Division Description Changes — Bills — Migration Legislation Amendment (The Bali Process) Bill 2012; Consideration in Detail — 27th Jun 2012

All changes made to the description and title of this division.

View division | Edit description

Change	Division
representatives vote 2012-06-27#4 Edited by mackay staff on 2014-10-20 09:50:59	Title Description The majority voted in favour of a [motion](http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-06-27.105.1) proposed by Independent MP [Andrew Wilkie](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives). ~~The motion was that the amendments in this bill only have effect for a period of 12 months after it commences as an Act.~~ ~~Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this bill.~~ ~~_Background to the bill_~~ The bill was introduced by Independent MP [Rob Oakeshott](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Robert_Oakeshott&mpc=Lyne&house=representatives) in response to the High Court's decision in [_Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship_](http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/32.html?query=) () HCA 32, which put an end to the Labor Government's [Malaysia Solution](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysian_Solution#Immigration) policy.(Read more about the decision on Wikipedia [here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaintiff_M70/2011_%26_Plaintiff_M106_of_2011_by_his_Litigation_Guardian_v_Minister_for_Immigration_and_Citizenship) and on ABC News [here](http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-31/high-court-rules-on-asylum-seeker-challenge/2864218). Read more about the effect of this decision on the Malaysia Solution [here](http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154). ) To this end, the bill amends the _Migration Act 1958_ to replace the existing framework for taking offshore entry persons to another country to assess their refugee claims.(More information about this bill and context can be found [here](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4747).) It also amends the _Immigration (Guardianship of Children) Act 1946_ in relation to making and implementing any decision to remove, deport or take a non-citizen child from Australia. However, these amendments would only have effect for a period of 12 months. ~~By making these amendments, the bill attempts to codify the [Bali Process](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bali_Process) into domestic law.~~ The majority voted in favour of a [motion](http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-06-27.105.1) proposed by Independent MP [Andrew Wilkie](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives). The motion was that the amendments in this bill only have effect for a period of 12 months after it commences as an Act. Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this bill. _Background to the bill_ The bill was introduced by Independent MP [Rob Oakeshott](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Robert_Oakeshott&mpc=Lyne&house=representatives) in response to the High Court's decision in [_Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship_](http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/32.html?query=) [2011] HCA 32, which put an end to the Labor Government's [Malaysia Solution](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysian_Solution#Immigration) policy.(Read more about the decision on Wikipedia [here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaintiff_M70/2011_%26_Plaintiff_M106_of_2011_by_his_Litigation_Guardian_v_Minister_for_Immigration_and_Citizenship) and on ABC News [here](http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-31/high-court-rules-on-asylum-seeker-challenge/2864218). Read more about the effect of this decision on the Malaysia Solution [here](http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154). ) To this end, the bill amends the _Migration Act 1958_ to replace the existing framework for taking offshore entry persons to another country to assess their refugee claims.(More information about this bill and context can be found [here](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4747).) It also amends the _Immigration (Guardianship of Children) Act 1946_ in relation to making and implementing any decision to remove, deport or take a non-citizen child from Australia. However, these amendments would only have effect for a period of 12 months. By making these amendments, the bill attempts to codify the [Bali Process](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bali_Process) into domestic law. References
representatives vote 2012-06-27#4 Edited by system on 2014-10-07 16:21:02	Title Description The majority voted in favour of a [http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-06-27.105.1 motion] proposed by Independent MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives Andrew Wilkie]. ~~The motion was that the amendments in this bill only have effect for a period of 12 months after it commences as an Act.~~ ~~Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this bill.~~ ~~''Background to the bill''~~ The bill was introduced by Independent MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Robert_Oakeshott&mpc=Lyne&house=representatives Rob Oakeshott] in response to the High Court's decision in [http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/32.html?query= ''Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship''] () HCA 32, which put an end to the Labor Government's [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysian_Solution#Immigration Malaysia Solution] policy.(Read more about the decision on Wikipedia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaintiff_M70/2011_%26_Plaintiff_M106_of_2011_by_his_Litigation_Guardian_v_Minister_for_Immigration_and_Citizenship here] and on ABC News [http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-31/high-court-rules-on-asylum-seeker-challenge/2864218 here]. Read more about the effect of this decision on the Malaysia Solution [http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154 here]. ) To this end, the bill amends the ''Migration Act 1958'' to replace the existing framework for taking offshore entry persons to another country to assess their refugee claims.(More information about this bill and context can be found [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4747 here].) It also amends the ''Immigration (Guardianship of Children) Act 1946'' in relation to making and implementing any decision to remove, deport or take a non-citizen child from Australia. However, these amendments would only have effect for a period of 12 months. ~~By making these amendments, the bill attempts to codify the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bali_Process Bali Process] into domestic law.~~ ~~References~~ The majority voted in favour of a [motion](http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-06-27.105.1) proposed by Independent MP [Andrew Wilkie](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives). The motion was that the amendments in this bill only have effect for a period of 12 months after it commences as an Act. Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this bill. _Background to the bill_ The bill was introduced by Independent MP [Rob Oakeshott](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Robert_Oakeshott&mpc=Lyne&house=representatives) in response to the High Court's decision in [_Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship_](http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/32.html?query=) () HCA 32, which put an end to the Labor Government's [Malaysia Solution](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysian_Solution#Immigration) policy.(Read more about the decision on Wikipedia [here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaintiff_M70/2011_%26_Plaintiff_M106_of_2011_by_his_Litigation_Guardian_v_Minister_for_Immigration_and_Citizenship) and on ABC News [here](http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-31/high-court-rules-on-asylum-seeker-challenge/2864218). Read more about the effect of this decision on the Malaysia Solution [here](http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154). ) To this end, the bill amends the _Migration Act 1958_ to replace the existing framework for taking offshore entry persons to another country to assess their refugee claims.(More information about this bill and context can be found [here](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4747).) It also amends the _Immigration (Guardianship of Children) Act 1946_ in relation to making and implementing any decision to remove, deport or take a non-citizen child from Australia. However, these amendments would only have effect for a period of 12 months. By making these amendments, the bill attempts to codify the [Bali Process](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bali_Process) into domestic law. References
representatives vote 2012-06-27#4 Edited by system on 2014-10-07 16:16:52	Title Description The majority voted in favour of a [http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-06-27.105.1 motion] proposed by Independent MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives Andrew Wilkie]. The motion was that the amendments in this bill only have effect for a period of 12 months after it commences as an Act. Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this bill. ''Background to the bill'' The bill was introduced by Independent MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Robert_Oakeshott&mpc=Lyne&house=representatives Rob Oakeshott] in response to the High Court's decision in [http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/32.html?query= ''Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship''] [2011] HCA 32, which put an end to the Labor Government's [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysian_Solution#Immigration Malaysia Solution] policy.[1] The bill was introduced by Independent MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Robert_Oakeshott&mpc=Lyne&house=representatives Rob Oakeshott] in response to the High Court's decision in [http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/32.html?query= ''Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship''] () HCA 32, which put an end to the Labor Government's [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysian_Solution#Immigration Malaysia Solution] policy.(Read more about the decision on Wikipedia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaintiff_M70/2011_%26_Plaintiff_M106_of_2011_by_his_Litigation_Guardian_v_Minister_for_Immigration_and_Citizenship here] and on ABC News [http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-31/high-court-rules-on-asylum-seeker-challenge/2864218 here]. Read more about the effect of this decision on the Malaysia Solution [http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154 here]. ) To this end, the bill amends the ''Migration Act 1958'' to replace the existing framework for taking offshore entry persons to another country to assess their refugee claims.[2] It also amends the ''Immigration (Guardianship of Children) Act 1946'' in relation to making and implementing any decision to remove, deport or take a non-citizen child from Australia. However, these amendments would only have effect for a period of 12 months. To this end, the bill amends the ''Migration Act 1958'' to replace the existing framework for taking offshore entry persons to another country to assess their refugee claims.(More information about this bill and context can be found [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4747 here].) It also amends the ''Immigration (Guardianship of Children) Act 1946'' in relation to making and implementing any decision to remove, deport or take a non-citizen child from Australia. However, these amendments would only have effect for a period of 12 months. By making these amendments, the bill attempts to codify the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bali_Process Bali Process] into domestic law. References * [1] Read more about the decision on Wikipedia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaintiff_M70/2011_%26_Plaintiff_M106_of_2011_by_his_Litigation_Guardian_v_Minister_for_Immigration_and_Citizenship here] and on ABC News [http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-31/high-court-rules-on-asylum-seeker-challenge/2864218 here]. Read more about the effect of this decision on the Malaysia Solution [http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154 here]. * [2] More information about this bill and context can be found [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4747 here].
