Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship. Why did the Gillard Labor government abandon the Howard government's Pacific solution?

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

I thank Senator Abetz for his question. What we have seen of course is that the opposition appear not to be pursuing their interest in Qantas given the revelations that Mr Hockey was obviously involved from quite early on in the arrangements with Freehills and Qantas.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, on a point of order, there is no relevance remotely to the question in this answer. It is not prologued; it is not prefaced. You should not, with respect, Mr President, allow a minister to flagrantly breach the standing orders and get away with it without pulling him up at once.

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order, Senator Brandis seems to just like the sound of his own voice. The minister is 21 seconds into his answer and Senator Brandis is on his feet making a spurious point of order. I would ask you to rule against Senator Brandis and allow the minister to continue to inform the Senate in response to the question.

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

I am listening very closely to the minister's answer. The minister has still one minute and 39 seconds remaining out of the two minutes in which to answer the question.

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

The government did not pursue the Nauru option, as was previously the position under the conservative government, because it did not work. As an approach to dealing with the processing of people coming to this country by boat, the policy pursued by the previous government saw the overwhelming number of people sent to Nauru end up either in Australia or New Zealand. What we saw as a result of that policy was that there was no effective deterrent whatsoever in the approach that was taken by the previous government, because the people smugglers understood precisely what was going on. Under the previous government's decision to use Nauru, we saw some 1,900 people arriving by boat seeking asylum. Of those that were processed and found to be refugees, 95 per cent ended up being settled in Australia or New Zealand. In other words, Nauru had a 95 per cent failure rate in stopping the boats.

It was a similar story with the TPVs. Over 8,000 people were actually encouraged to jump on a rickety boat in the two years after they were introduced. That was not a deterrent. Many of those people were women and children, and ultimately 90 per cent of those that were granted TPVs— (Time expired)

Honourable senators interjecting—

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

I remind senators that if they wish to debate the answer, the time for doing so is at the end of question time.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Given that Labor now falsely claims the Pacific solution did not work, can the minister tell us how many irregular maritime arrivals there have been since the Gillard Labor government deliberately abandoned the Howard government's Pacific solution?

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

The Leader of the Opposition wishes me to go to the question of the resettlement numbers, saying that we are falsely accusing the previous government. Between 2001 and 2007, 1,322 people were housed at Nauru offshore processing centre. Of those people, 847, or 64 per cent, were ultimately resettled; 474, or 36 per cent, returned home voluntarily; and one person died. Of the 847 people resettled, 802 people, or 95 per cent, ended up in Australia or New Zealand. Australia resettled 573 people, or 68 per cent, and New Zealand resettled 229—

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

Senator Carr, I do draw your attention to the question. Please continue.

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

A number of members of the coalition have in fact made it very clear that Nauru was not a solution. Take Mr Russell Broadbent, for instance. (Time expired)

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. I can understand why the minister does not want to give the chamber and the Australian public the number, because it is 12,942 at last count. Of those irregular maritime arrivals found not to have a genuine refugee claim, how many still remain in Australia?

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

What I can advise the Senate is that some 48 boats have come to Australia this year, which is down on 134 boats from the previous year. In fact, the Malaysian proposition that we put forward had a very big impact in terms of—

Senator Abetz interjecting—

The arrangements we entered into with the Malaysian government, Senator, had a very big impact in deterring the people smugglers and organised criminal syndicates in terms of the number of boats that arrived. So we do know that that was an approach that was working. What we of course have seen as a result of the political manoeuvrings in this parliament is that that option has not been able to be pursued. The government maintains the view that that is an effective way of dealing with this issue. (Time expired)