Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I inform the Senate that, at 8.30 am today, four proposals were received in accordance with standing order 75. The question of which proposal would be submitted to the Senate was determined by lot. As a result, I inform the Senate that the following letter has been received from Senator McKim:

Pursuant to Standing Order 75, I propose the following matter of public importance be submitted to the Senate for discussion:

The inhumanity and cruelty of Australia's offshore detention system, and the need to evacuate to Australia the men, women and children detained on Manus Island and Nauru.

Is the proposal supported?

More than the number of senators required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

I understand that informal arrangements have been made to allocate specific times to each of the speakers in today's debate. With the concurrence of the Senate, I shall ask the clerks to set the clock accordingly.

Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Despite having been repeatedly asked not to bring the facts about Manus Island and Nauru into this chamber, I have continued to do that. The Australian Greens have continued to do that, and I want to do it again today.

It is now more than five years since the Australian Labor Party reopened the Manus Island detention centre and the Nauru detention centre, and more than four long years since the Abbott government began turning around desperate people at sea, abusing their human rights, trampling on their freedoms and liberties, and exiling them, as Australia's political prisoners, to Manus Island and Nauru. Amnesty International has described the treatment of some of these refugees and people seeking asylum as tantamount to torture, and the Australian Greens agree with that assessment. We see the sick pleasure that some coalition senators, including the newly minted Senator Molan, one of the authors of the disgraceful offshore detention regime, seem to draw from the misery they are inflicting on innocent men, women and children in detention.

But it is the Australian Labor Party's cowardice on this issue that has given the coalition a blank cheque for the unspeakable cruelty it is perpetrating on refugees and people seeking asylum. In fact, if the Labor Party had shown an ounce of decency on this issue at any time in the last five years, the situation would not have deteriorated into the human rights calamity that it is today. The people of Australia are heartsick and disgusted at what is being done in their name, and millions of them are demanding that the situation be resolved.

Despite years of ineffective hand-wringing from some members in the Australian Labor Party, that party's policy position has only hardened and solidified—just like their hearts. Their motivation is actually not relevant here. Remember, it was Kevin Rudd who declared that no person who arrived by boat would resettle in Australia, and that remains the case today. How can the Australian Labor Party continue to sit on their collective hands after all that they have seen and all that has been revealed in this chamber and in innumerable Senate inquiries championed by the Australian Greens?

The ALP candidate for Batman, Ms Ged Kearney, has said recently that she accepted the reality of Labor's policy despite previously speaking out against it. Well, what she calls an 'acceptance of reality' we call a 'denial of humanity'. It's a retreat into cowardice. It puts the safety and protection of thousands of innocent men, women and children behind base political priorities. Because despite Ged Kearney and other Labor members muttering reasonable and nice words about the issue, the only thing that actually matters is how they vote in this place. It's votes in the parliament that determine the government. It's votes in the parliament that determine our laws. And it is votes in the parliament that can evacuate Manus Island and Nauru and bring those innocent people here to Australia.

But they won't vote for that because they're beholden to the ALP's factional machine. Despite all the horrors and despite all the cruelty that we've seen, Labor has only moved further away from decency on this issue. They repeatedly refuse to support any efforts in here to evacuate the men, women and children from Manus Island and Nauru and bring them here to safety and freedom in Australia. Ms Kearney has confirmed she's going to line up with Peter Dutton; she's going to line up with the LNP to keep people locked up on Manus Island and Nauru.

People in offshore detention cannot afford to wait for this mythical change from within the Australian Labor Party, and reassuring words offer them no hope whatsoever. People will not be freed from Manus Island or Nauru by electing hand-wringers from the Australian Labor Party. The only way to green up the ALP is to vote Green. It's the only language the Labor Party understands. If we are going to close the camps and bring those innocent people—those desperate people, who only want two things: freedom and safety—to Australia, we need votes in this parliament now. We need people elected to this parliament who are prepared not just to talk the talk but to walk the walk, and the only way that we are going to get that is to elect more MPs who will vote to evacuate Manus Island and Nauru, and who will vote to end the horrors of offshore detention. In Batman, that can only mean a vote for the Greens.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Excuse me, Madam Acting Deputy President, I've got to stop laughing. Can I say to the previous speaker: well, what a refreshingly different speech. In fact, I almost think it might be a speech that Senator McKim copied from me because, for years, I've been saying, 'Don't blame the coalition,' as Senator McKim always does, 'blame the people who set it up, the Labor Party.' Of course, Senator McKim's never understood that point until Batman comes along. The rank hypocrisy of the Greens was shown in that speech supposedly concerned about people they call distressed and disadvantaged on Manus and Nauru, but there was not a word about them, only about the Batman by-election and the huge fight they're having with the Labor Party for that particular seat. I cannot believe that any party claiming any responsibility or honesty could, for years, have sided with the Labor Party.