representatives vote 2012-06-27#4 Edited by mackay staff on 2014-02-24 11:54:36	Title Description ~~The majority voted in favour of a motion proposed by Independent MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives Andrew Wilkie].~~ The majority voted in favour of a [http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-06-27.105.1 motion] proposed by Independent MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives Andrew Wilkie]. The motion was that the amendments in this bill only have effect for a period of 12 months after it commences as an Act. Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this bill. ''Background to the bill'' The bill was introduced by Independent MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Robert_Oakeshott&mpc=Lyne&house=representatives Rob Oakeshott] in response to the High Court's decision in [http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/32.html?query= ''Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship''] [2011] HCA 32, which put an end to the Labor Government's [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysian_Solution#Immigration Malaysia Solution] policy.[1] To this end, the bill amends the ''Migration Act 1958'' to replace the existing framework for taking offshore entry persons to another country to assess their refugee claims.[2] It also amends the ''Immigration (Guardianship of Children) Act 1946'' in relation to making and implementing any decision to remove, deport or take a non-citizen child from Australia. However, these amendments would only have effect for a period of 12 months. By making these amendments, the bill attempts to codify the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bali_Process Bali Process] into domestic law. References * [1] Read more about the decision on Wikipedia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaintiff_M70/2011_%26_Plaintiff_M106_of_2011_by_his_Litigation_Guardian_v_Minister_for_Immigration_and_Citizenship here] and on ABC News [http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-31/high-court-rules-on-asylum-seeker-challenge/2864218 here]. Read more about the effect of this decision on the Malaysia Solution [http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154 here]. * [2] More information about this bill and context can be found [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4747 here]. * [2] More information about this bill and context can be found [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4747 here].
representatives vote 2012-06-27#4 Edited by mackay staff on 2014-02-24 11:51:30	Title Bills - Migration Legislation Amendment (The Bali Process) Bill 2012; Consideration in Detail Migration Legislation Amendment (The Bali Process) Bill 2012 - Consideration in Detail - 12 month limit Description The majority voted in favour of a motion proposed by Independent MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives Andrew Wilkie]. The motion was that the amendments in this bill only have effect for a period of 12 months after it commences as an Act. Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this bill. ''Background to the bill'' <p> The aye votes succeeded in passing an amendment that the amendments in this Act only have effect for a period of 12 months after the commencement of the Act. This amendment was proposed by <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives">Andrew Wilkie MP</a> The bill was introduced by Independent MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Robert_Oakeshott&mpc=Lyne&house=representatives Rob Oakeshott] in response to the High Court's decision in [http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/32.html?query= ''Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship''] [2011] HCA 32, which put an end to the Labor Government's [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysian_Solution#Immigration Malaysia Solution] policy.[1] ~~<p> Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this Bill. </p>~~ To this end, the bill amends the ''Migration Act 1958'' to replace the existing framework for taking offshore entry persons to another country to assess their refugee claims.[2] It also amends the ''Immigration (Guardianship of Children) Act 1946'' in relation to making and implementing any decision to remove, deport or take a non-citizen child from Australia. However, these amendments would only have effect for a period of 12 months. <p><b>Background to Bill</b></p> <p>The Bill was introduced in response to the High Court's decision in <a href="http://www.hcourt.gov.au/cases/case-m70/2011"><i>Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2011]</i></a>, which overruled the Labor Government's <a href="http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154">'Malaysia Solution'</a>. The Bill would have given the Government to implement offshore processing for asylum seekers. This Bill did not become law as it failed to pass in the Second Reading stage in the Senate on <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2012-06-28&number=3&house=senate ">28 June 2012</a>. By making these amendments, the bill attempts to codify the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bali_Process Bali Process] into domestic law. ~~<p><b>Summary of debate in Parliament</b></p>~~ ~~<p>In the debate in the House of Representatives for this division:~~ <ul> <li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Scott_Morrison&mpc=Cook&house=representatives">Scott Morrison</a> criticised the Gillard Government and the cross-bench MPs for rejecting Coalition amendments. MP Morrison stated that the Coalition will not support this legislation, citing the removal of clause 198A relating to human rights protections in the Migration Act as a reason. He also mentioned that he had travelled to Malaysia and was not satisfied with the conditions there. </li> <li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Bob_Katter&mpc=Kennedy&house=representatives">Bob Katter</a> criticised MP Morrison of hypocrisy. Katter stated that the standard of living is better in Australia. He stated that he will support the Coalition's legislation. He cited a figure that two-thirds of people attempting to arriving by boat eventually settle in Australia and used that to provide evidence for the fact that many will choose to settle regardless.</li> <li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Joe_Hockey&mpc=North_Sydney&house=representatives">Joe Hockey</a> cited his personal feelings towards this legislation, given that is father was a refugee. Hockey stated that he did not support a people swap approach, particularly given the movement of unaccompanied minors. He stated that he supports a solution that includes Nauru or Manus Island.</li> <li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Tony_Abbott&mpc=Warringah&house=representatives">Tony Abbott</a> stated that the Coalition would not support the 'Malaysia deal' or this amendment, citing that the measure will not work and that it is not in accordance with Australian human rights standards. Abbott criticised Prime Minister Gillard. </li> <il>MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Anthony_Albanese&mpc=Grayndler&house=representatives">Anthony Albanese</a> stated that the government would support this amendment. He argued that the amendment would ensure accountability and commended the cross-benches, the government and the opposition backbench for working out these issues. Albanese said that Nauru was not a deterrent and that this proposal is worth trying. </il> </ul> <p> More information about this Bill and the context surrounding it can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r4747_ems_d54d1bdd-091a-422c-96d0-f7a6186c9e45/upload_pdf/371445reprem.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">here</a>. The text of the Amendment can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr4747_amend_10b90f9d-fbed-4ab6-b913-8d6386b9b534%22;rec=0">here</a>. The debate in Parliament surrounding this Amendment can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr4747_amend_10b90f9d-fbed-4ab6-b913-8d6386b9b534%22;rec=0">here</a>. ~~<p><b>Qualifiers</b></p>~~ <p>This vote is difficult to determine who is voting for or against a stricter policy regarding asylum seekers. This is because the no votes could be voting against the Bali Process specifically, not a stricter system with regards to refugees. </p> References * [1] Read more about the decision on Wikipedia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaintiff_M70/2011_%26_Plaintiff_M106_of_2011_by_his_Litigation_Guardian_v_Minister_for_Immigration_and_Citizenship here] and on ABC News [http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-31/high-court-rules-on-asylum-seeker-challenge/2864218 here]. Read more about the effect of this decision on the Malaysia Solution [http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154 here]. * [2] More information about this bill and context can be found [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4747 here].
representatives vote 2012-06-27#4 Edited by Natasha Burrows on 2013-11-14 09:18:25	Title Description <p> The aye votes succeeded in passing an amendment that the amendments in this Act only have effect for a period of 12 months after the commencement of the Act. This amendment was proposed by <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives">Andrew Wilkie MP</a> <p> Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this Bill. </p> <p><b>Background to Bill</b></p> <p>The Bill was introduced in response to the High Court's decision in <a href="http://www.hcourt.gov.au/cases/case-m70/2011"><i>Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2011]</i></a>, which overruled the Labor Government's <a href="http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154">'Malaysia Solution'</a>. The Bill would have given the Government to implement offshore processing for asylum seekers. This Bill did not become law as it failed to pass in the Second Reading stage in the Senate on <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2012-06-28&number=3&house=senate ">28 June 2012</a>. <p><b>Summary of debate in Parliament</b></p> <p>In the debate in the House of Representatives for this division: <ul> <li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Scott_Morrison&mpc=Cook&house=representatives">Scott Morrison</a> criticised the Gillard Government and the cross-bench MPs for rejecting Coalition amendments. MP Morrison stated that the Coalition will not support this legislation, citing the removal of clause 198A relating to human rights protections in the Migration Act as a reason. He also mentioned that he had travelled to Malaysia and was not satisfied with the conditions there. </li> <li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Bob_Katter&mpc=Kennedy&house=representatives">Bob Katter</a> criticised MP Morrison of hypocrisy. Katter stated that the standard of living is better in Australia. He stated that he will support the Coalition's legislation. He cited a figure that two-thirds of people attempting to arriving by boat eventually settle in Australia and used that to provide evidence for the fact that many will choose to settle regardless.</li> <li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Joe_Hockey&mpc=North_Sydney&house=representatives">Joe Hockey</a> cited his personal feelings towards this legislation, given that is father was a refugee. Hockey stated that he did not support a people swap approach, particularly given the movement of unaccompanied minors. He stated that he supports a solution that includes Nauru or Manus Island.</li> <li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Tony_Abbott&mpc=Warringah&house=representatives">Tony Abbott</a> stated that the Coalition would not support the 'Malaysia deal' or this amendment, citing that the measure will not work and that it is not in accordance with Australian human rights standards. Abbott criticised Prime Minister Gillard. </li> <il>MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Anthony_Albanese&mpc=Grayndler&house=representatives">Anthony Albanese</a> stated that the government would support this amendment. He argued that the amendment would ensure accountability and commended the cross-benches, the government and the opposition backbench for working out these issues. Albanese said that Nauru was not a deterrent and that this proposal is worth trying. </il> </ul> . <p> More information about this Bill and the context surrounding it can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r4747_ems_d54d1bdd-091a-422c-96d0-f7a6186c9e45/upload_pdf/371445reprem.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">here</a>. The text of the Amendment can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr4747_amend_10b90f9d-fbed-4ab6-b913-8d6386b9b534%22;rec=0">here</a>. The debate in Parliament surrounding this Amendment can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr4747_amend_10b90f9d-fbed-4ab6-b913-8d6386b9b534%22;rec=0">here</a>. <p><b>Qualifiers</b></p> <p>This vote is difficult to determine who is voting for or against a stricter policy regarding asylum seekers. This is because the no votes could be voting against the Bali Process specifically, not a stricter system with regards to refugees. </p>
