Perrett, Graham, MP

Mr PERRETT (Moreton—Opposition Whip) (12:24): I rise to speak on the Migration Legislation Amendment (Regional Processing Cohort) Bill 2016. I want to give just a bit of history before I move into the legislation in detail. I came into this place in the magnificent class of '07—as I am sure you would agree, Mr Deputy Speaker Irons! I have seen a few things take place over the years in this area of migration and asylum seeker legislation. We can go into the long history, go back to 1788 and the ships arriving in that migration program. Obviously there had been a 40,000- or 50,000-year migration program before that. But in terms of modern history, we would look at the arrivals coming into Australia from the Vietnamese conflict. And then, I think it would be true to say, Paul Keating was instrumental in setting up the original detention centres, which were continued by John Howard. Then under Labor, under Kevin Rudd, there were significant changes. I have in front of me the Report of the expert panel on asylum seekers of August 2012, put out by Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston, Paris Aristotle and Professor Michael L'Estrange, which has informed much of my thinking. The other thing that particularly informed my thinking about asylum seeker legislation and responses was the inquiry into the Christmas Island tragedy, which was a horrific inquiry to be part of. I know that the minister at the table, the member for Stirling, was part of that inquiry as well. Seeing the video footage was truly disturbing. Standing on the cliffs on Christmas Island and hearing the evidence was a very moving experience. It moved all of the people who were involved in that committee inquiry. So, the Labor Party has had a long journey. I note that the member for Scullin is at the table as well. I know it has been a difficult journey for many in the Labor Party, particularly those who in other lives worked as lawyers representing asylum seekers and the like. I remember being a member of Labor for Refugees before the 2004 election and the 2007 election and then seeing how things have changed. But I mention that little bit of history because I want to put it into context. Regarding this piece of legislation that is sitting in front of us in the House, I need to state up-front—as an MP representing a very multicultural community from a state that has some economic challenges, in a nation with serious economic challenges—that this piece of legislation will not create a single job. This piece of legislation is indicative of the fact that this government is devoid of vision and ideas. We have a government that cannot even fill debate topics in the Federation Chamber. If they did not have constituency statements going on, they would have no agenda whatsoever. That is indicative of a greater problem in Australian politics, and this legislation is only part of it. I should state up-front Labor's policy since 19 July 2013—and there was a difficult journey—when Prime Minister Kevin Rudd clearly indicated that no asylum seeker who arrived in Australia by a maritime process would ever be settled in Australia. I could go through chapter and verse of the difficult arguments, challenges and debates that went into the Labor Party position, but that has been the Labor Party position ever since that date. That is what has meant that there were not significant numbers of people arriving after that date. So here we are in the fourth year of the Liberal-Nationals government and we have a piece of legislation that is a solution in search of a problem. Speaker after speaker opposite has said, 'The boats have stopped.' That is the reality. They can trumpet their cruelty, they can talk about evil people smugglers and they can talk about deaths at sea. We could trawl over history, but the reality is that the number of boat arrivals has halted since 19 July 2013, when Prime Minister Kevin Rudd articulated the change in the Labor Party position. Mr Robert: What a load of rubbish; you are a goose. Mr PERRETT: They are the facts. You can look on your own government and you will see that. We have a voice in the wilderness trying to present a truth, but that is the reality since 19 July 2013. We have a guy opposite who is prepared to do anything in pursuit of power. I am only prepared to tell the truth, and that is that, since 19 July 2013, we have not had a problem. This nation does not have a problem. As I point out, Labor would never let the people smugglers back in, but this piece of legislation is not a message to the people smugglers; it is a dog whistle, or a dog trumpet, to the people of Australia. It is not a message to the hordes of people smugglers that are wandering around Indonesia waiting to set up business and send people to Australia; what we have is a message, because we have a government in trouble—a Prime Minister who is floundering and a government without vision that is not able to set an economic agenda and, more importantly, cannot get its economic agenda through either house intact. So Labor have made it clear that we will never let the people smugglers back in business. Having been on those inquiries looking into the asylum seekers who drowned at sea—the Christmas Island tragedy in particular—I remember the 1,200 deaths that occurred after that. I have seen members of the Liberal and National parties standing up with tears in their eyes—I think it was Joe Hockey talking about 'not on his watch' et cetera—when they were political mercenaries, to block the Malaysian solution, which was recommended by the Report of the Expert Panel on Asylum Seekers, because of political opportunism and because they did not have the courage to do something in the national interest; instead they did something in the Nationals', and Liberals', interests. It was a disgraceful bit of political expediency, and history will condemn those opposite for being a party to that piece of political trickery. I know the detriment that comes with allowing people smugglers back in business, because they are criminals and they will do anything to make money, and that means they will traffic in human misery. I have heard some opposite actually acknowledge the fact that they would do anything for their children, as any parent would. They are saying it is a horrible thing that someone would pay $10,000. Well, I would pay millions. I would do whatever I could for my children, as any parent would. Any parent would do what they could to get their children out of harm's way and perhaps even to give their children some economic opportunities as well. Obviously, under the international treaty that we have signed, people cannot seek asylum because they are starving to death or because their island home is being capsized by climate change. People do not have the right to seek asylum if their crops have failed and they are about to starve to death. That is cruel, but we are still a party to a treaty that says that, if you are being persecuted because of your religion or your sexuality, we will process your request. I think we had five minutes when the now Treasurer and former immigration minister suggested that we back away from that treaty, but thankfully that never took traction with those opposite. The real issue here is that this government is now in its fourth year of office, and I know they have had a turnover of ministers and prime ministers and they have been in disarray, have lost control of the parliament, have agreed to motions condemning themselves and all that sort of thing. But their main failure is that they have failed to find a resettlement option for the more than 2,000 refugees in offshore detention centres in Manus Island in Papua New Guinea, and in the nation-state of Nauru. This piece of legislation before the chamber is a political stunt to distract from their incompetence. I particularly call out the foreign minister for her incompetence in this. In her fourth year as minister, she has not been able to track down a country that would resettle these more than 2,000 people. Obviously, it is hard to negotiate with our neighbours when you have cut nearly $12 billion in aid from them and from around the world. It is a bit hard to negotiate when you are a wealthy country in your 25th year of economic growth and you are saying to the countries nearby that are struggling: 'Hey, guess what? Can you take a couple of people because we don't want to see them?' Let us be honest about that. When we say, 'The boats have stopped,' what we are saying is, 'You don't have to suffer in our sight.' That is really what we are saying. Let us unpack this slogan from those opposite. When you say, 'The boats have stopped,' you are saying, 'You will suffer somewhere away from me,' you are saying, 'You can be tortured somewhere away from me,' you are saying, 'You can be taken outside and beaten up by the people that do not like your religion, your sexuality or whatever it is you are being discriminated against for,' and you are saying, 'Do that away from here.' Obviously, we are protected because of the fact that we are an island continent. We are protected by geography more than anything, but I remind those opposite that there has been a distinct lack of ability when it comes to dealing with our neighbours or other countries that might be able to resettle the people on Manus Island and Nauru. We had that incredible circumstance where the now Treasurer had a $45 million glass of champagne in Cambodia, clinking it saying, 'Well done.' Did he resettle one person? That would be the most expensive glass of alcohol in the history of the world—$45 million for nothing! So how did we reward him? We made him the Treasurer. What a joke! This legislation before the chamber will actually cause more problems. We have had the Prime Minister of our closest neighbour, New Zealand, saying that he did not want two different classes of New Zealand citizens to be processed according to their history. Those opposite have suggested that a former asylum seeker who becomes a successful person and wants to visit Australia decades from today would somehow be able to apply to the minister—as if that is a process that would be realistic. For those genuine refugees who have resettled in third countries such as Canada and the United States, it would not be realistic. As I said up front, this is not a message to the people smugglers in Indonesia; it is a message to the right wing of the Australian voting public. It is trying to say to them, 'Give me some support.' I need to remind those opposite that asylum seekers are not criminals. They have a right to seek asylum. The history of this piece of legislation goes back, sadly, to World War II when people were displaced—millions and millions of people—and we had boats arriving in Australia where they were turned away. The world said, 'Don't listen to your darker angels. We need to recognise that humans have that infinite capacity to be cruel, but let's be better. Let's create a process to grant asylum when it is warranted.' Obviously, where asylum seekers are found to be genuine refugees, they have a right to live their lives to the fullest. All Christians, all people with a heart and all people who care about their fellow humans would agree with that. We should not be cruelling the very hope that drives these desperate people to seek asylum from evils that we cannot imagine. Mr Robert: Really, you're speaking on behalf of the entire church now? Mr Rob Mitchell: Read your Bible. Mr PERRETT: We know you are not familiar with it. We have sent our ADF to fight for over 100 years for the very values that this legislation, I would suggest, is attacking. I can give you many stories of refugees who have been extremely successful, but I am particularly proud of those people in the quiet suburbs of my electorate who are just getting on with paying their taxes, raising their children, sending them to school and contributing to make this country a great nation. Why would we want to ever prevent successful refugees who have been resettled in other countries and who have risen to the top of their chosen field from coming to Australia to share their knowledge or skills? As I said at the start, this is crass politics. We have a Prime Minister slipping on the red budgie smugglers and finding that they fit perfectly! We know that no country has made this a prerequisite for doing a third-country settlement deal. We have a Prime Minister who has become a hollow man. All those values that he used to have when he was a small-L Liberal have been hollowed out. Now he is just a servant to that emboldened hard right. I condemn this piece of legislation and will not be supporting it.