You'll recall, Madam Acting Deputy President Kitching, that it was the Greens that kept in power the Labor Party, which set up Manus and Nauru. Congratulations, Senator McKim—when you said you were going to deliver some facts, I laughed audibly—you did deliver some facts, but it is the first time you have ever, ever, ever accepted the reality: it was the Labor Party who started Nauru and Manus and they were supported by the Greens political party. The Greens political party come with dirty hands to this debate and always have.

I can only simply chuckle to myself how this speech supposedly on humanitarian efforts in Nauru and Manus turned entirely on the Batman by-election, with no pretence made. Senator McKim, in one of his rare honest speeches, admitted that it was all about voting Green in the Batman by-election. One of the great benefits for me is that I don't have to vote in Batman—because I just don't know who I could vote for if my party didn't stand a candidate.

On the basis that this might have been a sensible debate about Australia's migration policy over the years, I did want to mention some real facts: under the Labor government, supported by the Greens' political party—it was a Labor-Greens alliance, you might remember—50,000 people arrived on over 800 boats; there were 1,200 deaths that we know of; over 8,000 illegal migration arrivals—children—were detained while Labor and the Greens were in power; and, at the height of the policy failure of the Labor and the Greens' political parties at that time, there were 10,201 people held in detention, including 1,992 children—

John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Ten thousand?

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, 10,000, and almost 2,000 children. They were forced to open 17 new detention centres at huge cost to the Australian taxpayer to deal with the influx of these illegal arrivals, and an $11 billion border protection blowout happened under the Labor-Greens policy on illegal migration arrivals. That all changed from the Howard days, when there were no children in detention and, since the advent of a coalition government, all of those children have been taken out of detention. Mind you, as the coalition was getting rid of all those children, the Human Rights Commission and Professor Triggs decided they would have an inquiry into the children in detention. They didn't bother at the height of Labor's failures and the Labor-Greens failures, when there were almost 2,000 children in detention. When the coalition had got that down to about a thousand—now it is zero—the Human Rights Commission started to have this big inquiry into children in detention. They didn't bother when the Labor-Greens policy had put them all there.

I'm delighted that, since the advent of the coalition government, the illegal arrivals have stopped completely. There's not been one IMA boat into Australian waters in that time. That has meant that there have been no deaths at sea. It also means that the people smugglers who made a fortune out of bringing in IMAs to our country have all but gone out of business. The people smugglers knew their business. The would-be illegal immigrants to Australia paid a lot of money to fly from wherever to Malaysia or Indonesia. They then paid the people smugglers at least $15,000 per person—they weren't poor people—to try and come into Australia illegally.

Australia and Australians have nothing to be ashamed of when it comes to our refugee policy. Per capita, we are up there amongst the most generous in the world. We actually look after genuine refugees who wait for years in squalid camps around the world, waiting for their turn to get to the promised land of Australia, and we take in about 15,000 each and every year. But these people that the Greens support, and the people smugglers that apparently the Greens support, were jumping the queue, meaning those in the squalid camps overseas were left to wait another year for their chance to reach utopia.

All of this was supported by the Greens political party, who now want the people of Batman to think that they are the only ones that are pure as far as this is concerned. I would love to have a look at the political donations to the Greens political party one day in detail and see the source from overseas of some of their support, because I do know this: the people smugglers have all but been put out of business, and it's cost millions and millions of dollars to their business model. Their only supporters, their real supporters in Australia, have been the Greens political party. One always wonders whether the people smugglers are not rewarding those who help their business model in Australia.

The Labor Party is equally guilty. But it was the Labor government—with Greens support, I emphasise—who did actually return to the Howard-years solution by saying to people, 'You might try to get to Australia, but you're not going to end up here.' That has stopped those jumping the queue. It's allowed us to take genuine refugees from the squalid refugee camps right around the world and bring them into our country, where they are welcome. We take more per capita than any other country in the world. And, most importantly, we don't have at least 1,200 people—that is the number that we know of—drowning at sea. The Labor Party returned to the Howard government solution. They didn't do terribly well with it, but, with the change of government to the coalition government, we have stopped the boats and stopped those deaths at sea. For some reason, the Greens don't seem to think that's good policy.

