David Van (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

The consequence of the medevac law has been nothing more than to dismantle the powers of the federal government to determine who comes to Australia—yes, to allow Labor to loosen Australia's border protection policies. I repeat once again: to allow Labor to loosen Australia's border protection policies.

As Minister Dutton explained in his second reading speech, there was never any need for the medevac bill. Prior to the February amendments, the government's existing powers were sufficiently abundant and responsible in meeting the genuine medical needs of offshore detainees—that is, should they require to be sent to Australia for specialist treatment or care, they got it. We on this side agree that those requiring medical treatment should be transferred to ensure they receive the medical care that they need, and this is the system that was in place before medevac existed. The existing transfer provisions worked effectively. They worked well. That is because they remained under the control of the government, providing for responsible border control and the orderly entry to and exit from this country.

The difference between the existing provisions and medevac is that now the government has significantly less powers to prevent the transfer of people with bad character. The medevac law took that control, and responsibility, out of an elected and accountable government's control and discretion, and placed it blindly into the hands of unelected and unaccountable doctors. The oddest aspect of the bill that Labor and the Greens passed is that those doctors don't even need to see the patient. They don't even need to be in the same state! Now wait: what if two doctors decide to approve the transfer simply to make a political point? Who holds them to account? Not the voters of Australia. What if a transferee commits a horrendous crime while here? Who will hold the doctors to account then? Why wasn't there judicial oversight built into their bill?

What is also important to note is that, as of mid-October, of the 135 people transferred to Australia, five refused medical treatment of some kind, including the treatment for which they were transferred in the first place; 40 have refused induction chest X-rays or blood tests on arrival; and only 10 per cent were hospitalised. As Senator Keneally herself has pointed out during her contribution to this bill, the government already continues to transfer people who require medical attention. Transferees requiring medical attention that is not available in a regional-processing country will be able to be transferred to a third country, or indeed Australia, for assessment or treatment.

What the senator does not acknowledge is that, worryingly, due to the limited nature of the character and security refusal grounds under Labor's medevac law, six people who have been brought to Australia have character and security concerns. There are currently people in PNG and Nauru who are charged with crimes against children, who are being investigated for the supply of illicit drugs or who have posted terror related information online. Under the medevac law, the government has no discretion to prevent the transfer to Australia of those individuals.

When those opposite say the medevac bill is compassionate, they would be correct in saying that this is a compassionate bill that favours people of questionable character. It is evident that medevac was never more than a pathway for Labor and the Greens to circumvent the strong but fair border control laws of the coalition government. Further, it goes to prove the point that this law was, from its inception, a political sham. Medevac was nothing more than sheer political mob rule and opportunism by Labor and the Greens. Those opposite have even acknowledged that transferees requiring medical treatment will be transferred.

The second part to this bill is vital in order to overturn the chaos and confusion created as a result of the amendment to the Migration Act 1958. The bill will rectify the act to ensure that the transferees that came out to Australia under Labor's medevac law can and will be sent back to a regional processing country once their medical treatment in Australia has been completed.

Labor's medevac law failed to provide a mechanism to return or remove transitory persons brought to Australia under section 198C of the Migration Act to a regional processing country. This is a deliberate act to undermine our secure borders. Yet under section 198B transitory persons are expected to return to a regional processing country once they no longer need to be in Australia for the purpose for which they claim. This government's bill will rectify the inconsistency to close any legal loophole allowing transferees the right to stay in Australia indefinitely. But one can only wonder if this was actually an oversight, or yet another way for Labor and the Greens to intentionally weaken Australia's border protection policies, effectively removing the ability of the government to decide who comes to, or stays in, Australia.

The purpose behind the government's repeal bill is simple. It is based on principles of good governance and ensuring the preservation of national sovereignty. It is imperative for the safety and security of all Australians that we as a government are able to determine who enters this country and whether or not individuals should remain within our borders permanently. Any law that removes the government's ultimate discretion to decide who enters and remains in Australia fundamentally undermines our strong, effective border protection policies. Strong border protection has always been a hallmark of coalition governments. Any moves to repudiate our commitment to border protection must be rectified. The Australian people have emphatically voted for the coalition's policy of strong and sovereign border control, and that is what this government will deliver.

When it comes to matters of border security, Labor cannot be trusted. Prior to the last election, it was clear to the Australian people that Labor's misguided policy on border protection and asylum seekers would be the hallmark of a Shorten-led government. It was a pre-election glimpse of what was to come. And it was overwhelmingly rejected. Unless Labor votes with this side of the chamber, it is safe to assume that any government led by the member for Grayndler would do the same. Thankfully, the voters of Australia rejected this in May.