representatives vote 2012-06-27#4 Edited by Natasha Burrows on 2013-11-14 09:18:09	Title Description <p> The aye votes succeeded in passing an amendment that the amendments in this Act only have effect for a period of 12 months after the commencement of the Act. This amendment was proposed by <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives">Andrew Wilkie MP</a> <p> Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this Bill. </p> <p><b>Background to Bill</b></p> <p>The Bill was introduced in response to the High Court's decision in <a href="http://www.hcourt.gov.au/cases/case-m70/2011"><i>Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2011]</i></a>, which overruled the Labor Government's <a href="http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154">'Malaysia Solution'</a>. The Bill would have given the Government to implement offshore processing for asylum seekers. This Bill did not become law as it failed to pass in the Second Reading stage in the Senate on <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2012-06-28&number=3&house=senate ">28 June 2012</a>. <p><b>Summary of debate in Parliament</b></p> <p>In the debate in the House of Representatives for this division: <ul> <li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Scott_Morrison&mpc=Cook&house=representatives">Scott Morrison</a> criticised the Gillard Government and the cross-bench MPs for rejecting Coalition amendments. MP Morrison stated that the Coalition will not support this legislation, citing the removal of clause 198A relating to human rights protections in the Migration Act as a reason. He also mentioned that he had travelled to Malaysia and was not satisfied with the conditions there. </li> <li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Bob_Katter&mpc=Kennedy&house=representatives">Bob Katter</a> criticised MP Morrison of hypocrisy. Katter stated that the standard of living is better in Australia. He stated that he will support the Coalition's legislation. He cited a figure that two-thirds of people attempting to arriving by boat eventually settle in Australia and used that to provide evidence for the fact that many will choose to settle regardless.</li> <li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Joe_Hockey&mpc=North_Sydney&house=representatives">Joe Hockey</a> cited his personal feelings towards this legislation, given that is father was a refugee. Hockey stated that he did not support a people swap approach, particularly given the movement of unaccompanied minors. He stated that he supports a solution that includes Nauru or Manus Island.</li> ~~<li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Tony_Abbott&mpc=Warringah&house=representatives">Tony Abbott</a> </ul>~~ <li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Tony_Abbott&mpc=Warringah&house=representatives">Tony Abbott</a> stated that the Coalition would not support the 'Malaysia deal' or this amendment, citing that the measure will not work and that it is not in accordance with Australian human rights standards. Abbott criticised Prime Minister Gillard. </li> <il>MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Anthony_Albanese&mpc=Grayndler&house=representatives">Anthony Albanese</a> stated that the government would support this amendment. He argued that the amendment would ensure accountability and commended the cross-benches, the government and the opposition backbench for working out these issues. Albanese said that Nauru was not a deterrent and that this proposal is worth trying. </il> </ul> . <p> More information about this Bill and the context surrounding it can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r4747_ems_d54d1bdd-091a-422c-96d0-f7a6186c9e45/upload_pdf/371445reprem.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">here</a>. The text of the Amendment can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr4747_amend_10b90f9d-fbed-4ab6-b913-8d6386b9b534%22;rec=0">here</a>. The debate in Parliament surrounding this Amendment can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr4747_amend_10b90f9d-fbed-4ab6-b913-8d6386b9b534%22;rec=0">here</a>. <p><b>Qualifiers</b></p> <p>This vote is difficult to determine who is voting for or against a stricter policy regarding asylum seekers. This is because the no votes could be voting against the Bali Process specifically, not a stricter system with regards to refugees. </p>
representatives vote 2012-06-27#4 Edited by Natasha Burrows on 2013-11-13 10:45:55	Title Description <p> The aye votes succeeded in passing an amendment that the amendments in this Act only have effect for a period of 12 months after the commencement of the Act. This amendment was proposed by <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives">Andrew Wilkie MP</a> <p> Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this Bill. </p> <p><b>Background to Bill</b></p> <p>The Bill was introduced in response to the High Court's decision in <a href="http://www.hcourt.gov.au/cases/case-m70/2011"><i>Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2011]</i></a>, which overruled the Labor Government's <a href="http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154">'Malaysia Solution'</a>. The Bill would have given the Government to implement offshore processing for asylum seekers. This Bill did not become law as it failed to pass in the Second Reading stage in the Senate on <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2012-06-28&number=3&house=senate ">28 June 2012</a>. <p><b>Summary of debate in Parliament</b></p> <p>In the debate in the House of Representatives for this division: <ul> <li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Scott_Morrison&mpc=Cook&house=representatives">Scott Morrison</a> criticised the Gillard Government and the cross-bench MPs for rejecting Coalition amendments. MP Morrison stated that the Coalition will not support this legislation, citing the removal of clause 198A relating to human rights protections in the Migration Act as a reason. He also mentioned that he had travelled to Malaysia and was not satisfied with the conditions there. </li> <li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Bob_Katter&mpc=Kennedy&house=representatives">Bob Katter</a> criticised MP Morrison of hypocrisy. Katter stated that the standard of living is better in Australia. He stated that he will support the Coalition's legislation. He cited a figure that two-thirds of people attempting to arriving by boat eventually settle in Australia and used that to provide evidence for the fact that many will choose to settle regardless. </ul> <li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Bob_Katter&mpc=Kennedy&house=representatives">Bob Katter</a> criticised MP Morrison of hypocrisy. Katter stated that the standard of living is better in Australia. He stated that he will support the Coalition's legislation. He cited a figure that two-thirds of people attempting to arriving by boat eventually settle in Australia and used that to provide evidence for the fact that many will choose to settle regardless.</li> <li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Joe_Hockey&mpc=North_Sydney&house=representatives">Joe Hockey</a> cited his personal feelings towards this legislation, given that is father was a refugee. Hockey stated that he did not support a people swap approach, particularly given the movement of unaccompanied minors. He stated that he supports a solution that includes Nauru or Manus Island.</li> <li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Tony_Abbott&mpc=Warringah&house=representatives">Tony Abbott</a> </ul> . <p> More information about this Bill and the context surrounding it can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r4747_ems_d54d1bdd-091a-422c-96d0-f7a6186c9e45/upload_pdf/371445reprem.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">here</a>. The text of the Amendment can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr4747_amend_10b90f9d-fbed-4ab6-b913-8d6386b9b534%22;rec=0">here</a>. The debate in Parliament surrounding this Amendment can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr4747_amend_10b90f9d-fbed-4ab6-b913-8d6386b9b534%22;rec=0">here</a>. <p><b>Qualifiers</b></p> <p>This vote is difficult to determine who is voting for or against a stricter policy regarding asylum seekers. This is because the no votes could be voting against the Bali Process specifically, not a stricter system with regards to refugees. </p>
representatives vote 2012-06-27#4 Edited by Natasha Burrows on 2013-11-13 10:32:37	Title Description <p> The aye votes succeeded in passing an amendment that the amendments in this Act only have effect for a period of 12 months after the commencement of the Act. This amendment was proposed by <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives">Andrew Wilkie MP</a> <p> Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this Bill. </p> ~~<p><b>Summary of debate in Parliament</b></p>~~ ~~<p>This Bill was sponsored by Independent MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Robert_Oakeshott&mpc=Lyne&house=representatives">Oakeshott</a>.~~ <p><b>Background to Bill</b></p> <p>The Bill was introduced in response to the High Court's decision in <a href="http://www.hcourt.gov.au/cases/case-m70/2011"><i>Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2011]</i></a>, which overruled the Labor Government's <a href="http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154">'Malaysia Solution'</a>. The Bill would have given the Government to implement offshore processing for asylum seekers. This Bill did not become law as it failed to pass in the Second Reading stage in the Senate on <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2012-06-28&number=3&house=senate ">28 June 2012</a>. <p><b>Summary of debate in Parliament</b></p> <p>In the debate in the House of Representatives for this division: <ul> <li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Scott_Morrison&mpc=Cook&house=representatives">Scott Morrison</a> criticised the Gillard Government and the cross-bench MPs for rejecting Coalition amendments. MP Morrison stated that the Coalition will not support this legislation, citing the removal of clause 198A relating to human rights protections in the Migration Act as a reason. He also mentioned that he had travelled to Malaysia and was not satisfied with the conditions there. </li> <li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Bob_Katter&mpc=Kennedy&house=representatives">Bob Katter</a> criticised MP Morrison of hypocrisy. Katter stated that the standard of living is better in Australia. He stated that he will support the Coalition's legislation. He cited a figure that two-thirds of people attempting to arriving by boat eventually settle in Australia and used that to provide evidence for the fact that many will choose to settle regardless. </ul> . <p> More information about this Bill and the context surrounding it can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r4747_ems_d54d1bdd-091a-422c-96d0-f7a6186c9e45/upload_pdf/371445reprem.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">here</a>. The text of the Amendment can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr4747_amend_10b90f9d-fbed-4ab6-b913-8d6386b9b534%22;rec=0">here</a>. The debate in Parliament surrounding this Amendment can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr4747_amend_10b90f9d-fbed-4ab6-b913-8d6386b9b534%22;rec=0">here</a>. <p><b>Qualifiers</b></p> <p>This vote is difficult to determine who is voting for or against a stricter policy regarding asylum seekers. This is because the no votes could be voting against the Bali Process specifically, not a stricter system with regards to refugees. </p>
