David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Home Affairs. Minister, every single human rights organisation and multicultural community that has spoken to your government's latest three migration bills has said they will separate families, damage communities and send people into danger. Why has the Albanese government chosen to work with Mr Dutton to push through this brutal antirefugee, antimigration legislation, despite the calls from every NGO in the sector and all people with a conscience?

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thanks, Senator Shoebridge. The practical reality that the government is encountering is a series of High Court decisions that need to be responded to. As Senator Shoebridge would be well aware, this parliament has debated a number of bills and passed a number of bills, not with the support of the Greens, to deal with some unusual situations in immigration law, but there have been at least two High Court decisions in recent times that I can think of that have found deficiencies in that legislation and that have called into question various immigration practices of this country.

A responsible government, when faced with that situation, has a choice: to rectify those issues to accord with community standards about these issues or to ignore them. I understand that the Greens political party would choose to ignore those practical realities, but this government understands that, when the High Court makes decisions, then governments need to act.

Senator Shoebridge asks why the government chooses to seek agreement with the opposition on these matters, and it is the case that there have been discussions with the opposition around these matters. One of the reasons we do that is that, whatever the subject matter, we can rely on the Greens political party to say no. This week we've seen it again, with the Greens political party finally caving in on housing. But we see it on every single issue: that the Greens political party have made a political judgement that it's in their political interests to oppose what a Labor government is seeking to do. If the Greens political party decided to have a different political strategy and were prepared to work with the Labor government, rather than block us, then maybe we'd be in a different situation.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Shoebridge, a first supplementary?

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yeah, sure, Minister. Labor has now created mandatory detention—offshore detention in PNG—and stopped people who sought asylum by sea from ever making a home here, and it has now introduced a package of bills that includes a Trump-style travel ban. When will Labor stop teaming up with the coalition to attack migrants in the hope of peeling off some votes from the Right, and when will you stop attacking people based on where they were born?

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Shoebridge, I could answer the question simply by referring you to my previous answer, but I might take the opportunity to repeat the point that, the way the Senate operates, no party has a majority to pass its legislation. I think it's well understood that, for our government, the options are to come to an agreement with the opposition on a matter or to come to an agreement with the Greens on the matter. As we have repeatedly seen, not just this year but in this entire parliamentary term, the Greens political party has no intention whatsoever of supporting Labor legislation, because that would involve cooperating, that would involve compromise and that would involve actually achieving something rather than blocking something.

We understand that you have thought that it's to your political advantage to block Labor. It would appear that parts of your party are starting to understand that maybe that's not such a politically successful strategy, but I know, Senator Shoebridge, that you'll never be in the camp of compromise to achieve reform. You will always be in the camp of destructive opposition. (Time expired)

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Shoebridge, second supplementary?

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Again: sure, Minister. Mr Dan Tehan bragged today that the coalition is 'running the immigration system for the government', and they're not wrong. Why is Labor just surrendering immigration to the coalition and Peter Dutton?

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Shoebridge, I remind you to refer to those in the other place by their correct titles.

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Why is Labor just surrendering immigration policy to the coalition and Mr Peter Dutton?

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you. Minister Watt, I remind you to direct your comments to the chair.

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Chair—'President' even. President, I make the point again that Senator Shoebridge obviously has a political agenda. I think even members of his own party understand what Senator Shoebridge's political agenda is. We have a different agenda, and that is to govern in the interests of all Australians. Senator Shoebridge might be the last person in his party room to understand that the destructive opposition that he and certain others in his party room have a been employing for this term might not be working out there in the real world.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Sorry, Senator Shoebridge, I didn't see you stand. Senator Shoebridge.

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That's okay, President. My question wasn't about the Greens; my question was about—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Are you on a point of order?

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Labor—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Shoebridge, are you on a point of order?

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Indeed. My point of order is relevance. My question was not about the Greens; my question—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm not asking you to go into your question. I've noted it down.

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

But you haven't—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Shoebridge, I believe that the minister is being relevant.

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Of course you do.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will listen closely and call him to the question if necessary.

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thanks, President. Senator Shoebridge obviously has had a road to Damascus conversion, where he has realised that, at the end of this term, he and his colleagues will have spent the entire time voting with Peter Dutton to block housing—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Watt, I am going to draw you to the question, and I'm going to remind you to please refer to those in the other place by their correct title. Senator Waters, on a point of order?

Larissa Waters (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That's going too far now. You're adversely reflecting on a senator. And actually the question was about your cosy relationship with the opposition. Could you please address that?

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator McKenzie, order! Minister Wong.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, President. I would remind Senator Shoebridge that, for all his feigned outrage, he was the one who put a very political statement at the end of the question. The minister is being utterly relevant in responding to that political statement.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you. I have drawn the minister back to the question and reminded him how to refer to others in the other place. Minister Watt.

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you. I take the point of order also from Senator Waters about the 'cosy relationship' with the coalition. If we want to talk about cosy relationships, let's look at the Greens activity over this term in blocking housing, and now it's the Greens who are lining up with the cooker faction of the opposition to block social media reform. (Time expired)