EO&E..............................................................................................................................................................

 

I’ve been saying for the best part of four years that the Prime Minister should stop being stubborn and she should pick up the phone to the President of Nauru. Finally, belatedly, four years too late, it seems she’s about to do that. So, I welcome the Prime Minister’s last minute conversion to common sense on this subject. I do point out, though, that Nauru is just one of three critical elements in the Coalition’s plan to stop the boats; one of the three critical elements in the Howard Government’s solution to the problem of stopping the boats. Now, you’ve got to have temporary protection visas and you’ve got to have the willingness to turn boats around where it’s safe to do so – in addition to rigorous offshore processing at Nauru.

But look, I think this is a good move from the Government. It could have come at any time in the last four years. It should have come much, much earlier than it has and I think the fact that the Prime Minister has held out for so long against what was obviously common sense will raise, yet again, questions about her judgment. Given this government’s constant failures, I think there will be questions in the public’s mind as to whether they can successfully implement Nauru, given that they couldn’t successfully put pink batts in people’s roofs. But nevertheless, this is a significant step in the right direction and I want to congratulate Angus Houston and his panel for finally helping the scales to fall from the eyes of this Prime Minister.

Angus Houston did say that the turning backs the boats policy can be done but there was a lot of caveats there. Will the Opposition take note of his comments and be working to shore up that policy area?

Look, for years we’ve been told that Nauru wouldn’t work, Angus Houston said it will. For years we’ve been told that you can’t turn boats around, Angus Houston says that you can.

But there was a lot of ‘buts’ in that.

The fact is that if you are serious about stopping the boats, you have to have the willingness to turn them around where it’s safe to do so. Angus Houston says that you can turn boats around; it is operationally possible to turn boats around. That’s been the position all along and I just wish – I’m sure the Australian public wish – that the Prime Minister hadn’t been so stubborn for so long on this because while the Prime Minister’s stubbornness has been preventing real solutions from being put in place, we’ve had 22,000 boat people, we’ve had almost 400 boats and we’ve had terrible cost, terrible trauma and terrible tragedy.

How much blame should be laid at the feet of the likes of Andrew Metcalfe and the Immigration Department who have been saying for months that Nauru won’t work on its own?

The problem on our borders has to be sheeted home directly to the government of the day. We have had 22,000 illegal arrivals, we have had almost 400 illegal boats, we have had hundreds of drownings at sea because the current government changed a policy that worked. Now, belatedly, they are putting back in place a key element of the policy that worked, but they could have done this at any time over the last four years and that’s why yet again the Prime Minister’s judgment and stubbornness are an issue today.

But you’re guaranteeing this legislation will go through? There won’t be any more surprises in the Parliament from the Coalition this week?

The point I make is that to the extent that this legislation allows good policy, we will support it. That’s always been our position. It is the duty of the Coalition to support good policy and to oppose bad policy. My understanding is that the legislation is going to allow Nauru, and that’s good policy.

If they decide at some stage to bring in a Malaysia solution, will you then bring on a disallowance motion?

Angus Houston said that Malaysia, as it has been negotiated, is unacceptable. He’s right. We’ve been saying all along that Malaysia is a dud deal for Australia and a cruel deal for boat people. We’ve been saying all along that no self-respecting country would agree to a five-for-one people swap. So, he’s vindicated the position that the Coalition has taken. I would be very, very surprised if we ever see the Malaysia people-swap raise its head again.

But he did say it was a viable long term solution. If the Government does improve some of those humanitarian safeguards, would the Coalition consider looking at it again?

I think the chances of the Government being able to negotiate a better deal in that particular instance are very, very low indeed.

Indonesia doesn’t want the boats going back. Angus Houston said they would have to agree to accept them for the boats going back to be a viable option. You don’t have any agreement from them, do you?

The point I make is that the Prime Minister has been saying up hill and down dale for years that you can’t turn boats around. Angus Houston said you can. The Prime Minister was saying until she was red in the face that Nauru is “a detour, not a solution.” Now she’s going to do it. That’s why the Australian public are entitled to say this is a Prime Minister who says one thing one day, and does the opposite the next day. That’s why more and more people will be questioning the Prime Minister’s judgment and her competence.

[ends]