representatives vote 2012-06-27#4 Edited by Natasha Burrows on 2013-09-22 14:19:25	Title ~~Bills — Migration Legislation Amendment (The Bali Process) Bill 2012; Consideration in Detail~~ Bills - Migration Legislation Amendment (The Bali Process) Bill 2012; Consideration in Detail Description ~~<p class="speaker">Scott Morrison</p>~~ <p>We have just seen in this place, with the vote on the previous amendment and the one that has now been put before us by the member for Denison, some very serious matters. The coalition reached out to this parliament and put forward some very serious proposals to the crossbench. We put forward an amendment to this bill, the Migration Legislation Amendment (The Bali Process) Bill 2012, in good faith. It would have seen this bill passed not only in this place but in the other place as well. It would have seen us leave this parliament this week with legislation that the government said was needed and that the Australian people expect is needed as well.</p> <p>That is not going to happen now because the government have rejected the amendment that was put forward and the offer that was made by the coalition to secure that amendment and break this deadlock. The amendment put forward by the member for Denison will not be supported by those on this side of the House. The offer that was made by the coalition has been rejected by the crossbenchers. It has been rejected by the government. They have decided to stand there and lock this parliament up over a potential way forward rather than dealing with it as I believe the people of Australia would have expected and as the coalition was hoping for. The member for Pearce stood here in this chamber and was given two opportunities to make that plea to the members of the government and the crossbench. That plea—from the member for Pearce, from the Leader of the Opposition and from me as the mover of the amendment—was categorically thrown out of this chamber by a government looking to score a cheap victory on this issue tonight rather than introduce legislation that will pass this parliament.</p> <p> The aye votes succeeded in passing an amendment that the amendments in this Act only have effect for a period of 12 months after the commencement of the Act. This amendment was proposed by <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives">Andrew Wilkie MP</a> <p> Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this Bill. </p> <p><b>Summary of debate in Parliament</b></p> <p>This Bill was sponsored by Independent MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Robert_Oakeshott&mpc=Lyne&house=representatives">Oakeshott</a>. <p><b>Background to Bill</b></p> <p>The Bill was introduced in response to the High Court's decision in <a href="http://www.hcourt.gov.au/cases/case-m70/2011"><i>Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2011]</i></a>, which overruled the Labor Government's <a href="http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154">'Malaysia Solution'</a>. The Bill would have given the Government to implement offshore processing for asylum seekers. This Bill did not become law as it failed to pass in the Second Reading stage in the Senate on <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2012-06-28&number=3&house=senate ">28 June 2012</a>. <p> More information about this Bill and the context surrounding it can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r4747_ems_d54d1bdd-091a-422c-96d0-f7a6186c9e45/upload_pdf/371445reprem.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">here</a>. The text of the Amendment can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr4747_amend_10b90f9d-fbed-4ab6-b913-8d6386b9b534%22;rec=0">here</a>. The debate in Parliament surrounding this Amendment can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr4747_amend_10b90f9d-fbed-4ab6-b913-8d6386b9b534%22;rec=0">here</a>. <p><b>Qualifiers</b></p> <p>This vote is difficult to determine who is voting for or against a stricter policy regarding asylum seekers. This is because the no votes could be voting against the Bali Process specifically, not a stricter system with regards to refugees. </p> <p>The amendment put forward by the member for Denison will not be supported by this coalition. This carbon-copy bill—the government's plea for their abominable Malaysian people swap—will not be supported by this coalition. This government's attempt, supported by the member for Lyne, to strip the human rights protections of clause 198A out of the Migration Act and replace them with nothing legally binding will not be supported by members on this side of the House—but it will be supported by many members on the other side of the House.</p> <p>I am not sure how many members of the government, as they examine their consciences on this, will walk into this place and support the abolition of these measures. I am not sure how many of them will examine their consciences, when this bill is finally debated and voted on, and vote for their abominable Malaysian people swap. I ask them to examine their consciences tonight because this side of the House is going to stand against the Malaysian people swap. I will tell you why: unlike most on that side of the House I have been to Nauru and Malaysia and seen where people will be. I have seen the schools they would attend—and the schools they will not attend in Malaysia. I have seen the clinics they will not be able to go to in Malaysia. I have seen the conditions that they are going to live in. I have seen the abuse that they are going to be exposed to. I have seen it and I will not let it happen in this place. I returned from Malaysia and shared with my colleagues—the Leader of the Opposition and the shadow cabinet—that we could not allow this abominable bill and proposal to be supported by this parliament.</p> <p>Members on that side may well support this abominable bill, but one thing we know is that the coalition will stand tough on this in the Senate. We will prevent this parliament from backing such an abominable arrangement. I am sorry to say to the member for Denison we will not support this amendment. He understood that we wanted to get legislation through this parliament. That has been rejected by those opposite. It has been rejected by the majority of the member for Denison's crossbench colleagues. The Australian people were looking for talks; we had them today. A compromise was put by the coalition—a significant compromise which required us to move. We did move, and that move has been categorically rejected by a government hell-bent on introducing— <i>(Time expired)</i></p> ~~<p class="speaker">Bob Katter</p>~~ ~~<p>I have been listening to speeches in parliament for 39 years and today was probably one of the better exercises in hypocrisy that I have heard.</p>~~ ~~<p class="speaker">Paul Neville</p>~~ ~~<p>How would you know?</p>~~ ~~<p class="speaker">Bob Katter</p>~~ <p>Do not provoke me. I do not think that would be a really good idea, Paul Neville. The situation to me seems very simple. If you can get on a boat and get into Australia, then you would be a fool not to have a go. The people who are coming in are coming from countries where incomes may be $3,000. It seems to me the average income for the people who are coming in is about $3,000 a year. Here, even if you do not work, you are on $35,000 a year. It is a pretty good call.</p> ~~<p class="speaker">Paul Neville</p>~~ ~~<p>Come on!</p>~~ ~~<p class="speaker">Bob Katter</p>~~ <p>The bloke in front of me here, the member for wherever he comes from—Bundaberg—says, 'Come on!' Are you disagreeing, my friend? Are you disagreeing that a person comes here because he will get a better standard of living? Oh, you are not—so stop interrupting.</p> ~~<p class="speaker">Anna Burke</p>~~ ~~<p>The member for Hinkler is not helping the situation. The member for Kennedy has the call.</p>~~ ~~<p class="speaker">Bob Katter</p>~~ <p>On the figures that have been presented to me by both sides of this parliament, it would appear that if these people are processed—here or overseas—two-thirds of them will end up getting into Australia. I suspect the figure is a lot higher than that, but I will accept the figure that I have been given of two-thirds. So if you have a shot you have a two in three chance of getting in to what these people would probably consider a paradise. So why not have a go? They have a go and a lot of them die because no-one has told them that a lot of people die attempting to get here.</p> <p>I voted against the Malaysian solution the first time and I think really it was for political reasons that I made the decision. I am ashamed to say that, but that may have been an element most certainly in my thinking at the time. But if you know that when you get on that boat you are going to be at the back of a queue of 250,000 people in Malaysia then there is not much point in getting on that boat. That is what we are talking about and voting on here. I will also be voting for the legislation being put forward by the opposition because I think it is better to have two horses in the race than one horse in the race. But it does not seem to me that too many other people in this place are too interested in that. They have got their idea and they are not going to change it, they are not going to compromise. From my experience, on both sides of the House I have been presented with that approach. I think that the Malaysian solution may not stay afloat in the longer term and we do have to go to another solution, but I just cannot but see that if you know that you get on the boat and you have two-thirds of a chance of getting into a country that they would consider to be paradise then it is worthwhile having a go.</p> <p>My forebears and the forebears of most people in this House—all mine were here in 1870 or earlier—came out here and were prepared to live on a dirt floor in a galvanised iron shanty in the goldmining towns of Australia, as did the forebears of almost all those who were here before the Second World War. But these people are not coming here to live on a dirt floor in a galvanised iron shanty; none of them are going to do that. They are going to live in what is considered by most people on Earth to be fairly attractive circumstances. Unless you can demonstrate clearly to these people that if you get on the boat you will not get in here then this will continue and get considerably worse.</p> <p>I have spoken in this place a thousand times that you live in a country that is empty. I represent an area that could support a population of 60 or 70 million people. The electorate of Kennedy has got the water and the land resources. This issue will bring it home to the rest of the world. As the United Nations lady from the Indian subcontinent said, 'You will take these people because you are a country that can.' I think that they are very ominous words for the people of Australia. The more attention that is brought to this issue, the worse our country is going to be. <i>(Time expired)</i></p> ~~<p class="speaker">Joe Hockey</p>~~ <p>I am always reluctant to speak early in these debates. For a whole lot of personal reasons, the emotions run very deep in me in relation to refugees. The member for Kennedy said that his forebears came here in the 1870s. My father came here as a refugee on 3 September 1948. He came from a country where there was war. He had to wait his turn, but he was desperate to come here. The member for Kennedy is right: there is a great deal of hypocrisy from time to time in these debates. But I will say one thing deliberately to this parliament. I will never ever support a people swap where you can send a 13-year-old child unaccompanied to a country without supervision—never. It will be over my dead body. How dare people?</p> <p>Some people say they are wrestling with their conscience. I am not; I know exactly what I want to do. The compromise that the Leader of the Opposition offered today went some way forward to offering a solution, be it Nauru, Manus Island or somewhere else. I fought with the previous Prime Minister, my Prime Minister, about Nauru. I opposed it until the moment he assured me that at all times Australians would be able to supervise the people who were sent there, that they would be protected, that they would have health care and education support—until he could assure me that those most vulnerable would be protected. That was when I agreed with him. I was prepared to cross the floor in a previous government with an absolute majority in this place because I disagreed with the treatment of those most vulnerable by my Prime Minister. Until he assured me personally, together with the minister for immigration, that no child would ever be abandoned in another country once they had come under the guardian protection of Australia—until he assured me of that I would not support it. But he did.</p> <p>This government is now asking us to support a situation where a 13-year-old child could be sent to another nation without any regard for their welfare after that moment. Even if we have words from the immigration minister about it being a case-by-case basis, it is the threat of it and from time to time the enactment of it that is the most damning thing for our conscience. That is why I feel entirely consistent. That is why I was so angry about being gagged before. I have wrestled, like many others, with their conscience on this debate but I am entirely consistent with my soul. I will sleep easy because I know from my own background and from what I have done in the past that I am going to be consistent no matter how painful it might be in the electorate, no matter how hard it might be explaining it to my constituents. I rest easy on this because I can be entirely consistent with what beats within my soul.</p> ~~<p class='motion-notice motion-notice-truncated'>Long debate text truncated.</p>~~