We do what we said we'd do. Those people on Manus and Nauru are well treated and they are given every assistance—better assistance than many Australian disadvantaged people. They are looked after, but they know they will never come into Australia while this government is here. Their only hope is for the Greens and the Labor Party to get back into power. Then they and the people smugglers— (Time expired)

Alex Gallacher (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's really important to note at the outset that the factual position of the Labor Party was contained in a motion on 14 November 2017 carried by 31 votes to 28 in this chamber. That motion clearly and succinctly set out the position of the Australian Labor Party. It reads:

(a) acknowledges the failure of the Abbott-Turnbull Government to manage offshore processing arrangements and secure other third country resettlement arrangements for eligible refugees;

(b) notes the United States of America refugee resettlement agreement will resettle up to 1250 eligible refugees from Manus Island and Nauru but that some eligible refugees will miss out on the opportunity to resettle in America;

(c) acknowledges that former Prime Minister Julia Gillard announced an agreement with Prime Minister John Key on 9 February 2013 at the annual Australia-New Zealand Leaders' meeting that:

  (i) New Zealand would resettle 150 refugees annually from Australia, including refugees from Manus Island and Nauru, and

  (ii) the first refugees would be resettled in 2014;

(d) notes that, if former Prime Minister Tony Abbott had not withdrawn from the agreement, as many as 600 refugees would have been resettled in New Zealand by now;

(e) acknowledges the inquiry and report of the Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee, Serious allegations of abuse, self-harm and neglect of asylum seekers in relation to the Nauru Regional Processing Centre, and any like allegations in relation to the Manus, and in particular, recommendation 7: 'The committee recommends that the Australian Government give serious consideration to all resettlement offers it receives, including the Government of New Zealand's offer to resettle refugees from Papua New Guinea and the Republic of Nauru. Further, if particular resettlement offers are considered unsuitable, the Government should clearly outline the reasons';

(f) notes that New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has renewed the offer to Australia to resettle 150 refugees from Manus Island and Nauru;

…   …   …

(h) calls on the Turnbull Government to immediately accept New Zealand's offer to resettle refugees from Manus Island and Nauru and begin negotiating appropriate conditions, similar to the United States refugee resettlement agreement, to ensure people smugglers do not exploit vulnerable people.

So our position is exceedingly clear. It was carried as a resolution of this chamber as late as November of 2017.

We can go around and around this argument as many times as you like—and Senator Macdonald and others can regurgitate their version of history and the failures of previous government—but the simple reality is that you've had five years in office and we have had a continual problem in this area. Really, there are two ways that we can sort this out. We can resettle them somewhere else or we can leave them as they are, in circumstances which—whilst Senator Macdonald will contest—don't appear to be ideal, or at the very least do not appear to be conducive to proper outcomes for mental health and the like. There can be many reasons for that. You can say it's the Greens party's problem for whipping up their expectations, but the reality is that I don't think the situation in Manus Island and Nauru has contributed to Australia's international reputation.

I had a very close look at the situation in Nauru when I chaired the inquiry into the allegations over there, and it was very, very clear that there were circumstances which challenge propriety, governance and fair play. When the government of Nauru throws out the Australian Federal Police representative for some advice they didn't welcome, when a magistrate has his visa removed for some advice that the government of Nauru didn't welcome and when we continue to pour unaudited quantities of money into Nauru, it is simply not good enough. We know—and there has been some media speculation and actual evidence on this—that we can spend up to $600,000 or $700,000 on each one of these people, keeping them in what are allegedly pretty miserable conditions.

Labor believes in strong borders. We believe in offshore processing. The regional settlement was the initiative of the Labor government. We believe in boats being turned back where it is safe to do so because it does save lives. We all watch the news. I have travelled through Italy and I have travelled through Europe, and people are making that perilous journey on unsafe boats. The Italian coastguard is doing an exemplary job saving people's lives. We know that this is an international economic problem.

I do applaud Senator Macdonald's comments about the great work Australia has done with the humanitarian intake. Per capita, we are probably one of the best in the world at that. We do it exceedingly well. I have travelled to Mount Gambier and been at citizenship ceremonies where the Karen refugee community in that area—all speaking English, all working and their kids excelling at school—have actually been absorbed into a regional community area with tremendous success. In the suburb I live in, the Afghani Hazara community have revitalised half a kilometre of Prospect Road with their business acumen and investment. They are doing great things. So we all acknowledge that refugees come here and contribute, but there has to be a process by which they come here and contribute, and people smugglers shouldn't be part of that process. We just don't accept that you should be able to fly, buy a ticket or come in on a boat.

