Christopher Back (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, Senator Carr. I refer the minister to the government's proposal to allow offshore processing in a location to be determined by the government of the day, regardless of its status as a signatory to the UN convention. Does the minister agree that the Labor government has totally abrogated and walked away from its obligations under the UNHCR convention?

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government's very, very clear view is that the arrangements that we have entered into are consistent with our international obligations under the refugee convention. They are entirely appropriate to the government's longstanding respect for human rights. These are actions which are about—

Honourable Senators:

Honourable senators interjecting—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Carr, just resume your seat. If people want to chew up question time with interjections that are disorderly then that is their choice.

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The arrangements that the government has entered into with the government of Malaysia are about sending a very clear message to the people-smuggling syndicates. This is about stopping the boats by encouraging people to understand precisely what Australia's attitude is in regard to the treatment of people who are using this trade, which we think is very dangerous. When you talk about human rights, encouraging people to get on these boats is totally inconsistent with that. Australia is actually increasing its humanitarian intake as a result of these arrangements. It is about improving the treatment of refugees throughout the region. It is, in the government's view, a contribution to a regional solution to ensure that we are able to deal effectively with the question of refugees.

On the other hand, the opposition's position is to use Nauru, which is a very expensive option that has a demonstrated record of failure. In regard to their attitude on TPVs, it saw a situation where they actually encouraged people to get on rickety boats and risk their lives. It failed as a policy. So the government is clear in its view that, in regard to our human rights obligations, the Malaysian proposition is one that ought to be supported.

Christopher Back (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I refer to the government's statement that their proposed amendments to the Migration Act deliver on the basic tenets of the UN convention and, when coupled with the transfer agreement between Australia and Malaysia, provide ample protection for the rights of asylum seekers. As clause 16 of the transfer agreement expressly declares it to not be legally binding, upon what basis does the government make these claims?

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The basis on which the government makes the claims is that it is an agreement with the government of Malaysia. That agreement is quite explicit about the—

Honourable Senators:

Honourable senators interjecting—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Carr, just resume your seat. If senators want to chew up question time with interjections then that is the way we will proceed. If you wish to debate the issue, debate it after three o'clock.

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is an agreement that the Australian government—

Senator Brandis interjecting—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Carr, just resume your seat. This is one way to chew up question time.

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is an agreement the Australian government has entered into with the government of Malaysia. I find it extraordinary that the opposition are seeking to denigrate the government of Malaysia and the people of Malaysia with this constant harping on propositions which they know are totally inconsistent with the terms of the agreement itself. We have the UNHCR being directly involved in the implementation of these arrangements and are providing an opportunity for an additional 4,000 resettlement places in Australia. The UNHCR has been actively engaged in this process and sees it as a very positive improvement on the position prior to which the agreement was struck. (Time expired)

Christopher Back (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Given that the Prime Minister has categorically stated that she would rule out anywhere that is not a signatory to the refugee convention, doesn't the government's proposed amendments to the Migration Act violate the Prime Minister's own commitment? Minister, why does the Prime Minister want a legislative excuse to break yet another promise?

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The answer to that proposition is no. This is an arrangement whereby, in the Prime Minister's view, we are able to implement our commitments to human rights under the refugee convention. The Prime Minister has made it very clear on numerous occasions that the transfer arrangement is a bilateral agreement between the Australian and Malaysian governments and is about ensuring the opportunity for an increased 4,000 resettlement places in Australia. This agreement sets out quite clearly the obligations of both countries and it is consistent with our undertakings to the human rights and refugee conventions.