Change

Division

representatives vote 2012-06-27#4

Edited by mackay staff

on 2014-10-20 09:50:59

Title

Description

The majority voted in favour of a [motion](http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-06-27.105.1) proposed by Independent MP [Andrew Wilkie](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives).
~~The motion was that the amendments in this bill only have effect for a period of 12 months after it commences as an Act.~~
~~Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this bill.~~
~~_Background to the bill_~~
The bill was introduced by Independent MP [Rob Oakeshott](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Robert_Oakeshott&mpc=Lyne&house=representatives) in response to the High Court's decision in [_Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship_](http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/32.html?query=) () HCA 32, which put an end to the Labor Government's [Malaysia Solution](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysian_Solution#Immigration) policy.(Read more about the decision on Wikipedia [here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaintiff_M70/2011_%26_Plaintiff_M106_of_2011_by_his_Litigation_Guardian_v_Minister_for_Immigration_and_Citizenship) and on ABC News [here](http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-31/high-court-rules-on-asylum-seeker-challenge/2864218). Read more about the effect of this decision on the Malaysia Solution [here](http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154). )
To this end, the bill amends the _Migration Act 1958_ to replace the existing framework for taking offshore entry persons to another country to assess their refugee claims.(More information about this bill and context can be found [here](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4747).) It also amends the _Immigration (Guardianship of Children) Act 1946_ in relation to making and implementing any decision to remove, deport or take a non-citizen child from Australia. However, these amendments would only have effect for a period of 12 months.
~~By making these amendments, the bill attempts to codify the [Bali Process](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bali_Process) into domestic law.~~
The majority voted in favour of a [motion](http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-06-27.105.1) proposed by Independent MP [Andrew Wilkie](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives).
The motion was that the amendments in this bill only have effect for a period of 12 months after it commences as an Act.
Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this bill.
_Background to the bill_
The bill was introduced by Independent MP [Rob Oakeshott](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Robert_Oakeshott&mpc=Lyne&house=representatives) in response to the High Court's decision in [_Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship_](http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/32.html?query=) [2011] HCA 32, which put an end to the Labor Government's [Malaysia Solution](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysian_Solution#Immigration) policy.(Read more about the decision on Wikipedia [here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaintiff_M70/2011_%26_Plaintiff_M106_of_2011_by_his_Litigation_Guardian_v_Minister_for_Immigration_and_Citizenship) and on ABC News [here](http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-31/high-court-rules-on-asylum-seeker-challenge/2864218). Read more about the effect of this decision on the Malaysia Solution [here](http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154). )
To this end, the bill amends the _Migration Act 1958_ to replace the existing framework for taking offshore entry persons to another country to assess their refugee claims.(More information about this bill and context can be found [here](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4747).) It also amends the _Immigration (Guardianship of Children) Act 1946_ in relation to making and implementing any decision to remove, deport or take a non-citizen child from Australia. However, these amendments would only have effect for a period of 12 months.
By making these amendments, the bill attempts to codify the [Bali Process](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bali_Process) into domestic law.
References

representatives vote 2012-06-27#4

Edited by system

on 2014-10-07 16:21:02

Title

Description

The majority voted in favour of a [http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-06-27.105.1 motion] proposed by Independent MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives Andrew Wilkie].
~~The motion was that the amendments in this bill only have effect for a period of 12 months after it commences as an Act.~~
~~Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this bill.~~
~~''Background to the bill''~~
The bill was introduced by Independent MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Robert_Oakeshott&mpc=Lyne&house=representatives Rob Oakeshott] in response to the High Court's decision in [http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/32.html?query= ''Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship''] () HCA 32, which put an end to the Labor Government's [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysian_Solution#Immigration Malaysia Solution] policy.(Read more about the decision on Wikipedia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaintiff_M70/2011_%26_Plaintiff_M106_of_2011_by_his_Litigation_Guardian_v_Minister_for_Immigration_and_Citizenship here] and on ABC News [http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-31/high-court-rules-on-asylum-seeker-challenge/2864218 here]. Read more about the effect of this decision on the Malaysia Solution [http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154 here]. )
To this end, the bill amends the ''Migration Act 1958'' to replace the existing framework for taking offshore entry persons to another country to assess their refugee claims.(More information about this bill and context can be found [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4747 here].) It also amends the ''Immigration (Guardianship of Children) Act 1946'' in relation to making and implementing any decision to remove, deport or take a non-citizen child from Australia. However, these amendments would only have effect for a period of 12 months.
~~By making these amendments, the bill attempts to codify the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bali_Process Bali Process] into domestic law.~~
~~References~~
The majority voted in favour of a [motion](http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-06-27.105.1) proposed by Independent MP [Andrew Wilkie](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives).
The motion was that the amendments in this bill only have effect for a period of 12 months after it commences as an Act.
Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this bill.
_Background to the bill_
The bill was introduced by Independent MP [Rob Oakeshott](http://publicwhip-rails.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Robert_Oakeshott&mpc=Lyne&house=representatives) in response to the High Court's decision in [_Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship_](http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/32.html?query=) () HCA 32, which put an end to the Labor Government's [Malaysia Solution](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysian_Solution#Immigration) policy.(Read more about the decision on Wikipedia [here](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaintiff_M70/2011_%26_Plaintiff_M106_of_2011_by_his_Litigation_Guardian_v_Minister_for_Immigration_and_Citizenship) and on ABC News [here](http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-31/high-court-rules-on-asylum-seeker-challenge/2864218). Read more about the effect of this decision on the Malaysia Solution [here](http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154). )
To this end, the bill amends the _Migration Act 1958_ to replace the existing framework for taking offshore entry persons to another country to assess their refugee claims.(More information about this bill and context can be found [here](http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4747).) It also amends the _Immigration (Guardianship of Children) Act 1946_ in relation to making and implementing any decision to remove, deport or take a non-citizen child from Australia. However, these amendments would only have effect for a period of 12 months.
By making these amendments, the bill attempts to codify the [Bali Process](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bali_Process) into domestic law.
References

representatives vote 2012-06-27#4

Edited by system

on 2014-10-07 16:16:52

Title

Description

The majority voted in favour of a [http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-06-27.105.1 motion] proposed by Independent MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives Andrew Wilkie].
The motion was that the amendments in this bill only have effect for a period of 12 months after it commences as an Act.
Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this bill.
''Background to the bill''
The bill was introduced by Independent MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Robert_Oakeshott&mpc=Lyne&house=representatives Rob Oakeshott] in response to the High Court's decision in [http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/32.html?query= ''Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship''] [2011] HCA 32, which put an end to the Labor Government's [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysian_Solution#Immigration Malaysia Solution] policy.[1]
The bill was introduced by Independent MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Robert_Oakeshott&mpc=Lyne&house=representatives Rob Oakeshott] in response to the High Court's decision in [http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/32.html?query= ''Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship''] () HCA 32, which put an end to the Labor Government's [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysian_Solution#Immigration Malaysia Solution] policy.(Read more about the decision on Wikipedia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaintiff_M70/2011_%26_Plaintiff_M106_of_2011_by_his_Litigation_Guardian_v_Minister_for_Immigration_and_Citizenship here] and on ABC News [http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-31/high-court-rules-on-asylum-seeker-challenge/2864218 here]. Read more about the effect of this decision on the Malaysia Solution [http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154 here]. )
To this end, the bill amends the ''Migration Act 1958'' to replace the existing framework for taking offshore entry persons to another country to assess their refugee claims.[2] It also amends the ''Immigration (Guardianship of Children) Act 1946'' in relation to making and implementing any decision to remove, deport or take a non-citizen child from Australia. However, these amendments would only have effect for a period of 12 months.
To this end, the bill amends the ''Migration Act 1958'' to replace the existing framework for taking offshore entry persons to another country to assess their refugee claims.(More information about this bill and context can be found [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4747 here].) It also amends the ''Immigration (Guardianship of Children) Act 1946'' in relation to making and implementing any decision to remove, deport or take a non-citizen child from Australia. However, these amendments would only have effect for a period of 12 months.
By making these amendments, the bill attempts to codify the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bali_Process Bali Process] into domestic law.
References
* [1] Read more about the decision on Wikipedia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaintiff_M70/2011_%26_Plaintiff_M106_of_2011_by_his_Litigation_Guardian_v_Minister_for_Immigration_and_Citizenship here] and on ABC News [http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-31/high-court-rules-on-asylum-seeker-challenge/2864218 here]. Read more about the effect of this decision on the Malaysia Solution [http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154 here].
* [2] More information about this bill and context can be found [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4747 here].

