genuine guarantee of permanency in this country but it also meant that people could reunite with their families, which saw more women and children get on a boat to join a partner who was here in this country under a TPV.

In the spirit of compromise Labor offered to actually examine TPVs and to look at the issue, to have a cross-party group, a committee—even a parliamentary committee—to look at the fors and againsts, the positives and the negatives, of TPVs. But even that was ruled out by the coalition because they did not want to accept that, somewhere along the line, their policy was a failure, that it would not work. Time and time again, we have MPIs here about TPVs, about turning back the boats. Time and time again, we have evidence that neither of those policies would work. Both of those policies are dangerous. (Time expired)