We both have this problem. Ironically, as I have said here before, it's been on the agenda since 1 July 2011, I think the first day I was here. Senator Cash, on this side of the chamber, was articulating well what her view of the world was—sometimes a little shrilly, but she definitely put her point of view forward strongly. What we need to do here is resolve this. I don't think it's going to be resolved like an impasse at chess, where, 'Unless you go back to Iran,' who won't take you, 'you're not coming this way.' We have an offer from New Zealand, we have an offer from the United States and we have offers from other parts of the region. The government needs to be more proactive and diligent, and resolve this issue.

I accept the fact that we never want to have a resurrection of the boats. No-one wants to go through that awful tragedy off Christmas Island. There are people in this parliament who contributed in that inquiry who are still affected by that evidence. So we don't resile from the fact this is a really difficult issue for the parliament as a whole, but I think it is about time that all of the parties in this place tried to get common ground. We shouldn't be seeking the things that keep us apart; we should be looking for the things that bring us together and get closer to resolving this issue, whether it's getting the Trump administration to quicken the process and those genuine refugees being allowed to resettle in the United States and get on with their lives, or in New Zealand and get on with their lives. I think the hard-edged political factors in this are not conducive to good people outcomes.

I really don't think it is relevant to mention the electorate of Batman as some sort of panacea for this. If we do get a successful candidate for the Greens party in Batman, that will be the wish of the people of Batman. But it's not going to resolve anything in here. It is not going to resolve anything in here; it may bring another voice to their side of the table, but if that's a voice of disunity or of noncooperation and not trying to work through the problems and get resolution, then that's not really what should be promulgated by Senator McKim and his party. Electing one Greens person in Batman will not do one iota for resolution for people who are struggling to find resolution in Manus Island and or Nauru.

What we do need is a more collegiate effort in the parliament to get both sides—all sides; the four sides in this argument—to put together a genuine Australian position that restores our international reputation to where it should be: at the absolute peak. We have done this really well in the past. We have done humanitarian stuff really well in the past, and the cooperation that's been exhibited by Indonesia and others in these areas is exemplary. We should double our efforts in those areas. We should resolve this problem and take these people; it is a real stain on our reputation.

Janet Rice (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am continually astounded by the depth of the depravity and inhumanity of this government in its treatment of the most vulnerable people: refugees and people seeking asylum. And the justification for this cruelty, such as we just heard from Senator Macdonald, is a stain on our country. These are our fellow humans. They are simply seeking safety and a future for their families. It is shameful and it has gone on for far too long. Of course, it's not just the government that should be ashamed. We've just heard Senator Gallacher be an apologist for ongoing, indefinite incarceration of asylum seekers on the offshore hellholes of Manus Island and Nauru. The Labor Party must also recognise its key role in this. The Labor Party and the government are equally responsible for the cruelty and inhumanity of those offshore camps.

In the face of this cruelty and bigotry there are, however, some windows of hope. In my home state of Victoria people are undertaking determined, hopeful actions, in the face of this regime, to drive change and signal Australia's true values of care and compassion. Both major parties should take heed. Victorians are exercising their voices, and they'll continue to do so at the ballot box. One local council, the City of Darebin, which lies within the federal seat of Batman, has fearlessly demonstrated its support for refugees and asylum seekers. In December last year, council resolved to write to the Prime Minister to express concern regarding the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Australia's offshore detention camps. Mayor Kim Le Cerf stated that all levels of government must meet their humanitarian obligations to support asylum seekers and refugees. She called on the federal government to close the offshore detention camps on Manus Island and Nauru and immediately bring the refugees and asylum seekers to Australia for resettlement. I also note that Darebin is a refugee welcome zone, where refugees successfully settle and receive support in the community, and that Darebin council is a signatory to the joint statement on asylum seekers by Victorian local governments. There are many other Victorian councils and community groups that are providing leadership, humanity and a vision for a welcoming Australia; who are reflecting the values of their community and the wishes of ordinary Australians that refugees and asylum seekers be treated with compassion. I commend them all. It makes me proud to be a Victorian.