representatives vote 2012-06-27#4

Edited by mackay staff

on 2014-02-24 11:54:36

Title

Description

~~The majority voted in favour of a motion proposed by Independent MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives Andrew Wilkie].~~
The majority voted in favour of a [http://www.openaustralia.org/debate/?id=2012-06-27.105.1 motion] proposed by Independent MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives Andrew Wilkie].
The motion was that the amendments in this bill only have effect for a period of 12 months after it commences as an Act.
Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this bill.
''Background to the bill''
The bill was introduced by Independent MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Robert_Oakeshott&mpc=Lyne&house=representatives Rob Oakeshott] in response to the High Court's decision in [http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/32.html?query= ''Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship''] [2011] HCA 32, which put an end to the Labor Government's [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysian_Solution#Immigration Malaysia Solution] policy.[1]
To this end, the bill amends the ''Migration Act 1958'' to replace the existing framework for taking offshore entry persons to another country to assess their refugee claims.[2] It also amends the ''Immigration (Guardianship of Children) Act 1946'' in relation to making and implementing any decision to remove, deport or take a non-citizen child from Australia. However, these amendments would only have effect for a period of 12 months.
By making these amendments, the bill attempts to codify the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bali_Process Bali Process] into domestic law.
References
* [1] Read more about the decision on Wikipedia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaintiff_M70/2011_%26_Plaintiff_M106_of_2011_by_his_Litigation_Guardian_v_Minister_for_Immigration_and_Citizenship here] and on ABC News [http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-31/high-court-rules-on-asylum-seeker-challenge/2864218 here]. Read more about the effect of this decision on the Malaysia Solution [http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154 here].
* [2] More information about this bill and context can be found [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4747 here].
* [2] More information about this bill and context can be found [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4747 here].

representatives vote 2012-06-27#4

Edited by mackay staff

on 2014-02-24 11:51:30

Title

Bills - Migration Legislation Amendment (The Bali Process) Bill 2012; Consideration in Detail
Migration Legislation Amendment (The Bali Process) Bill 2012 - Consideration in Detail - 12 month limit

Description

The majority voted in favour of a motion proposed by Independent MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives Andrew Wilkie].
The motion was that the amendments in this bill only have effect for a period of 12 months after it commences as an Act.
Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this bill.
''Background to the bill''
 The aye votes succeeded in passing an amendment that the amendments in this Act only have effect for a period of 12 months after the commencement of the Act. This amendment was proposed by <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives">Andrew Wilkie MP</a>
The bill was introduced by Independent MP [http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Robert_Oakeshott&mpc=Lyne&house=representatives Rob Oakeshott] in response to the High Court's decision in [http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/HCA/2011/32.html?query= ''Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship''] [2011] HCA 32, which put an end to the Labor Government's [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysian_Solution#Immigration Malaysia Solution] policy.[1]
~~ Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this Bill. ~~
To this end, the bill amends the ''Migration Act 1958'' to replace the existing framework for taking offshore entry persons to another country to assess their refugee claims.[2] It also amends the ''Immigration (Guardianship of Children) Act 1946'' in relation to making and implementing any decision to remove, deport or take a non-citizen child from Australia. However, these amendments would only have effect for a period of 12 months.
Background to Bill
The Bill was introduced in response to the High Court's decision in <a href="http://www.hcourt.gov.au/cases/case-m70/2011">Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2011]</a>, which overruled the Labor Government's <a href="http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154">'Malaysia Solution'</a>. The Bill would have given the Government to implement offshore processing for asylum seekers. This Bill did not become law as it failed to pass in the Second Reading stage in the Senate on <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2012-06-28&number=3&house=senate
">28 June 2012</a>.
By making these amendments, the bill attempts to codify the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bali_Process Bali Process] into domestic law.
~~Summary of debate in Parliament~~
~~In the debate in the House of Representatives for this division:~~
<ul> <li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Scott_Morrison&mpc=Cook&house=representatives">Scott Morrison</a> criticised the Gillard Government and the cross-bench MPs for rejecting Coalition amendments. MP Morrison stated that the Coalition will not support this legislation, citing the removal of clause 198A relating to human rights protections in the Migration Act as a reason. He also mentioned that he had travelled to Malaysia and was not satisfied with the conditions there. </li>
<li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Bob_Katter&mpc=Kennedy&house=representatives">Bob Katter</a> criticised MP Morrison of hypocrisy. Katter stated that the standard of living is better in Australia. He stated that he will support the Coalition's legislation. He cited a figure that two-thirds of people attempting to arriving by boat eventually settle in Australia and used that to provide evidence for the fact that many will choose to settle regardless.</li>
<li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Joe_Hockey&mpc=North_Sydney&house=representatives">Joe Hockey</a> cited his personal feelings towards this legislation, given that is father was a refugee. Hockey stated that he did not support a people swap approach, particularly given the movement of unaccompanied minors. He stated that he supports a solution that includes Nauru or Manus Island.</li>
<li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Tony_Abbott&mpc=Warringah&house=representatives">Tony Abbott</a> stated that the Coalition would not support the 'Malaysia deal' or this amendment, citing that the measure will not work and that it is not in accordance with Australian human rights standards. Abbott criticised Prime Minister Gillard. </li>
<il>MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Anthony_Albanese&mpc=Grayndler&house=representatives">Anthony Albanese</a> stated that the government would support this amendment. He argued that the amendment would ensure accountability and commended the cross-benches, the government and the opposition backbench for working out these issues. Albanese said that Nauru was not a deterrent and that this proposal is worth trying. </il> </ul>
 More information about this Bill and the context surrounding it can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r4747_ems_d54d1bdd-091a-422c-96d0-f7a6186c9e45/upload_pdf/371445reprem.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">here</a>. The text of the Amendment can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr4747_amend_10b90f9d-fbed-4ab6-b913-8d6386b9b534%22;rec=0">here</a>. The debate in Parliament surrounding this Amendment can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr4747_amend_10b90f9d-fbed-4ab6-b913-8d6386b9b534%22;rec=0">here</a>.
~~Qualifiers~~
This vote is difficult to determine who is voting for or against a stricter policy regarding asylum seekers. This is because the no votes could be voting against the Bali Process specifically, not a stricter system with regards to refugees.
References
* [1] Read more about the decision on Wikipedia [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaintiff_M70/2011_%26_Plaintiff_M106_of_2011_by_his_Litigation_Guardian_v_Minister_for_Immigration_and_Citizenship here] and on ABC News [http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-31/high-court-rules-on-asylum-seeker-challenge/2864218 here]. Read more about the effect of this decision on the Malaysia Solution [http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154 here].
* [2] More information about this bill and context can be found [http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r4747 here].

representatives vote 2012-06-27#4

Edited by Natasha Burrows

on 2013-11-14 09:18:25

Title

Description

The aye votes succeeded in passing an amendment that the amendments in this Act only have effect for a period of 12 months after the commencement of the Act. This amendment was proposed by <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives">Andrew Wilkie MP</a>
Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this Bill.
Background to Bill
The Bill was introduced in response to the High Court's decision in <a href="http://www.hcourt.gov.au/cases/case-m70/2011">Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2011]</a>, which overruled the Labor Government's <a href="http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154">'Malaysia Solution'</a>. The Bill would have given the Government to implement offshore processing for asylum seekers. This Bill did not become law as it failed to pass in the Second Reading stage in the Senate on <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2012-06-28&number=3&house=senate
">28 June 2012</a>.
Summary of debate in Parliament
In the debate in the House of Representatives for this division:
<ul> <li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Scott_Morrison&mpc=Cook&house=representatives">Scott Morrison</a> criticised the Gillard Government and the cross-bench MPs for rejecting Coalition amendments. MP Morrison stated that the Coalition will not support this legislation, citing the removal of clause 198A relating to human rights protections in the Migration Act as a reason. He also mentioned that he had travelled to Malaysia and was not satisfied with the conditions there. </li>
<li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Bob_Katter&mpc=Kennedy&house=representatives">Bob Katter</a> criticised MP Morrison of hypocrisy. Katter stated that the standard of living is better in Australia. He stated that he will support the Coalition's legislation. He cited a figure that two-thirds of people attempting to arriving by boat eventually settle in Australia and used that to provide evidence for the fact that many will choose to settle regardless.</li>
<li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Joe_Hockey&mpc=North_Sydney&house=representatives">Joe Hockey</a> cited his personal feelings towards this legislation, given that is father was a refugee. Hockey stated that he did not support a people swap approach, particularly given the movement of unaccompanied minors. He stated that he supports a solution that includes Nauru or Manus Island.</li>
<li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Tony_Abbott&mpc=Warringah&house=representatives">Tony Abbott</a> stated that the Coalition would not support the 'Malaysia deal' or this amendment, citing that the measure will not work and that it is not in accordance with Australian human rights standards. Abbott criticised Prime Minister Gillard. </li>
<il>MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Anthony_Albanese&mpc=Grayndler&house=representatives">Anthony Albanese</a> stated that the government would support this amendment. He argued that the amendment would ensure accountability and commended the cross-benches, the government and the opposition backbench for working out these issues. Albanese said that Nauru was not a deterrent and that this proposal is worth trying. </il> </ul>
.
More information about this Bill and the context surrounding it can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r4747_ems_d54d1bdd-091a-422c-96d0-f7a6186c9e45/upload_pdf/371445reprem.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">here</a>. The text of the Amendment can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr4747_amend_10b90f9d-fbed-4ab6-b913-8d6386b9b534%22;rec=0">here</a>. The debate in Parliament surrounding this Amendment can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr4747_amend_10b90f9d-fbed-4ab6-b913-8d6386b9b534%22;rec=0">here</a>.
Qualifiers
This vote is difficult to determine who is voting for or against a stricter policy regarding asylum seekers. This is because the no votes could be voting against the Bali Process specifically, not a stricter system with regards to refugees.

