Mr JOHN COBB (2:26 PM) —My question is to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs. Would the minister inform the House whether the government intends maintaining its policy on the mandatory detention of unlawful arrivals? As part of a wider government strategy, has this policy been successful in achieving its objectives of maintaining the integrity of Australia's borders? Is the minister aware of any obstacles that could prevent this policy from being maintained?

Mr RUDDOCK (Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Reconciliation) —I thank the honourable member for Parkes for his question because it gives me an opportunity to assure the House that the government is firmly committed to maintaining the integrity of our borders. Of course, up until now, an important aspect of being able to maintain the integrity of our borders has been to ensure that if people arrive in Australia without authority, they are detained until such time as we are able to deal with a number of matters, particularly their health, character and any potential security risk that may be associated with their presence, to ensure that people are available for processing and to ensure that, if they have no lawful basis to remain in Australia, they are available for removal.

That very important public policy has had very strong support in this parliament over a long period and there are very good reasons for that. First, the strategy that we have used has worked. When we see the strategy, it is not just about detention and mandatory detention; it is about working with other countries of first asylum to deal with burden sharing issues. It is about working with transit countries to ensure that people only travel properly documented and with authority, and Operation Relex has also been a very important part of the strategy for dealing with these issues. I can assure the member that there have been very important advances in relation to that. The policy is working. There have been no boat arrivals on the Australian mainland since August last year. There have been none to our territories since November. That is a very significant and beneficial position to be in.

I cannot say that is not going to change. I noticed New Zealand is embarking on an overseas information campaign at the moment to draw to the attention of people the dangers of these sorts of voyages, which can be life taking. These are not matters that are only of concern to us; they have been of concern to others. The reasons are very clear: other countries that have not been able to take the same action that we have been able to take are in a very much more disadvantaged position than we have been in. Our position has been essentially manageable and it has been manageable because of the policies that we have put in place.

I notice that there are some who argue that we ought to adopt the failed policies that have been used in Europe. The United Kingdom had 88,000 asylum seekers last year— twice what they had five years ago. They have lost track of more than 270,000 failed asylum seekers. France received 47,000 claims last year—up from something of the order of 21,000 five years ago. More than 90 per cent of people who are rejected asylum seekers in France cannot be located when people look for them to send them home.

Mandatory detention has been a very important part of the program that was introduced by governments to deal with these issues. It was introduced first by a Labor government faced with fewer numbers of arrivals than we have seen in recent times. I am surprised that members of the Labor Party seem to have difficulty in being able to defend this policy in their own councils. Let me just say that, if they need some help in marshalling the arguments to be able to put these matters properly and forcefully, I would be willing to assist.

The most compelling argument that you should be putting to the members of your own councils when they take to moving motions on this important area of public policy is that nobody ought to be encouraging policies or approaches that would encourage the people smugglers, those who trade in people's lives—and they do: 350 people lost their lives being trafficked into Australia—in their insidious trade. The fact is that they watch very closely for any suggestion that there are likely to be changes in public policy here in Australia. You only have to look back over some of the closely fought elections in the past to see the way in which the boat numbers ebbed and flowed when people thought there might be a change in public policy in Australia.

Let me make it very clear: if the Labor Party want to keep on encouraging unlawful movement into Australia and to undermine the policies that are working, they should engage in this sort of insidious debate, which will hold out to the smugglers that there is some prospect of change if there were ever to be a change of government in Australia.