Senate debates
Thursday, 15 June 2006
Questions without Notice
Migration
2:01 pm
Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
My question is actually directed to Senator Vanstone, the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, on the basis that she is one of the few ministers left. Can the minister finally advise the Senate which of the public pronouncements by the Prime Minister and herself on the rationale for the new migration laws is the current government position? Does the Prime Minister’s statement of 2001—‘We will decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come’—still apply, or does the minister’s announcement this morning on radio that Indonesia is a very important partner in decisions about Australia’s border protection policy supersede the PM’s stance? Can the minister explain why we have gone from a position of the Australian government determining who comes to this country to a position of now accepting Indonesia as a partner in these decisions?
Amanda Vanstone (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
The answer to your first question—‘Do both of these statements stand?’—is yes, they do. The Prime Minister quite clearly said, ‘We will decide who comes here and the circumstances under which they come.’ The government has made a decision about amendments it seeks to make to its migration legislation—and it is the government making that decision. It is making that decision on the basis of its concern to remain strong on border protection and to keep good and friendly relationships with our neighbours—who are indeed, in the region, partners with us in border protection and the detection of people-smuggling. There are two aspects to that. There is simply no inconsistency and no conflict.
We had a significant boatload of asylum seekers arriving onshore, and we obviously regard that as a serious challenge to our border control. It is the first time that we have had a boat of large numbers for a long time. Of course we would process them according to our international commitments but, as a consequence of that arrival, we had a look to see what we could do to further strengthen our border protection.
It is simply not a case of appeasing a foreign government. I make the point I made in here recently when Senator Brown was here when I pointed to the granting of 42 visas to Indonesian West Papuans when we knew very well that the Indonesian government were not going to be happy with it. That had been made very clear. The President of Indonesia had in fact rung up and sought, through the Prime Minister, a commitment that we would not give those visas—and we did. Why did we do that? Because we will live up to our international obligations under the convention. But we are not precluded from then saying, ‘A large boat arrival; we had better look at what other changes we could make.’
Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Senator Chris Evans interjecting—
Amanda Vanstone (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Just as a matter of interest, since the senator opposite, Senator Evans, is so surprised at the concept of working with Indonesia, I will take him back to comments made in 2001 by his now leader. Mr Beazley said then:
Australia can only stop the flood of boats by fixing our relationship with Indonesia. A real solution must be found in Jakarta.
Clearly, at the time, Mr Beazley understood that border protection and people-smuggling issues require serious cooperation. In fact, earlier on the same day, the leader apparently went into a radio station and said:
In the end, the only solution to the problem we now confront resides around the relationship that we have with Indonesia and the attitudes that develop in this region to illegal people-smuggling.
And he went on to say:
What we need to do is exercise a bit of leadership, because we want circumstances where people who come here illegally go back to the point they came from and get processed there.
Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Corporate Governance and Responsibility) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Senator Wong interjecting—
Amanda Vanstone (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
That is what Mr Beazley said. He also said:
That is the true disincentive for people coming down in the way in which they have been doing. Everything else has been tried. Let’s try that.
There might be some points of difference about some issues associated with this matter, but there is no point of difference on this: that Mr Beazley clearly understood in 2001—or said he understood—that our relationship with Indonesia was important. He now seeks to say that he would be a good alternative Prime Minister but he will take no notice of what Indonesia says. You cannot have it both ways. (Time expired)
Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I note that the contradictions highlighted did not seem to get explained by that answer. But the key question, Minister, is: what decisions are going to be made as a result of discussions with your backbench, who seem to be in open revolt? Will you then have to take whatever position they force upon you back to the Indonesian government before you can come into this parliament and introduce amended laws?
Amanda Vanstone (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I thank the senator for his question—coming from a party that does not allow freedom of opinion and freedom of discussion. I can understand the concept of members being able to disagree amongst themselves and thrash it out openly—
Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
You’re thrashing! Calm down.
Amanda Vanstone (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
without getting beaten up in the suburbs of Sydney, so badly that you have to be put into hospital, which is what happened under the previous Labor union movement.
Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Minchin has been beating you up for years.
Amanda Vanstone (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
That is what happens. They get beaten up and put into hospital.
Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Nick Minchin has been beating you up for years—successfully.
Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Order! Senator Evans, three times I have asked you to come to order. I will not ask you again. And I remind both ministers and honourable senators that ministers, when answering questions, should address their answers through the chair and senators, when asking questions, should address their questions through the chair.
Amanda Vanstone (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I am pleased to be a member of a party that does not have factional people being beaten up in the suburbs of Sydney so badly that they have to be put into hospital.
George Campbell (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
Senator George Campbell! Senator Vanstone, you have 15 seconds left.
Amanda Vanstone (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source
I will have the discussions with my colleagues and I will keep those discussions between myself, the Prime Minister and them. And, when we come to the end of those discussions, no doubt they will be made public.