Senator FARRELL (South Australia—Parliamentary Secretary for Sustainability and Urban Water) (17:06): Senator Bernardi, I do not need your help or advice in terms of what policy this government should be adopting on border protection. You referred to former Prime Minister Howard and his policies. His policies were not about border protection, Senator Bernardi. His policies were about getting himself re-elected in the 2001 election. Senator Bernardi: It worked. Senator FARRELL: It did work, and that is the tragedy. Senator Bernardi: It also stopped the boats. Senator FARRELL: It did not stop the boats, because we are still getting these boats now. This problem did not go away with what John Howard did. He sought to use the tragic circumstances of the 438 Afghan asylum seekers on the Tampa for his own political purposes. It was not about border protection; it was about getting him re-elected in that 2001 election. What is tragic, quite frankly, is the fact that the opposition would use today of all days to raise this issue in the parliament. Overnight, we have read about the very tragic circumstances off the Javanese coast in which a number of apparent asylum seekers seeking to come to Australia lost their lives. It is a tragedy that the opposition, just as they did under John Howard at the time of the Tampa, are seeking to use this issue to score what are nothing other than cheap political points. It is distressing to the people of Australia and to this parliament that instead of focusing on policies that might solve the present difficulties off the coast of the Indonesia they have decided to use this opportunity to score these cheap political points. And we have seen that time and time again. The reality is that the opposition has no effective policy on border protection and so they seek to criticise our policy, a policy that will clearly act as a deterrent, that will be effective and that will solve the problem that we find ourselves facing. It would seem that the only time that the opposition supports offshore processing is when it is done their way, the Nauru solution. Senator Bushby interjecting— Senator FARRELL: What do we know, Senator Bushby, about the Nauru solution? What are the experts telling us about the Nauru solution? Senator Bushby interjecting— Senator FARRELL: You will have your opportunity, Senator Bushby, to speak on this subject in due course, if you are on the list. What we are being told about the Nauru solution is that it is both costly and ineffective. We want effective border protection solutions. What we know about the Nauru solution is that it is costly and ineffective. To resurrect that Nauru solution would not be cheap. We are looking at over $1 billion in operational costs alone. And that does not include all of the inevitable spending on infrastructure that would be required to resurrect the Nauru solution. The opposition have been told about the Nauru solution. They have been told in very clear terms that Nauru is not a silver bullet solution. More importantly, it will not break the model of the people smugglers and their dreadful trade. Just as we know it will not work, the opposition knows that it will not work and will be expensive. The government has the solution, the Malaysia solution. The Nauru solution is the wrong one. We are talking about it costing more than $1 billion to resurrect the Nauru solution. Senator Humphries: Can you get those figures? Senator FARRELL: I do not have them immediately to hand, Senator Humphries, but I will make some inquiries and see what I can find out for you in that regard. We know from all of the expert advice that we have received that the Nauru solution is expensive. More importantly, it will not work. Whatever the cost might be—put the cost factor aside for a moment; put that $1 billion aside, Senator Humphries—we know that it will not work. It will no longer act as a deterrent because what the people smugglers know is that if they can get to Nauru it is just a stopping off point on the way to Australia. It is a bit like the Qantas dispute on the weekend: if you want to come from Adelaide to Canberra, you might have to go via Melbourne but you will get to your destination. That is how the people smugglers think of the Nauru solution. This government has a solution, and one that provides a great deal of compassion. Part of that proposal is to bring 4,000 genuine refugees— Senator Bushby: Genuine refugees. Senator FARRELL: Yes, genuine refugees—from Malaysia. My understanding is that the vast bulk of these people are from the country of Burma, that prison state. Those people currently in Malaysia are genuinely in the queue and have been waiting for long periods of time to be resettled to Australia. They will get the benefit of our solution, which they would not get under any opposition proposal. Going back and looking at the Nauru proposal, what else do we know about it? The government released the Solicitor-General's legal advice and provided special briefings to the Leader of the Opposition. But he continues to ignore the facts explained in that legal advice. Senator Polley: He ignores every expert. Senator FARRELL: He does. I will take that intervention from Senator Polley. That is one of the problems of the current Leader of the Opposition. He gets advice but he refuses to follow it. He gets the advice from the Solicitor-General that there are significant legal doubts as a result of the High Court decision in respect of Nauru but he refuses to accept that advice. Of course, we have seen what he says about the advice of climate scientists about what is happening in terms of global warming. He rejects that. He just has one mantra, and the mantra is: stop the boats. A simple solution: stop the boats. The Nauru solution will not stop the boats. The boats will still keep coming unless we get the opposition to see sense here, unless they start taking advice, both the legal advice that we now have from the Solicitor-General—which has been provided to you; you wanted some information from us, Senator Humphries; we have provided you the legal advice— Senator Humphries: I didn't ask you that. Senator FARRELL: Perhaps not you personally. Senator Humphries: I want the costings—the billion-dollar costings. Senator FARRELL: I have undertaken to follow that one up, Senator Humphries. But of course that advice, as the Leader of the Opposition and other members in the opposition have been told, does not support the position of the opposition. We have also heard about one of Mr Abbott's solutions to the people-smuggling trade—that is, to tow the boats back. Mr Abbott was asked about this last month. Senator Back interjecting— Senator FARRELL: Mr Abbott was asked about this, Senator Back. Senator Back: Didn't Mr Rudd have that idea also, Senator Farrell? Senator FARRELL: We are talking about Mr Abbott here. Senator Back interjecting— Senator FARRELL: Senator Back, you can talk in your speech. This is my opportunity to say a few words, Senator Back, and I want to talk about what Mr Abbott said. When he was asked the question, he said: Well, that’s the kind of operational question that would have to be worked out by the commander on the spot … I’m not going to set myself up as an expert, but what’s been done in the past can under the right conditions be done again in the future. That is his policy.