Both major parties should heed these community voices. I know a lot of good former Labor supporters who cannot abide the current parliamentary party's continued support for the fear based, cruel regime we have in place, so I say to my Labor colleagues in this place: there is always room to recognise these humanitarian options, but until you do Australians will struggle to believe that you are ever true to your purported values of fairness and equality. In a few short weeks the residents of the Batman electorate will get the chance to send a strong message to the Labor Party that they want action—no more talk, no more lip service, no more pussyfooting around on refugees. Labor talk tall on refugees and asylum seekers but in the end they always fall into lock step with the cruel policies of this government in a race to the bottom. The likely Labor candidate for Batman, Ged Kearney, tells us she's progressive. She tells us she will represent the people of Batman. She tells us she's a lifelong supporter of refugees and asylum seekers. Indeed, I commend her work and her previous advocacy. But since becoming the likely Labor candidate she's already fallen into line with party policy. She now says Labor's position on boat turnbacks and offshore detention has been adopted at the party's national conference and 'as a candidate and hopefully member of the Labor caucus, that's a reality I accept.' Well, that's not good enough. 'A lifelong advocate for refugees,' she says. 'That's the reality I accept'—a reality of cruelty, inhumanity and indefinite detention in these offshore hellholes. That's not a reality that the people of Batman accept, and it's not a reality that Alex Bhathal, the Greens candidate for Batman, accepts.

When you're given the honour of being an MP or a senator, what matters is how you vote, not your supposed lifelong advocacy for refugees and asylum seekers, not how much you say you're going to change the party from within and not what realities you accept. What matters is how you vote. And the people of Batman deserve someone who believes that how they vote matters. Alex Bhathal is a lifelong advocate for refugees and asylum seekers. She will vote, as the member for Batman, to end the cruelty of offshore hellholes, she will vote to end boat turnbacks and she will vote to end indefinite incarceration, because Alex Bhathal knows that what matters to the people of Batman is how she votes in the parliament as their representative. I have hope for a day when this cruel, inhumane, secretive and, frankly, globally shameful treatment of refugees and asylum seekers will end. We must never stop highlighting its horrific impact on people. Australian community members won't be silent, and the Greens won't be silent, because the current cruel and inhumane asylum seeker and refugee policies are not a reality that the Greens accept.

Jim Molan (NSW, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Again, this is not my first speech. I'm rising to speak to oppose the matter of public interest that's been addressed by a number of speakers before me, and I remind the Senate that the title of the MPI that we're looking at today is:

The inhumanity and cruelty of Australia's offshore detention system and the need to evacuate to Australia the men, women and children detained on Manus Island and Nauru.

That's extraordinarily emotive language—'inhumanity' and 'cruelty'. When I read it, I wondered where I'd heard it before. I don't have to go back very far in my extraordinary political career to remember where I have heard it before, because yesterday someone called McKim—I'm not too sure whether it's our McKim or any McKim—tweeted a tweet against me, calling me a racist first, which I take very, very seriously.

Cory Bernardi (SA, Australian Conservatives) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Molan, will you please resume your seat for a moment. Senator McKim, what's your point of order?

Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My point of order is the respectful addressing of senators in this place.

Cory Bernardi (SA, Australian Conservatives) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, I was listening intently. Resume your seat, Senator McKim. Senator Molan was referring to a tweet from an individual named McKim, and he said he doesn't know whether it was the McKim in the Senate or another. The point is he was referring to the information at hand. There is no point of order. Resume your seat.

Senator McKim interjecting—

Is there another point of order?

Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes.

Cory Bernardi (SA, Australian Conservatives) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What's this one?

Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The tweet was sent from the official Senator McKim account, and it is identified—

Cory Bernardi (SA, Australian Conservatives) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Resume your seat, Senator McKim. I've made the ruling. The ruling is consistent with the standing orders. Senator Molan.

Jim Molan (NSW, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator McKim because he's clarified that point. He goes on and brags about the cruelty of offshore detention and he says that I revel in trampling rights and freedoms.

We all remember the situation, unfortunately, because it's not that long ago. We've been through this a number of times before. People will remember the Howard years. They'll remember Minister Philip Ruddock. They'll remember the Tampa incident and the involvement of the military in that. They'll remember offshore processing. They'll remember Christmas Island and they'll remember John Howard, who said that we decide who comes to this country and how they come to this country. And we did decide, fundamentally, because about 70 per cent of the people supported that decision. We did decide that, and the way that we decided was that we emphasised that, to come to Australia, you had to come in through a legal entry port. The method of arrival can be illegal even if you then claim refugee status. Of course, that was the reason that we used the term 'illegal maritime arrival' or its abbreviation 'IMA'. It was quite a legitimate abbreviation and quite properly used because their method of arrival was illegal and that's what it stands for. It stands for 'illegal maritime arrival'.

When Kevin Rudd arrived, he claimed that he would maintain John Howard's border policy and defence policies. As Prime Minister, he formed a committee to actually do something. Yes, committees are great for policy, but rarely are they any good for doing things. As a result of this, he failed to do anything with 15 or 16 government departments and agencies working through a committee, none of whom had ultimate responsibility and none of whom worked in accordance with management 101. It was guaranteed to fail from day one. The actions that that government took just made the situation worse.