representatives vote 2012-06-27#4

Edited by Natasha Burrows

on 2013-11-14 09:18:09

Title

Description

The aye votes succeeded in passing an amendment that the amendments in this Act only have effect for a period of 12 months after the commencement of the Act. This amendment was proposed by <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives">Andrew Wilkie MP</a>
Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this Bill.
Background to Bill
The Bill was introduced in response to the High Court's decision in <a href="http://www.hcourt.gov.au/cases/case-m70/2011">Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2011]</a>, which overruled the Labor Government's <a href="http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154">'Malaysia Solution'</a>. The Bill would have given the Government to implement offshore processing for asylum seekers. This Bill did not become law as it failed to pass in the Second Reading stage in the Senate on <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2012-06-28&number=3&house=senate
">28 June 2012</a>.
Summary of debate in Parliament
In the debate in the House of Representatives for this division:
<ul> <li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Scott_Morrison&mpc=Cook&house=representatives">Scott Morrison</a> criticised the Gillard Government and the cross-bench MPs for rejecting Coalition amendments. MP Morrison stated that the Coalition will not support this legislation, citing the removal of clause 198A relating to human rights protections in the Migration Act as a reason. He also mentioned that he had travelled to Malaysia and was not satisfied with the conditions there. </li>
<li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Bob_Katter&mpc=Kennedy&house=representatives">Bob Katter</a> criticised MP Morrison of hypocrisy. Katter stated that the standard of living is better in Australia. He stated that he will support the Coalition's legislation. He cited a figure that two-thirds of people attempting to arriving by boat eventually settle in Australia and used that to provide evidence for the fact that many will choose to settle regardless.</li>
<li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Joe_Hockey&mpc=North_Sydney&house=representatives">Joe Hockey</a> cited his personal feelings towards this legislation, given that is father was a refugee. Hockey stated that he did not support a people swap approach, particularly given the movement of unaccompanied minors. He stated that he supports a solution that includes Nauru or Manus Island.</li>
~~<li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Tony_Abbott&mpc=Warringah&house=representatives">Tony Abbott</a> </ul>~~
<li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Tony_Abbott&mpc=Warringah&house=representatives">Tony Abbott</a> stated that the Coalition would not support the 'Malaysia deal' or this amendment, citing that the measure will not work and that it is not in accordance with Australian human rights standards. Abbott criticised Prime Minister Gillard. </li>
<il>MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Anthony_Albanese&mpc=Grayndler&house=representatives">Anthony Albanese</a> stated that the government would support this amendment. He argued that the amendment would ensure accountability and commended the cross-benches, the government and the opposition backbench for working out these issues. Albanese said that Nauru was not a deterrent and that this proposal is worth trying. </il> </ul>
.
More information about this Bill and the context surrounding it can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r4747_ems_d54d1bdd-091a-422c-96d0-f7a6186c9e45/upload_pdf/371445reprem.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">here</a>. The text of the Amendment can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr4747_amend_10b90f9d-fbed-4ab6-b913-8d6386b9b534%22;rec=0">here</a>. The debate in Parliament surrounding this Amendment can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr4747_amend_10b90f9d-fbed-4ab6-b913-8d6386b9b534%22;rec=0">here</a>.
Qualifiers
This vote is difficult to determine who is voting for or against a stricter policy regarding asylum seekers. This is because the no votes could be voting against the Bali Process specifically, not a stricter system with regards to refugees.

representatives vote 2012-06-27#4

Edited by Natasha Burrows

on 2013-11-13 10:45:55

Title

Description

The aye votes succeeded in passing an amendment that the amendments in this Act only have effect for a period of 12 months after the commencement of the Act. This amendment was proposed by <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives">Andrew Wilkie MP</a>
Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this Bill.
Background to Bill
The Bill was introduced in response to the High Court's decision in <a href="http://www.hcourt.gov.au/cases/case-m70/2011">Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2011]</a>, which overruled the Labor Government's <a href="http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154">'Malaysia Solution'</a>. The Bill would have given the Government to implement offshore processing for asylum seekers. This Bill did not become law as it failed to pass in the Second Reading stage in the Senate on <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2012-06-28&number=3&house=senate
">28 June 2012</a>.
Summary of debate in Parliament
In the debate in the House of Representatives for this division:
<ul> <li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Scott_Morrison&mpc=Cook&house=representatives">Scott Morrison</a> criticised the Gillard Government and the cross-bench MPs for rejecting Coalition amendments. MP Morrison stated that the Coalition will not support this legislation, citing the removal of clause 198A relating to human rights protections in the Migration Act as a reason. He also mentioned that he had travelled to Malaysia and was not satisfied with the conditions there. </li>
<li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Bob_Katter&mpc=Kennedy&house=representatives">Bob Katter</a> criticised MP Morrison of hypocrisy. Katter stated that the standard of living is better in Australia. He stated that he will support the Coalition's legislation. He cited a figure that two-thirds of people attempting to arriving by boat eventually settle in Australia and used that to provide evidence for the fact that many will choose to settle regardless. </ul>
<li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Bob_Katter&mpc=Kennedy&house=representatives">Bob Katter</a> criticised MP Morrison of hypocrisy. Katter stated that the standard of living is better in Australia. He stated that he will support the Coalition's legislation. He cited a figure that two-thirds of people attempting to arriving by boat eventually settle in Australia and used that to provide evidence for the fact that many will choose to settle regardless.</li>
<li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Joe_Hockey&mpc=North_Sydney&house=representatives">Joe Hockey</a> cited his personal feelings towards this legislation, given that is father was a refugee. Hockey stated that he did not support a people swap approach, particularly given the movement of unaccompanied minors. He stated that he supports a solution that includes Nauru or Manus Island.</li>
<li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Tony_Abbott&mpc=Warringah&house=representatives">Tony Abbott</a> </ul>
.
More information about this Bill and the context surrounding it can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r4747_ems_d54d1bdd-091a-422c-96d0-f7a6186c9e45/upload_pdf/371445reprem.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">here</a>. The text of the Amendment can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr4747_amend_10b90f9d-fbed-4ab6-b913-8d6386b9b534%22;rec=0">here</a>. The debate in Parliament surrounding this Amendment can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr4747_amend_10b90f9d-fbed-4ab6-b913-8d6386b9b534%22;rec=0">here</a>.
Qualifiers
This vote is difficult to determine who is voting for or against a stricter policy regarding asylum seekers. This is because the no votes could be voting against the Bali Process specifically, not a stricter system with regards to refugees.

representatives vote 2012-06-27#4

Edited by Natasha Burrows

on 2013-11-13 10:32:37

Title

Description

The aye votes succeeded in passing an amendment that the amendments in this Act only have effect for a period of 12 months after the commencement of the Act. This amendment was proposed by <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives">Andrew Wilkie MP</a>
Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this Bill.
~~Summary of debate in Parliament~~
~~This Bill was sponsored by Independent MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Robert_Oakeshott&mpc=Lyne&house=representatives">Oakeshott</a>.~~
Background to Bill
The Bill was introduced in response to the High Court's decision in <a href="http://www.hcourt.gov.au/cases/case-m70/2011">Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2011]</a>, which overruled the Labor Government's <a href="http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154">'Malaysia Solution'</a>. The Bill would have given the Government to implement offshore processing for asylum seekers. This Bill did not become law as it failed to pass in the Second Reading stage in the Senate on <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2012-06-28&number=3&house=senate
">28 June 2012</a>.
Summary of debate in Parliament
In the debate in the House of Representatives for this division:
<ul> <li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Scott_Morrison&mpc=Cook&house=representatives">Scott Morrison</a> criticised the Gillard Government and the cross-bench MPs for rejecting Coalition amendments. MP Morrison stated that the Coalition will not support this legislation, citing the removal of clause 198A relating to human rights protections in the Migration Act as a reason. He also mentioned that he had travelled to Malaysia and was not satisfied with the conditions there. </li>
<li> MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Bob_Katter&mpc=Kennedy&house=representatives">Bob Katter</a> criticised MP Morrison of hypocrisy. Katter stated that the standard of living is better in Australia. He stated that he will support the Coalition's legislation. He cited a figure that two-thirds of people attempting to arriving by boat eventually settle in Australia and used that to provide evidence for the fact that many will choose to settle regardless. </ul>
.
More information about this Bill and the context surrounding it can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r4747_ems_d54d1bdd-091a-422c-96d0-f7a6186c9e45/upload_pdf/371445reprem.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">here</a>. The text of the Amendment can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr4747_amend_10b90f9d-fbed-4ab6-b913-8d6386b9b534%22;rec=0">here</a>. The debate in Parliament surrounding this Amendment can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr4747_amend_10b90f9d-fbed-4ab6-b913-8d6386b9b534%22;rec=0">here</a>.
Qualifiers
This vote is difficult to determine who is voting for or against a stricter policy regarding asylum seekers. This is because the no votes could be voting against the Bali Process specifically, not a stricter system with regards to refugees.

representatives vote 2012-06-27#4

Edited by Natasha Burrows

on 2013-09-22 14:19:25

Title

~~Bills — Migration Legislation Amendment (The Bali Process) Bill 2012; Consideration in Detail~~
Bills - Migration Legislation Amendment (The Bali Process) Bill 2012; Consideration in Detail

