Kristina Keneally (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

Under standing order 74(5)(b), I move:

That the Senate take note of the explanation.

To the people in the chamber here today and in the gallery: I don't know if you have children. I do. When my kids were little, they used to say to me: 'Why do we have to learn about maths? Why is maths so important? When am I ever going to use maths in my daily life when I grow up?' Sometimes as a parent you struggle to find the practical applications for maths in daily life. You can talk about bank accounts and home loans, but that is a bit of an abstract notion. Today I sit here and wonder: did the government members learn about maths when they were growing up, and do they see the application of maths in the jobs they do today? For example, can they count to 30? When you lodge a question on notice, ministers get 30 days to answer it. That is simple counting, and they have simply missed that deadline. The minister, in her explanation, noted that I have placed a substantial number of questions on notice. Hey, by the way, that is my right as a senator. The minister also noted that many of them have been answered. Well, in fact, I could have put more questions here today that have not been answered. I chose these two, but there are a number that have not yet been answered.

But let me continue on why maths is important. Just this week, again on the issue of questions on notice, this government showed its lack of ability to deal with maths. I had a question to the government regarding the number of plane arrivals between 31 July and 19 August and they gave me the incorrect number. They gave me the number for another set of dates. So not only have this government lost control of the borders at our airports; they have lost control of the ability to do the basic maths to count the number of people who are coming to our airports and claiming asylum.

What we do know, though, is that, even though they couldn't count accurately for the period specified in my question on notice, one number remains valid in their answer, and that is that, under this third-term Liberal government, a record 95,000 people have arrived at our nation's airports and claimed asylum. Under this third-term Liberal government, Australia has seen 95,000 people arrive at our airports and claim asylum. That is at least one number they got right. Well, we assume they got it right. Maybe they will come back and change that, too; I don't know.

Of course, this government does have a track record. I do have a bit of a memory. I remember the omnibus savings bill in 2016. I don't know whether the Minister for Finance remembers that bill. The government introduced that bill in 2016. They had a maths problem in that bill. This was their big omnibus savings bill. On page 5 of that bill, there was a $107 million error. Do you know what the then Treasurer, Scott Morrison—he's got another job now, by the way; he's the Prime Minister. He was the Treasurer then. He called it 'a computational error', making him possibly the first Treasurer in the history of Australia to admit that maths is not his strong suit!

Of course, we do know that, when it comes to managing the budget, this government does have a particular problem managing numbers, because, when we left office in September 2013, net debt was at $175 billion. Net debt today under this third-term Liberal government is $399.1 billion. I'll leave the government to see if they can do the maths to work out how much they have increased net debt. Gross debt in September 2013 was $280 billion. Hazard a guess as to what it is now. If you don't know, don't worry; I can tell you. It's $565 billion. Again, there is a math problem for the government. How much have they increased gross debt under this third-term Liberal government?

We come to the questions that I have asked, and some of them are maths based, so perhaps they had trouble doing the maths. I asked in question 698:

1. How many people made onshore protection claims in the 2018-19 financial year.

Then I asked:

2. In the 2018-19 financial year, how many people made onshore protection claims in the following jurisdictions:

a. New South Wales;

b. Queensland;

c. Victoria;

d. South Australia;

e. Western Australia;

f. Tasmania;

g. the Australian Capital Territory; and

h. the Northern Territory.

Then I went on and asked a number of other questions, including:

3. Can a breakdown be provided of citizenship by country (for the top 10 countries only) :

I would have thought this was information—numbers—that the Department of Home Affairs would have to hand, and the government could have then provided to this Senate. I also note that I asked a number of other questions in question 382—for example:

1. When in 2016—

2016, by the way, is the year they had the omnibus savings bill that had the $107 million computational error in it, but I digress—

did the Minister first become aware of the current surge in asylum seeker applications from citizens of Malaysia and when did the Minister first become aware of the current surge of asylum seeker applications from citizens of China.

2. What actions did the Minister take once he became aware of these surges and when were these actions taken.

Then I went on and asked a few other questions. I asked another maths question again, so perhaps maths really isn't the strong suit of this government:

5. Of the people who have arrived by plane and then applied for asylum since 2014 (inclusive) , what are the current numbers for each of the top five citizenships …

a. at primary stage;

b. at the AAT;

c. at judicial review—

et cetera. It was a range of questions that go to the heart of what this government says is their core strength: securing our nation's borders. They have no problem telling you the number of boats that arrive. They have no problem telling you the number of asylum seeker applications for people who came by boat in the previous five years before they took office. They have a huge problem being straight with the Australian people that, when it comes to asylum seeker applications for people who arrive by aeroplane, we are on track to double the number of people who lodged an asylum claim and came by boat. We are closing in on 100,000 applications—onshore asylum seeker applications—from this government, who trumpet that securing the borders is their top priority and their core expertise.

Let's remember that, because we're an island, yes, we have water borders, but we also have airport borders, and this government created the Department of Home Affairs. When they did that, they brought in Australian Border Force. They brought in the Australian Federal Police. They brought in ASIO, ASIS and all of those agencies under this megadepartment, the Department of Home Affairs, because they and they alone, they claimed, knew how to secure the borders and keep Australians safe. This is what the then Prime Minister—you may remember him; his name is Malcolm Turnbull—said in July 2017:

When it comes to our nation's security, we must stay ahead of the threats against us. There is no room for complacency. There is no room for set and forget.

The current Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, has used the same phrase when describing everything from Australia's foreign policy through to the emergency response for the drought. 'There is no set and forget,' says the Prime Minister, Scott Morrison.

Yet, while there was so much fanfare around the creation of the Department of Home Affairs portfolio, it would seem that 'set and forget' has been the key strategy for both the Prime Minister and the Minister for Home Affairs when it comes to this critical portfolio. After all, how else can you possibly explain that there are more than 200,000 people on bridging visas right now in Australia? That is a massive increase in the number of bridging visas. I might put that as a question on notice and see if that's another math problem the government can solve. What has been the increase, the blowout, in bridging visas? More than 221,000 would-be citizens, permanent residents, are waiting an average of 13 months to have their citizenship applications processed. Let's reflect that when they took over, when we left office, it took about five months to get a citizenship application processed. Here is a maths problem: it now takes 13 months; it used to take five. How many more months has it blown out?