It was roughly at this stage that I became involved in Operation Sovereign Borders. At that stage, I was assisting the then opposition with defence policy. The Rudd-Gillard-Rudd government had, during its period of time in government, been absolutely appalling on defence. It was a legitimate function for someone with some defence knowledge to actually try to assist the opposition to oppose them. The Rudd-Gillard-Rudd government saw the Defence Force as an ATM and drove down defence spending from two per cent to 1.6 per cent. They had no ships and no subs but were very good at pink batts and school halls!

The greatest thing we saw was the arrival of a consolidated and logical management 101 based technique for actually solving this extraordinary problem. Minister Morrison at the time was good enough to call me a co-author of Operation Sovereign Borders—something I am very, very proud of. But I suspect, in fact, that there were about four co-authors of Operation Sovereign Borders, so it's not an honour that I have to myself. Why did all this occur? After everything that the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd government did had not worked, the one thing that they left us with, as we were saying before—Senator Macdonald gave you the statistics of the number of children who were held in detention over that period of time, the highest number being almost 2,000 at any one time, along with 50,000 people off 600 to 800 boats—was an appalling situation. There were something like 30,000 people left in this country who were undocumented, and 1,200 drowned. What that left us with was an extraordinary problem. I have not heard anyone who was running the government or from the Greens, who were supporting the government at that time, take responsibility in any way, shape or form for those deaths. Senator Macdonald went through all those figures.

We had to pick up after that. The only thing that we were really left with that we then had to carry on overseas was offshore processing. The matter of public importance describes the system that we have as 'Australia's offshore detention system'. It's not an offshore detention system; it is an offshore processing system that has an element of detention in it. At the moment, there are no people in detention on either of those two islands.

The Rudd-Gillard-Rudd government tried to stop the boats, but they couldn't do it. It cost us $11 billion for them to fail, so we did it for them. We did it for the people of Australia, who have consistently supported Operation Sovereign Borders and the strengthening of our borders at about 70 per cent in any poll that's been taken. We did it because this was a life-and-death issue. It is not as though we were solving an esoteric or abstract problem. This was a life-and-death problem—1,200 people had died. We did it because we are an immigrant nation and, as an immigrant nation, we must maintain confidence in our immigration system. Our people will not support 200,000 people coming to this country each year of which just less than 20,000 are under the humanitarian program. On top of that, in the last couple of years, we've brought in 12,000 Syrian refugees.

We must maintain the confidence of the people in our immigration system and we have done that. The migration system at the time that we took it over was being run by the people smugglers. That is an appalling situation. To subcontract your major migration policy to a bunch of thugs throughout the world—a bunch of criminals—is absolutely irresponsible, and we see the consequences of that every single day in the Mediterranean. The policy that we did not introduce in Australia still exists in the Mediterranean and people are dying in their thousands to this day.

Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They're fleeing from Syria! They're fleeing from your wars, mate!

Jim Molan (NSW, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If we control our borders, we can actually show Australians that, as a migrant nation, they can trust this government to implement the migration policy; therefore, we can bring in more people than we've brought in in the past. Controlling borders is a magnificent step.

John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise on a point of order, Madam Acting Deputy President. There's no secret that Senator Molan is very new to this place. It is his second day here. Interjections are disorderly and I ask you to refer to the Greens to stop their interjecting and let him speak freely, at least till he gets some more experience in this place. After two days, I think it is very rude to be interjecting consistently with a new senator.

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Williams. I just remind all senators to have courtesy when a senator is on his feet.

Jim Molan (NSW, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you very much, Madam Acting Deputy President; and, Senator, thank you for your intervention. Here are the issues. The issues really are that the Australian people support Operation Sovereign Borders. Manus and Nauru is tough, tough policy. We acknowledge that. I have never met anyone who wants to keep people on Nauru and Manus. We are doing our best, through the US policy at the moment, to move people off Manus Island. Offshore processing is tough policy. There are no boats. There have been no successful boat missions and there have been no deaths because we turned them back—exactly that. We turned them back and they went back whence they came. That is the success.

Honourable senators interjecting—

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order!

Jim Molan (NSW, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As a result of that, we are able to bring in 200,000 people a year in the migration policy because Australians support the migration policy, and that is absolutely critical. Of that number, a large proportion, 18,750, are under the humanitarian program, and that is critically important. So strong borders are humane. Ladies and gentlemen, members of the Senate and colleagues, the reasons for success are turn-back, offshore processing and TPVs. Take one out and you'll kill people again.

