Senate debates

Monday, 29 July 2019

Bills

Ministers of State (Checks for Security Purposes) Bill 2019; Second Reading

11:06 am

Photo of Raff CicconeRaff Ciccone (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise also today to speak against Senator Hanson's private member's bill, the Plebiscite (Future Migration Level) Bill 2018. As senators will remember, when this bill was initially introduced in the last parliament, Labor opposed it vigorously. Our position has not changed. The plebiscite does not do anything other than provide a question. There is no definitive outcome on immigration rates or levels, regardless of what the outcome of the vote is. We recognise that the story of our country, the story of us, is tied to our heritage as a migration nation. Migrants come to Australia—a lot do—but they come here in search of a better life, not just for themselves but for their families. And why wouldn't they? After all, we live in the greatest country on earth.

Today nearly half of all Australians either were born overseas or have at least one parent who was. In my own case, my parents came here in the late 1960s because they knew that Australia was a country where they could work hard, get ahead and create a future for their children. They're not alone. They join roughly 7½ million others since the end of World War II. We owe much of our prosperity as a nation to those who made this journey. Indeed, the Australia that we all know and enjoy today simply would not have been possible were it not for the contribution of people who were born overseas and their children and grandchildren.

Senator Hanson has ignored the benefits of migration, particularly the economic benefits. Migrants have helped to drive our economy. One in three small businesses in Australia are run by migrants, and migrant owners employ around 1.4 million workers right across Australia. As outlined by Treasury in the April 2018 report Shaping anation, the contribution to our economy by migrant intake alone was worth $10 billion over five years. That report stated:

… migration improves the Commonwealth's fiscal position, since migrants are likely to contribute more to tax revenue than they claim in social services or other government support.

In my home state of Victoria, one can barely walk down a mall or shopping strip without seeing the value that migrants make to our economy. But central to the defence against the kind of divisiveness proposed in this bill is not merely the important role that migration plays in our economy; rather, it is advancing the vision that we all have for this great nation. In Melbourne, what would Lygon Street be without the coffee machines brought over the seas by migrants from Italy? What would Box Hill be without its numerous dumpling restaurants opened by Chinese migrants who wanted to make something for themselves? What would Oakleigh be without the smell of roasting meat cooked in the traditional Greek way gently waffling down Eaton Mall?

Labor understands Australians are frustrated with stagnant wages, unaffordable housing and clogged infrastructure; however, migrants are not to blame. The truth is that this nation would not be what it is today without the contributions made to it by those who have come here in the hope of making a great contribution to Australia. It is not for us to subject this to a divisive and, perfectly honestly speaking, hurtful plebiscite. Whilst Labor accepts that this is important—that we make sure that we get the balance right in managing our migration program—this is the responsibility of the government with the best advice at hand. There is simply no place in our inclusive and proudly diverse nation for an expensive opinion poll on questions that don't need to be asked.

Comments

No comments