Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Minister for Communications and the Arts) Share this | Hansard source

The first point I need to make is that it has always been the convention in this place that the government of the day has the opportunity to lay out the program for legislation during government business time. I can well remember Senator Collins fiercely defending that proposition when she was on this side of the chamber. It is the convention in this place that the government of the day lay out the legislative program in this place, so we cannot support the suspension motion to alter that convention.

But what we also saw was an absolute shambles on the part of those opposite when it came to seeking to move the suspension motion. That reflects what has been a real lack of care and a real lack of attention when it comes to the Phelps bill at all stages. Those opposite and many on the crossbench voted for that bill in this place at the end of last year without having received any legal advice as to its constitutionality in terms of what was sent to the other place, and we saw that play out over there. They also voted for the legislation without receiving any security briefing, not because it wasn't available but because they didn't think it necessary to seek that before voting on the legislation.

There has been no care. There has been no thought. There has been no concern about the protection of our borders and what the practical, real-world impact will be if this piece of legislation is passed. What those opposite are seeking to do is to give the people smugglers a product that they can sell. When we came into office we systematically put back in place that which those opposite had dismantled. We broke the people smugglers' business model. Those opposite want to give the people smugglers a product to sell. They want to provide a pipeline for the people smugglers to convey people on the high seas, putting forward the proposition that they can deliver an outcome for those that the people smugglers want to sell to. We cannot support that for one second.

It is the core business of the elected executive government of the day to protect our borders. That is something that should never ever be outsourced to anyone. It should never be outsourced to anyone. It is the responsibility of the elected executive government of the day. The Phelps bill seeks to outsource that solemn responsibility of government—in this case, to doctors. We have a high regard for doctors, but it's governments who are elected to discharge these duties. Also, the bill is based on a fundamentally false premise, that medical facilities and medical services are not available to those who are offshore. They are available to those who are offshore, and when they need services that aren't available there then that occurs. So this legislation is based on an absolutely false premise.

The other thing that those opposite and those looking to support the bill fail to recognise and acknowledge is the existence of something called pull factors. There are pull factors. There are push factors and there are pull factors. We saw that when Mr Rudd was putting himself forward to be Prime Minister of the nation. That government at that time essentially said that pull factors don't exist; it's only push factors. Well, pull factors do exist, and they are a core part of what people smugglers sell. It's a core part of what people smugglers put to people—that they can deliver an outcome. What they use for their marketing purposes are those things that the Australian Labor Party say and those things that the Australian Labor Party do and those things that the Greens say and those things that the Greens do.

What we see now is that the Labor Party have given up any pretence of there being bipartisanship when it comes to border protection. They've broken cover, and the Australian people have the opportunity to see where they stand.