Lisa Singh (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Australian society would be so much poorer without the diversity of those who have come from every part of the globe. As a good global citizen and signatory to a number of human rights conventions, Australia has a responsibility to ensure that people are safe from violence and persecution when they seek our support. Until recent years, Australia had a proud history of providing that safety—that safe haven for those asylum seekers and refugees—and accepted them into our broader Australian community. But, unfortunately, for years now, Australia, as we know, has been indefinitely incarcerating men, women and children in offshore detention camps on Manus Island and Nauru. This policy, breaching our human rights obligations, is generating deserved criticism and even revulsion in Australia and overseas.

I note Senator Molan's contribution just now, and I ask him to educate himself about international law, about human rights law and about migration law, because if he did he would know very well that everyone has the right to seek asylum. Everyone has the right to seek asylum—to use labels like 'illegals' is simply showing your ignorance about the need to provide that and ensure that we are living up to what we have signed under international law.

I also urge those government senators to meet with and get a better understanding of the international development sector. ACFID, the Australian Council For International Development, went on a fact-finding mission in November last year. They went to PNG. They went to investigate the conditions of refugees and asylum seekers who were brought to Papua New Guinea by the Australian government and who remain under the Australian government's responsibility. ACFID produced a short preliminary findings report. As their report made clear, there are three key factors that are making this a protracted crisis: the four to 4½ years that people have been held by the Commonwealth of Australia in Papua New Guinea; the deterioration of mental health and, in many cases, their physical health and wellbeing due to the deprivation of freedom of movement, poor case management and a lack of settlement options; and the plain fact that the conditions and systems are not adequate to meet the needs of people with complex mental health and medical needs, which is being exacerbated now of course by the drawdown of services.

In January this year, Human Rights Watch, in their annual report, called on the Australian government to act on the serious shortcomings in its human rights record if it wants to be a credible leader on the global stage. And although Australia was elected last year to the UN Human Rights Council for a term of some three years, pledging to prioritise freedom of expression, indigenous rights, gender equality, good governance and national human rights institutions, Human Rights Watch noted that the Turnbull government was undeterred by UN calls to end offshore processing and maintained its cruel practice of warehousing asylum seekers in abysmal conditions, where detainees faced violence and unnecessary delays in medical care. This is all occurring in the Australian government's name—in the Commonwealth's name.

Indeed, January this year also saw extremely disturbing reports of a Rohingyan refugee, suffering an acute mental health crisis and a broken ankle requiring surgery, who had been waiting for more than a year to be transferred from Australia's offshore immigration centre on Nauru for medical treatment. This is just one example. Apparently, Australian Border Force have not yet made a decision on his transfer, despite Nauru hospital's overseas medical referral panel twice approving this refugee for transfer to Australia for treatment and repeated warnings from doctors on the island that he presents a medical emergency and cannot be cared for on that island. The circumstance of this Rohingyan refugee is not unique, and reports make that clear. The governments of Nauru and Australia have ignored doctors' recommendations and blocked medical transfers for nearly 50 people, including those women who have been raped on Nauru and then denied an abortion in Australia. The human rights abuses against people are horrific—against people who simply sought our protection, that right to seek asylum, that we have denied to so many people.

The worth of families is a fundamental principle of international and Australian domestic law. Australia is party to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which states that children have the right to know and be cared for by their parents and should grow up in a family environment where possible. But several departmental sources and sources on Nauru have confirmed to journalists that it is unofficial policy to use family separation to encourage refugees to return to Nauru after medical treatment overseas. Refugees have been told they must leave their children alone in offshore immigration detention in order to access life-saving medical treatment overseas.

There are still children inside the regional processing centre on Nauru, 18 months after the trumpeted deal with the US, which is an utter disgrace. The fact that only about 100 refugees have left the camps for the United States is not good enough and is just too slow. I support the findings in this ACFID report. I support the findings that go into the need to fast-track the processing of resettlement to the United States. Of course, even after that, it still leaves a number of people—including, at the moment, 150 children—in offshore detention with no prospects for freedom, 4½ years later.

Some of these people are, as I mentioned before, Rohingyas from Myanmar. Australians are well aware of the nightmare that has been going on since 25 August in Myanmar and Rakhine State, where the Myanmar military have killed and slaughtered thousands, resulting in some 688,000 people fleeing to Bangladesh. Despite this, the Turnbull government is offering Rohingya refugees in our offshore processing facilities money to go back to Myanmar. It is just unfathomable. Tim Costello, on his visit to Bangladesh and to Manus, said recently:

It was a surreal irony to meet Rohingya refugees who have been locked up on Manus while the Australian government simultaneously supports international humanitarian appeals to aid the Rohingya in Cox's Bazar.

