Michael Keenan MP

2UE Interview with David Oldfield

Topics: Labor’s Border Protection Failure / Latest Boat Arrivals

The last I heard at least three more boats had arrived in Australia since yesterday. We say illegal arrivals, some of them say irregular maritime arrivals, some people call them refugees. Let’s at least call them, in many respects, people who should at least have to explain how it is they can catch air liners and have various documents and then suddenly turn up in Australia on a boat courtesy of a people smuggler. They have a lot of explaining to do these people. However you may see them, however a bleeding heart you may be, however willing you may be to take them into your granny flat. They have a lot of explaining to do. Over the weekend the Federal Opposition introduced an interesting new argument into the boat people debate. The Opposition has suggested that the United Nations Refugee Convention signed in 1951 is outdated. Well hold me back, might be out of date, it is highly irrelevant to this nation but we will get to that. Shadow Immigration Minister, Scott Morrison, said the Convention now puts countries, like Australia, at a disadvantage. It makes it easier for asylum seekers to country shop and good on Scott Morrison for saying that. He has been saying it for a while and who on earth is denying that these people are country shopping. Prime Minister Julia Gillard said the Opposition is being hypocritical calling for the Refugee Convention to be overhauled. Ms Gillard said the Refugee Convention is the whole reason the Opposition will not support the Malaysia Solution. I am joined by Michael Keenan who is the Opposition Spokesmen on Border Protection. G’day Michael.

G’day David, nice to be with you.

Nice to have you. Now the very first thing that comes to mind for me is why will the Prime Minister not get into the Greens? Why will she continue this disturbing, dishonest, graceful lie that the Opposition is somehow impeding the Government when they have their ally the Greens who are stopping it all?

Sorry David.

Now you have an 18 month old son who is boisterous in the background, I fully comprehend what’s taking place, go ahead.

Yes my apologies.

If she wants to make a change for instance then the Greens would be forced to support it because of course she governs in alliance with the Greens and the idea that the Opposition needs to get behind yet another failed policy from the Government and then legitimise this other failed policy, I don’t think is something that we are going to be a part of.

It is disgusting beyond comprehension that the Government of this country tries to blame the Opposition for the fact that their coalition partner won’t support them in their policy.

That’s exactly right. They are trying to sponsor the so called all party committee but unfortunately there is no actual indication that they want to do anything about people smuggling, they just want to have another talk fest, which will result in yet another failed policy and that is the last thing that Australia needs.

You are unduly kind Michael. The fact is that the policy that works is known and that is the former Howard policy. It might need some tweaking round the edges but the Government is responsible for the current state of people smugglers. Not flipping through the net, they are simply rushing through the open gates that is the no more border protection. Look a very interesting thing has happened today, be it brand new or not, finally we see in print that Scott Morrison, the Opposition Spokesmen and the person who at some stage will very likely be the future Immigration Minister, and I quote, that the international agreement for almost 60 years, that has formed the bedrock of Australia’s refugee program no longer reflects the practicality and reality of refugee movements across the world. He went on Michael, and you would know, to say that the 1951 UN Convention on refugees, conceived in the ashes of WWII, with millions of displaced people in camps around Europe, did not adequately today address contemporary challenges. He said in particular that the United Nations High Commissioner for refugees must do more to crackdown on secondary movements where refugees pass through multiple countries in search of preferred countries for asylum, which of course are western countries. None of these people want to finish up in any country that is vaguely similar culturally or, in effect, in modern state as the country they have come from.

This has been part of our policy for sometime and the idea that the modern situation reflects those enormous displacement of WWII, which is what the Convention was designed to deal with, is just not right. This document just doesn’t reflect the fact that people are now coming half way around the world to seek asylum in a country of their choice. In times passed, if you were seeking asylum then the most likely thing that you would do is just cross over the border into a neighbouring country. You certainly wouldn’t be deciding where you would like to seek asylum and then go half way around the world to do that. The Convention as it stands now doesn’t do anything to address that situation. We have been calling for sometime for that Convention to be overhauled and in government we would like to work with like minded countries to modernise it.

