Louise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

What a performance from Senator Cash! This question time has highlighted the complete lack of credibility of the opposition's policies on asylum seekers. Why? Because they have nothing but shallow rhetoric to guide them on this question. They put forward policies that are, in effect, non-policies—policies that are completely un-implementable, as our speakers have highlighted.

Labor has put forward policies. This government has put forward policies which those opposite have refused to implement. They have refused to implement them. Why? Because it is politically convenient for them not to do so. It is politically convenient to those opposite to allow boats to continue to arrive. We have confidence in our border protection policies, but the simple fact is that you have refused to let us implement them. You have refused to allow this parliament to sign up to the Malaysia agreement, which means that this country continues to be subjected to the arrival of the flow of asylum seekers. You have refused to let us implement the recommendations of the Houston panel. You have refused to allow Australia to do a people swap with Malaysia, to take away the incentives for people to get on boats.

We have a credible suite of policies which you have refused to help us implement, which is exactly the opposite approach to that which, for example, Kim Beazley took as opposition leader. You have never, ever allowed this parliament, this government, to govern on this question. And why? Because the fear mongering that you perpetuate about the arrival of boats of what you call illegals suits you politically. It suits your political dramatisation of these issues. You can see it in the coalition's language on these questions, day after day. Your alternative policies are, however, dangerous. Every credible analyst says so. Credible analysts say: we will see a lot more sinking of boats if the coalition get their way.

As question time highlighted this afternoon, this is filthy, dirty work. We have been in this place before. We have seen this before. We have seen boats sabotaged so that even more lives are at risk. We have seen people drown when boats have been sabotaged. And we know that this is a likely outcome of a boat turn-back policy. There is a reason that credible analysts say this. Why? Because we have seen it before. This is what happens when you turn back boats: there are desperate acts undertaken by people desperate not to be turned back. Then there is no choice but to pluck people from the water from sinking boats under very dangerous circumstances, placing our own personnel at risk. What is more, Indonesia has consistently said it wants no part of this policy.

Let us have a look at one of the other alternative policies that the coalition has put on the table: temporary protection visas. I know that Senator Cash has put forward policies in this parliament, but, if you look at the success of temporary protection visas, a total of around 11,200 TPVs were granted between the period of the introduction of visa subclasses and their abolition. How many people departed in that time? Three hundred and seventy-nine. It was not a credible policy. It is not an effective policy. Why? The facts speak for themselves; the statistics speak for themselves. We know that the vast majority—95 per cent—of people on TPVs were ultimately granted a permanent visa. As a device to return asylum seekers, that policy was a complete failure. In the year they were introduced by the Howard government, there were 3,722 unauthorised arrivals— (Time expired)