I recently visited the Rohingya refugees in Cox's Bazar in Bangladesh. I spoke to those distressed Rohingyas, who have experienced the worst atrocities—what the UN Human Rights Commissioner called 'textbook ethnic cleansing'. When I asked them, they did not want to go back to Myanmar. Yet, here is our government wanting to offer refugees who sought our protection money to send them back to Myanmar. The hypocrisy is just bizarre. At the same time we are giving $30 million to Bangladesh to support the Rohingya to stay out of Myanmar. Go figure! This is how ludicrous this government's policy is. It's just sheer, rank hypocrisy. So, I ask Senator Molan to please read ACFID's report, Refugees on Manus (Time expired)

Andrew Bartlett (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is good to have the debate brought back to some basic facts and reality about what is happening on Manus Island and Nauru, and that the reality of people who are fleeing persecution, including in our region, is being put on the record. Somehow or other we are continuing to get this fiction that these people are just trying to rort some non-existent system. A textbook case of genocide is happening right now in our region, and people are fleeing that. Are they are supposed to just stay there and die? That is this government's idea of what they consider 'humane'.

Let's revisit the actual text of what we are discussing here today, a matter that is, very much, of public importance: the inhumanity and cruelty of Australia's offshore detention system.

Not a single word from the coalition speakers today in any way sought to suggest that it is anything other than inhumane and cruel on Manus Island or Nauru, except for the extraordinary statement from Senator Macdonald that these people are 'well treated'. Eight of them have died! Whatever you say about the regime under John Howard, Philip Ruddock and their successors, at least they managed to run an offshore detention regime that didn't involve people dying, people being murdered, people dying by blatant bureaucratic neglect. This minister in this country has to take ultimate responsibility for those things.

As people know, I've only recently come back into this chamber, but it was a terrible feeling of deja vu listening to some of the nonsense, from Senator Macdonald in particular. Literally 20 years ago when I first came here, the same lies were being said, and probably by the same speaker. And it's because those lies have been able to be repeated and take hold that these sorts of outrageous human rights abuses have continued to occur. This litany of lies still gets repeated today. It is not illegal to seek asylum; that is a simple fact, and to continue to assert otherwise is false. It is false to suggest anything other than: the vast majority of people are clearly refugees. That has been determined by our own grotesquely inadequate system of assessment on Manus Island and Nauru. It is totally false to say that Australia is the most generous country in the world when it comes to accepting refugees per capita. It is the same falsehood was said 20 years ago, and yet we had the grand, crowning lie today that somehow these people on Manus Island are 'well treated'. Unbelievable!

And there is the nonsense that somehow people have stopped drowning. What do you think happened to all of those Rohingya people, even before the genocide got put on to massive turbocharging by the Myanmar military? What do you think happened to them on those boats? Remember—those other countries in our region who followed Tony Abbott's lead and pushed them back out to sea. What do you think happened to them? Did they all, sort of, go back home and sit in their lounge rooms and say, 'Oh, well, we had a go and we missed out'. There is clear evidence. I know they're not interested in anything other than the fairytales that they continue to try and perpetrate for political advantage on the Australian people. There is clear evidence of thousands of people drowning in our region. But somehow or other that is not a matter of concern.

The simple fact is: of course we can't assist every person who is fleeing extreme danger, but there are some people that we can help now, and we certainly should not be inflicting extra harm, extra suffering, extra cruelty on those people. It does have to be said that those camps on Manus Island were reopened under the Labor government, and it was not—as claimed in another falsehood from Senator Macdonald—'with the support of the Greens'. It was clearly opposed by the Greens at the time, categorically and repeatedly.

Senator Ian Macdonald interjecting—

Senator Macdonald perhaps hasn't been listening all that time, but I see he's back in the chamber and responding, so presumably he's heard me just this one time. So I can tell you: it was not true; you are wrong. Now you cannot not repeat at least one falsehood again.

The simple fact is there is an opportunity right now, as was stated by another speaker. Hundreds of those people could be and should be in New Zealand right now. Let's also not forget, in amongst all that history over the last 20 years, that there was a significant shift due to public pressure—community pressure, groups like Rural Australians for Refugees, and so many other people in the community, and some people back then in the Liberal Party who pressured the Howard government to change its policy—to bring those refugees here from Nauru, some of whom are now citizens, as others have said in this debate and have built strong lives in this country and are contributing effectively to this country. That position can be changed again, and I know community sentiment is shifting to stop this cruelty now.

Malarndirri McCarthy (NT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time for discussion of the matter of public importance has expired.