Let’s face it, the refugees that were understood to be genuine refugees, as recognised by this 1951 Convention, expected people to be fleeing for their lives and cross over into a border where people were not trying to kill them and then they were safe.

That’s right. That is exactly what it was.

A matter that might be a couple of hundred kilometres or so not 10,000km catching commercial airliners, doing virtually tour operation scenarios, almost with travel insurance and duty free shopping on the way. Michael this is going to be a bit difficult perhaps what I am going to suggest to you is that it is hard to imagine given the stand that is being taken here by your Spokesmen on Immigration. It is hard to imagine that you can take this stand and in anyway still want to stay within this Convention?

It still offers very important protections for people who are fleeing persecution from their government.

Do we need the United Nations to actually tell us how to treat people?

It is not so much the United Nations it is the Convention that people sign up to.

But do we need that? Are you seriously telling me that Australia doesn’t know how to treat people? Do we need some numbskull in Geneva or anywhere else to tell us how to treat people?

We certainly don’t need to be told how to treat people….

Can you tell me what it is that the United Nations Convention or any of the signatories does for this nation?

What it does is it sets out a framework for the international community to deal with….

Forget the international community, what does it do for Australia?

I think it is a very important document for the protections that it does offer…

No, I don’t want to be adversarial because I am on your side in what you are trying to do, which is get genuine refugees to come to Australia and stop all this country shopping and any sensible person would be on your side. Isn’t it time that we recognised that the United Nations does nothing for Australia and that Australia is a 21st century modern humanitarian country that does not need any exterior body to tell us how to treat people?

I don’t agree with all that you are saying. I agree that we don’t need people to explain to us how to treat people because it is the Australian way to treat people fairly and decently. I do think the UN Convention is still an important document and what we are saying is that it needs to be modernised to reflect the current situation.

But why? Why is it important for Australia?

Because it sets the international framework for how the global community is going to deal with people seeking asylum in other countries. I do think that that remains a very important document.

We will agree to differ on this situation of globalized humanitarianism. It is ridiculous; we should just understand how we treat people and not what is happening anywhere else. I think we should be out of the United Nations and out of this convention and entirely but I will leave you with that thought. When this Government is gone and you and Scott Morrison are running border protection and immigration, what is going to change?

The first thing we will do is go back to the suite of policies that actually work. The whole reason we are facing this onslaught of illegal boats arriving is because when the government changed, the Labor Party changed the policies and that gave a green light to the people smugglers and that basically said that Australia now has an open borders policy. Those changes were made in August 2008; in September 2008 we started having the first illegal boats arrive. Subsequently it has got worse because the more successful people smugglers are, the more people they can sell there product to and that of course is what has been happening. When we return to the policies that we had prior to the change, then that will send a very clear message to the people smugglers that Australia is no longer a soft touch anymore and that we are going to take back the right to decide who comes to this country. We are going to drive people smugglers out of business.

At least in parrel to that, in what you have said yourself, even though I don’t think it goes far enough, will you also be seeking with the United Nations to update appropriately to the 21st century, what this UN Convention says?

Yes that is certainly part of our policy. It won’t be with the United Nations as a body, we will get together with like minded countries to address the Refugee Convention. Australia has a very generous humanitarian program, not many countries around the world do that so we speak from a position of strength and so we will go and talk to like minded countries and say that this document needs to be updated to reflect the current framework of people moving around the world, not moving to neighbouring countries but half way around the world to seek asylum and pay people smugglers in the process. I apologise for my son.

Michael I think we should let you go because I think your son is wanting to seek asylum somewhere.

I apologise David. Unfortunately my wife has just popped out so you and your listeners will have to excuse me.

I completely understand, I have been in very similar circumstances.

Michael I appreciate your time and no sensible person would be unsupportive. In other words only a dill would not be supporting what it is that you have in mind unless of course you have the view that we can just welcome to this country hundreds of thousands of people regardless of where they are from and there circumstances and if you can arrive here you can stay. If you don’t support that then you should be supporting what it is that you and the Coalition are putting forward. Take care.

Nice to talk to you David.

Nice to talk to you as well. Bye for now.

Ends……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….