Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Immigration and Border Protection) Share this | Hansard source

As I was saying, Senator Hanson-Young needs to remember when talking to this bill to ensure that history is recorded correctly. The Australian Greens were in a formal alliance with the Australian Labor Party and under that alliance they failed Australia and Australians in relation to border protection. The actual cohort to which this bill is directed is a cohort that came to this country under the former government, and in excess of 30,000 people were placed in limbo as a direct result of the actions of the former government. The former government did not commence the processing of these people. They were placed in poverty and without work rights as a direct result of a policy decision of the former government. Had this government's temporary protection visa initiative not been disallowed by the Senate recently, these people whom Senator Hanson-Young says do not have work rights would now be entitled to work rights if they had been granted temporary protection visas.

The reintroduction of temporary protection visas was one of the many measures taken by the coalition government to restore strength and integrity to Australia's immigration program and, as I have stated, to clear the backlog of Labor's legacy of in excess of 30,000 people who came to this country and who have quite literally been dumped into the community on bridging visas. Temporary Protection visas strike an appropriate and effective balance between a genuine need for safe haven from persecution and a disincentive for illegal arrivals, because, as a government, we are not honouring the promise of permanent protection that the people smugglers make to them when they encourage them to get on a boat and make the dangerous journey to Australia.

Of course, temporary protection visas directly respond to changing circumstances in a person’s home country. Temporary protection visas will allow those in need of protection to have access to work rights—unlike the current situation which Senator Hanson-Young supports, where people do not have access to work rights—and support services in the community. This is the case if they are allowed to be on temporary protection visas. These benefits—and again I remind the chamber that these are the benefits which Senator Hanson-Young has on a number of occasions advocated in this very chamber and, indeed, in the speech that she just gave in support of her own bill—have been denied to asylum seekers as a direct result of the Labor-Greens alliance in banding together recently to disallow Temporary Protection Visas.

Given the failure of the Labor-Greens alliance to support this important measure, the coalition government has chosen to regain control of the protection visa program by utilising the visa capping framework in the Migration Act 1958 to determine the maximum number of visa grants in the permanent protection visa class for this financial year. This was a necessary step as it underlines the coalition government's resolve to ensure that persons who arrive in Australia without visas are not granted permanent protection in Australia.

The cap on further protection visa grants is in place until 30 June 2014 and it will continue to deny people smugglers a product to sell. The message from the government has been consistent and clear: those who have travelled illegally to Australia will never be resettled in Australia permanently. At the same time, the government continues to implement measures to achieve a fair and orderly immigration program.

The cap on further protection visa grants also enables the government to ensure that we strike the right balance between the offshore and onshore components of the Humanitarian Program, providing the places to the most vulnerable who are patiently waiting to come to Australia through regular, orderly migration channels. These are people who do not have the means to pay the people smugglers and these are people who have been languishing in refugee camps for many years. Certainly, a number of them that I met from the Congo were in refugee camps for in excess of 20 years and, indeed, every single one of their children had been born in a refugee camp.

The visa capping framework in the Migration Act 1958 consists of sections 85, 86 and 91. These provisions commenced on 16 December 1992. Section 85 provides the minister with the power to set a cap on the number of visas that may be granted in a specified financial year, whilst section 86 prevents any more visas of that class being granted in that year once the number of visas granted reaches the number in the cap. Section 91 then enables the minister to consider those visa applications which are subject to the cap in the order in which he or she determines to be the most appropriate. The visa capping framework has been used on very many occasions by governments of both persuasions for many different visa classes—for example, parent and other family visa classes amongst others. It is a mechanism which allows for control when demand exceeds supply.

The cap does not stop visa processing, and I think that is a very important point to make, considering it is not what Senator Hanson-Young says is the effect of the decision that has been taken by this government. So, again, this cap and the ability of the minister under the act to make such a decision does not stop visa processing. It is not a freeze and it is not a suspension of processing. It is a mechanism to limit the number of grants which may be issued in a particular financial year. Illegal maritime arrivals will continue to have their protection claims assessed, and those who are refused a protection visa will still be able to seek a review by the Refugee Review Tribunal. Successive governments have found that the capping framework is useful to them when seeking to ensure that Australia's visa program is managed in the best interests of the nation. Nothing is changed by this government's decision: the provision continues to be used for its intended purpose.

This bill proposes to amend the Migration Act 1958 to allow instruments made under section 85 to be disallowed by the parliament. Removing the government's right to cap a visa class without risk of disallowance, as this bill proposes, has the potential to lead to disorder and to inappropriately fetter the government's legitimate role in setting the Australian migration program in the national interest. It would impact not only the Humanitarian Program but also all other visa classes within the migration program.

The financial impact on the migration program may be to the detriment of the Australian taxpayer if control of these programs does not fully rest with the government of the day. It enables the government to determine the optimum size and composition, as deemed by the government of the day in consideration of the annual budget. The cap is reviewed each year and takes into consideration any changes in the level of demand and allocation of overall migration program planning levels. The visa capping framework also allows for program management mechanisms, such as enabling the minister to consider applications in an order that the government deems most appropriate. These mechanisms are essential, particularly in the case of the parent visa case load. The visa capping framework has enabled successive governments to validly exercise control over a range of visa classes over many years, leading to the orderly management and flow of non-citizens to Australia.

Mr Acting Deputy President Furner, rest assured that, although the Labor-Greens alliance is not willing to allow illegal maritime arrivals who engage our protection obligations to receive the benefits of temporary protection visas, including access to work rights—which, under the former government, they were denied. Temporary protection visas remain a key component of this government's policies, and we will be taking any action deemed necessary in the weeks and the months ahead in order to implement this policy and deliver on our commitment to the Australian people. This bill should not be supported.