Description

~~Scott Morrison~~
We have just seen in this place, with the vote on the previous amendment and the one that has now been put before us by the member for Denison, some very serious matters. The coalition reached out to this parliament and put forward some very serious proposals to the crossbench. We put forward an amendment to this bill, the Migration Legislation Amendment (The Bali Process) Bill 2012, in good faith. It would have seen this bill passed not only in this place but in the other place as well. It would have seen us leave this parliament this week with legislation that the government said was needed and that the Australian people expect is needed as well.
That is not going to happen now because the government have rejected the amendment that was put forward and the offer that was made by the coalition to secure that amendment and break this deadlock. The amendment put forward by the member for Denison will not be supported by those on this side of the House. The offer that was made by the coalition has been rejected by the crossbenchers. It has been rejected by the government. They have decided to stand there and lock this parliament up over a potential way forward rather than dealing with it as I believe the people of Australia would have expected and as the coalition was hoping for. The member for Pearce stood here in this chamber and was given two opportunities to make that plea to the members of the government and the crossbench. That plea—from the member for Pearce, from the Leader of the Opposition and from me as the mover of the amendment—was categorically thrown out of this chamber by a government looking to score a cheap victory on this issue tonight rather than introduce legislation that will pass this parliament.
The aye votes succeeded in passing an amendment that the amendments in this Act only have effect for a period of 12 months after the commencement of the Act. This amendment was proposed by <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Andrew_Wilkie&mpc=Denison&house=representatives">Andrew Wilkie MP</a>
 Someone who votes aye in this division supports this amendment. The majority voted aye in this amendment, so it was successful and is included in this Bill.
Summary of debate in Parliament
This Bill was sponsored by Independent MP <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/mp.php?mpn=Robert_Oakeshott&mpc=Lyne&house=representatives">Oakeshott</a>.
Background to Bill
The Bill was introduced in response to the High Court's decision in <a href="http://www.hcourt.gov.au/cases/case-m70/2011">Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2011]</a>, which overruled the Labor Government's <a href="http://theconversation.com/malaysia-solution-high-court-ruling-explained-3154">'Malaysia Solution'</a>. The Bill would have given the Government to implement offshore processing for asylum seekers. This Bill did not become law as it failed to pass in the Second Reading stage in the Senate on <a href="http://publicwhip-test.openaustraliafoundation.org.au/division.php?date=2012-06-28&number=3&house=senate
">28 June 2012</a>.
More information about this Bill and the context surrounding it can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r4747_ems_d54d1bdd-091a-422c-96d0-f7a6186c9e45/upload_pdf/371445reprem.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">here</a>. The text of the Amendment can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr4747_amend_10b90f9d-fbed-4ab6-b913-8d6386b9b534%22;rec=0">here</a>. The debate in Parliament surrounding this Amendment can be found <a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr4747_amend_10b90f9d-fbed-4ab6-b913-8d6386b9b534%22;rec=0">here</a>.
Qualifiers
This vote is difficult to determine who is voting for or against a stricter policy regarding asylum seekers. This is because the no votes could be voting against the Bali Process specifically, not a stricter system with regards to refugees.
The amendment put forward by the member for Denison will not be supported by this coalition. This carbon-copy bill—the government's plea for their abominable Malaysian people swap—will not be supported by this coalition. This government's attempt, supported by the member for Lyne, to strip the human rights protections of clause 198A out of the Migration Act and replace them with nothing legally binding will not be supported by members on this side of the House—but it will be supported by many members on the other side of the House.
I am not sure how many members of the government, as they examine their consciences on this, will walk into this place and support the abolition of these measures. I am not sure how many of them will examine their consciences, when this bill is finally debated and voted on, and vote for their abominable Malaysian people swap. I ask them to examine their consciences tonight because this side of the House is going to stand against the Malaysian people swap. I will tell you why: unlike most on that side of the House I have been to Nauru and Malaysia and seen where people will be. I have seen the schools they would attend—and the schools they will not attend in Malaysia. I have seen the clinics they will not be able to go to in Malaysia. I have seen the conditions that they are going to live in. I have seen the abuse that they are going to be exposed to. I have seen it and I will not let it happen in this place. I returned from Malaysia and shared with my colleagues—the Leader of the Opposition and the shadow cabinet—that we could not allow this abominable bill and proposal to be supported by this parliament.
Members on that side may well support this abominable bill, but one thing we know is that the coalition will stand tough on this in the Senate. We will prevent this parliament from backing such an abominable arrangement. I am sorry to say to the member for Denison we will not support this amendment. He understood that we wanted to get legislation through this parliament. That has been rejected by those opposite. It has been rejected by the majority of the member for Denison's crossbench colleagues. The Australian people were looking for talks; we had them today. A compromise was put by the coalition—a significant compromise which required us to move. We did move, and that move has been categorically rejected by a government hell-bent on introducing— (Time expired)
~~Bob Katter~~
~~I have been listening to speeches in parliament for 39 years and today was probably one of the better exercises in hypocrisy that I have heard.~~
~~Paul Neville~~
~~How would you know?~~
~~Bob Katter~~
Do not provoke me. I do not think that would be a really good idea, Paul Neville. The situation to me seems very simple. If you can get on a boat and get into Australia, then you would be a fool not to have a go. The people who are coming in are coming from countries where incomes may be $3,000. It seems to me the average income for the people who are coming in is about $3,000 a year. Here, even if you do not work, you are on $35,000 a year. It is a pretty good call.
~~Paul Neville~~
~~Come on!~~
~~Bob Katter~~
The bloke in front of me here, the member for wherever he comes from—Bundaberg—says, 'Come on!' Are you disagreeing, my friend? Are you disagreeing that a person comes here because he will get a better standard of living? Oh, you are not—so stop interrupting.
~~Anna Burke~~
~~The member for Hinkler is not helping the situation. The member for Kennedy has the call.~~
~~Bob Katter~~
On the figures that have been presented to me by both sides of this parliament, it would appear that if these people are processed—here or overseas—two-thirds of them will end up getting into Australia. I suspect the figure is a lot higher than that, but I will accept the figure that I have been given of two-thirds. So if you have a shot you have a two in three chance of getting in to what these people would probably consider a paradise. So why not have a go? They have a go and a lot of them die because no-one has told them that a lot of people die attempting to get here.
I voted against the Malaysian solution the first time and I think really it was for political reasons that I made the decision. I am ashamed to say that, but that may have been an element most certainly in my thinking at the time. But if you know that when you get on that boat you are going to be at the back of a queue of 250,000 people in Malaysia then there is not much point in getting on that boat. That is what we are talking about and voting on here. I will also be voting for the legislation being put forward by the opposition because I think it is better to have two horses in the race than one horse in the race. But it does not seem to me that too many other people in this place are too interested in that. They have got their idea and they are not going to change it, they are not going to compromise. From my experience, on both sides of the House I have been presented with that approach. I think that the Malaysian solution may not stay afloat in the longer term and we do have to go to another solution, but I just cannot but see that if you know that you get on the boat and you have two-thirds of a chance of getting into a country that they would consider to be paradise then it is worthwhile having a go.
My forebears and the forebears of most people in this House—all mine were here in 1870 or earlier—came out here and were prepared to live on a dirt floor in a galvanised iron shanty in the goldmining towns of Australia, as did the forebears of almost all those who were here before the Second World War. But these people are not coming here to live on a dirt floor in a galvanised iron shanty; none of them are going to do that. They are going to live in what is considered by most people on Earth to be fairly attractive circumstances. Unless you can demonstrate clearly to these people that if you get on the boat you will not get in here then this will continue and get considerably worse.
I have spoken in this place a thousand times that you live in a country that is empty. I represent an area that could support a population of 60 or 70 million people. The electorate of Kennedy has got the water and the land resources. This issue will bring it home to the rest of the world. As the United Nations lady from the Indian subcontinent said, 'You will take these people because you are a country that can.' I think that they are very ominous words for the people of Australia. The more attention that is brought to this issue, the worse our country is going to be. (Time expired)
~~Joe Hockey~~
I am always reluctant to speak early in these debates. For a whole lot of personal reasons, the emotions run very deep in me in relation to refugees. The member for Kennedy said that his forebears came here in the 1870s. My father came here as a refugee on 3 September 1948. He came from a country where there was war. He had to wait his turn, but he was desperate to come here. The member for Kennedy is right: there is a great deal of hypocrisy from time to time in these debates. But I will say one thing deliberately to this parliament. I will never ever support a people swap where you can send a 13-year-old child unaccompanied to a country without supervision—never. It will be over my dead body. How dare people?
Some people say they are wrestling with their conscience. I am not; I know exactly what I want to do. The compromise that the Leader of the Opposition offered today went some way forward to offering a solution, be it Nauru, Manus Island or somewhere else. I fought with the previous Prime Minister, my Prime Minister, about Nauru. I opposed it until the moment he assured me that at all times Australians would be able to supervise the people who were sent there, that they would be protected, that they would have health care and education support—until he could assure me that those most vulnerable would be protected. That was when I agreed with him. I was prepared to cross the floor in a previous government with an absolute majority in this place because I disagreed with the treatment of those most vulnerable by my Prime Minister. Until he assured me personally, together with the minister for immigration, that no child would ever be abandoned in another country once they had come under the guardian protection of Australia—until he assured me of that I would not support it. But he did.
This government is now asking us to support a situation where a 13-year-old child could be sent to another nation without any regard for their welfare after that moment. Even if we have words from the immigration minister about it being a case-by-case basis, it is the threat of it and from time to time the enactment of it that is the most damning thing for our conscience. That is why I feel entirely consistent. That is why I was so angry about being gagged before. I have wrestled, like many others, with their conscience on this debate but I am entirely consistent with my soul. I will sleep easy because I know from my own background and from what I have done in the past that I am going to be consistent no matter how painful it might be in the electorate, no matter how hard it might be explaining it to my constituents. I rest easy on this because I can be entirely consistent with what beats within my soul.
~~Long debate text truncated.~~