Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, Senator Carr. The day before the 2007 election the then Labor leader, Mr Rudd, told the Australian people that if Labor won government he would turn back boats carrying asylum seekers to Australia. I ask the minister: if it was right for Labor to turn back boats in 2007, is it still right to turn back boats in 2011? If not, why not?

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Abetz for his question. What I can say with absolute certainty is that turning back boats on the high seas is reckless and dangerous for all those involved. That is the position of the Liberal Party, which would tell us that, when it comes to inconsistencies, they know no equal. When it comes to inconsistencies we have to look no further than the amendments that the Liberal Party has proposed in the House—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Carr, I draw your attention to the question. You have one minute and 32 seconds.

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, we are discussing the question of towing boats back to sea, which I say is a reckless position, which is the position of the Liberal Party, which has been reaffirmed by the Liberal Party. If we look to the amendments the Liberal Party have themselves moved in the House of Representatives, we know they say that no-one should be sent to any country unless it is a signatory to the human rights convention. Of course, their proposal is to send boats back to Indonesia, a country that is not a signatory to the human rights convention. We know that, as recently as Tuesday of this week—

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I raise a point of order in relation to relevance. Clearly the minister is not being directly relevant as sessional orders require. The question was very simply in relation to Labor's promise in 2007 and if the position has changed why it has changed.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Carr, you have 51 seconds remaining. I draw your attention to the question, as I did before.

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I appreciate that, Mr President. When it comes to the refugee conventions I think it is important that the Liberal Party are in fact consistent. We do look to them as they obviously believe they have a monopoly when it comes to the question of moral indignation on human rights, despite their record!

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Carr, I draw your attention to the question. You have 34 seconds remaining.

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr President. The Liberal Party's attitude here is one of saying that they have a moral monopoly when it comes to the question of human rights, despite their appalling record.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Carr. I do draw your attention to the question. You have 24 seconds remaining.

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Liberal Party really have, as I said before, more front than Myer when it comes to the question of human rights. Their alleged concern for human rights is a newfound discovery.

Honourable senators interjecting—

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order on both sides! Senator Carr, I draw your attention to the question again. You have five seconds remaining.

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As far as the questions of the human rights conventions and the towing of boats back to sea, it is absolutely—(Time expired)

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Shortly before the 2010 election the current Labor leader, Ms Gillard, specifically ruled out sending asylum seekers to 'anywhere that is not a signatory to the refugee convention'. If it was wrong for Labor in 2010 to send asylum seekers anywhere that is not a signatory to the refugee convention, such as Malaysia, is it still wrong to do so in 2011? If not, why not?

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government's position is that the human rights provisions in terms of the refugee conventions have to be upheld. That is very much what this government is about. Our position in regard to Malaysia is that the protections are built into the agreement with the Malaysian government and that there is a provision for the UNHCR to be actively engaged in the processes involved, to an extent that is beyond anything that ever occurred before this agreement had been entered into. On the other hand, we have the Liberal Party suddenly discovering these issues of human rights and proposing a policy to actually send the boats back to Indonesia, to send the boats back on the high seas, despite the incredible dangers involved, to a country that is not a signatory to the human rights conventions or the refugee conventions. That is clearly a major contradiction in the way in which the Liberal Party has approached this issue.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Noting the fact that Labor leaders Rudd and Gillard both promised one thing before an election and did another thing afterwards on border protection, I ask: is it a fact that the dismantling of the former coalition government's effective border protection policy was begun under Labor leader Rudd and continued under Labor leader Gillard, with disastrous consequences for asylum seekers who have drowned and taxpayers who now foot the billion dollar annual bill, not to mention Labor's credibility?

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Essentially the processes of dismantling the arrangements around Nauru were based on sound policy. The fact is it did not work. We have said consistently that the Nauru option actually saw a situation where there were in fact no deterrents and the overwhelming numbers of people who went to Nauru and were granted refugee status ended up in either Australia or New Zealand. So our position was essentially that the policy did not work. It was incredibly expensive and it mistreated people terribly. As a consequence of that, the government moved to end the Pacific solution. We have said that the arrangements in regard to Malaysia are substantially different. Under these agreements there is genuine protection for refugees so that they will not be returned to a country from which they have fled and they will have appropriate access to refugee assessment. This is a much stronger process. (Time expired)