Labor has consistently demonstrated that it cannot manage the protection of our borders. We only have to look back to the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd years to see what a catastrophic failure the government created on 'stopping the boats'. Labor's policies instead resulted in an unprecedented influx of illegal boat arrivals to our shores and over 1,200 deaths at sea. In case you need it, here is a reminder of what happened under Labor: 50,000 people arrived on over 800 boats, over 8,000 children were put into detention, 17 onshore detention centres and two regional processing centres were opened, and our border protection budget blew out by $16 billion.

I ask the question: where is the compassion and morality in giving false hope to asylum seekers by encouraging them to embark on a dangerous or, even worse, deadly journey across treacherous seas in ramshackle, unseaworthy boats? The people-smuggling trade, which flourished under the policies of the last Labor government, resulted in numerous devastating drowning deaths at sea on journeys to Australia. This is not compassion. This is not good government. This isn't even common sense. Good government means making the tough decisions that are the right decisions.

It is in Australia's national interest that this bill be passed. We must never return to Labor's policies, which resulted in chaos at our border, deaths at sea and children in detention. Under Operation Sovereign Borders, we have taken back control of our borders from the people smugglers. We are proud of our record, which speaks in stark contrast to Labor's, because we can say that there have been zero deaths at sea, we have closed 17 detention centres and we have removed all children from detention and taken them off Manus and Nauru. We have also increased the intake under our humanitarian program.

If Labor were serious about protecting our borders and restoring the right of the government to control who comes to Australia, medevac never would have existed in the first place. How many elections must they lose on this issue before they accept what Australians want in regard to border security? I note that we now hear Labor representatives claim that each of their policies is up for debate and revision since their May election loss. Well, here is a key opportunity for Labor to revise a crucial policy failure—namely, medevac.

Let's examine what some of those opposite, and their colleagues in the other place, have said since the election—since their change of heart in their policies, since everything is on the table. In June this year, Senator Keneally, on the ABC's AM program, said: 'Let's be fundamentally clear that Labor stands with the government when it comes to keeping our borders secure.' Wow! I think that bears repeating: 'Let's be fundamentally clear that Labor stands with the government when it comes to keeping our borders secure.' Given that those opposite have been advertising their change of heart, shouldn't they consider changing their position on medevac? Remember, this is a bill that was passed with Labor's support. The former member for Wentworth couldn't have done it without those opposite. It was their votes, not hers, that were critical to the passage of medevac through these chambers.

Similarly, Senator Keneally said in July, in The Australian, that Labor fully supports boat turnbacks. Does this mark a change of heart for her, because, in 2015, she said that she 'dislikes the option of boat turnbacks'? If Senator Keneally dislikes turnbacks, and she's had a change of heart since the election, why isn't she supporting the government's legislation here and now? The answer is simple. You can't trust Labor on borders, and you have never been able to. They openly flip-flop.

During his parliamentary career, the Leader of the Opposition has openly protested against the government's border policies, but thinks that he can show up to chat with Alan Jones and say he supports the current policies. Where is he on this? Is his heart really in it? Labor has said that all policies are up for review, but we need to examine the Leader of the Opposition's real feelings on this to understand whether Labor says what it means. At the 2015 ALP conference, the member for Grayndler, at the time the opposition leader-in-waiting, voted against boat turnbacks. Do you know why, Madam Acting Deputy President Polley? It speaks to the heart of Labor's gutlessness when it comes to standing up for our borders. Mr Albanese voted against boat turnbacks because, as he said, 'I couldn't ask someone to do something that I couldn't see myself doing.' The Leader of the Opposition, someone who himself has aspirations to one day lead our country, cannot see himself undertaking boat turnbacks. So which is it? Does he support strong borders or not?

The truth is that medevac was never about genuine concern for the medical needs of the transferees. These needs were more than adequately met under the existing system. It was about trawling for Green voters prior to an election they were desperately, hungrily, wanting to win. Medevac is about circumventing Australian law and security measures to try and get around the government's functioning and successful border control and asylum-seeker policies.

The coalition has a clear, fair and assured policy on border protection. Yes, you can call it strong, but it has a greater compassion and respect for human rights than the trumped-up, gesture politics played by our opponents. Nothing epitomises this more than the lies told by the supporters of Labor's medevac legislation. It's been demonstrated to be a scam and the mess it was always destined to be. Yet again, it's all in the name of self-aggrandising, compassion-and-human-rights-centred rhetoric, righteously proffered by Labor and the Greens. This bill is about ensuring that those who genuinely require medical treatment will be able to access it, whilst also ensuring that those of bad character are not transferred to Australia or allowed to stay here. I therefore urge the Senate to support this crucial repeal bill.