Ms O'BYRNE (9:27 AM) —The Migration Legislation Amendment (Further Border Protection Measures) Bill 2002 [No. 2] is simply a token effort by this government to make it look tough on the issue of border protection. But, frankly, it is nothing more than window-dressing—and window-dressing that causes unnecessary distress rather than comfort to those Australians who live on those parts of our great country, which the government would seek to have excised from it.

I represent an electorate which itself is part of an island, but also one which includes a number of what the minister would no doubt describe as offshore islands—assuming that he does not also regard Tasmania as falling within that category. Flinders and Cape Barren islands are two of this country's larger offshore islands. They are both inhabited by proud Australians, whom I am sure feel very much part of this country. I am sure that the citizens of the Coral Sea Islands Territory, the islands forming part of Queensland and north of latitude 12 degrees south, those forming part of Western Australia and north of latitude 23 degrees south and those forming part of the Northern Territory and north of latitude 16 degrees south, feel exactly the same way. To have their places of residence excised from the rest of Australia for government propaganda purposes is an insult to them. This is all about this government attempting to be seen as doing something about border protection, with a little political motivation on the side.

In his second reading speech, Minister Ruddock described the disallowance of the regulations, which this bill seeks to replace, and the defeat of the bill itself when it was first presented as being an extraordinary outcome. His rationale was that the opposition was thereby undermining legislation that we had supported in 2001 to fight people-smuggling. We, on this side of the House, are absolutely serious about ensuring that people smugglers do not prosper or succeed in any way. But we would seek to do this by effective initiatives, which bite at the heart of those operations—not by trying to trick the Australian people that we are doing something by a shambolic excision of some parts of the country. This legislation will achieve nothing but heartache—heartache for those Australians who live in those parts of Australia sought to be lopped off by the government and heartache for the victims of the people smugglers, if they were to be landed at any of these places.

The only thing this legislation would do is to remove the right of any person landing on any of these islands to apply for a visa under the laws of this country. We would still have to face the issue of what to do with the arrivals, an issue with which, in the eyes of much of the rest of the world and many Australians, we have not dealt well.

In his speech the minister said:

We must have the capacity to manage our borders and ensure that our sovereignty is not put at risk by opportunistic people smugglers.

We on this side on the House do not dispute that for one minute, but where we differ from the government is on how we would do it. The action proposed by this bill, as I have said, is just lip-service and window-dressing. It will not make the slightest dint on those who would try to breach our sovereignty; it would create the smallest blip on the radar of the people smugglers. The only way in which we can achieve effective management and protection of our borders is through a comprehensive plan. As on so many other issues, the government is so intent on trying to dupe the people of Australia into believing that it is tough on this or acting on that that it drops the ball when actually doing things which will have some impact or effect. In his speech, the minister again continued with the spin. He said:

Expansion of the excised offshore places by this bill sends a very strong message to people smugglers that, while Australia has commitments elsewhere, we have not been distracted from protecting Australia's borders. We remain alert and prepared to move quickly to take measures to counter their operations.

This bill does absolutely none of that. If the people smugglers want to dump their hapless cargo on any one of those islands, they will still do so. Before we can get to them they will have already ripped off their clients and be long gone. The people on those boats would have no idea whether they were being landed at an excised island, an unexcised island or on the mainland of Australia. People smugglers are ruthless characters with no morals. They do not care where they land the people from their boats, so long as they get their money. The minister could not be further from the mark. The government is clearly distracted from doing anything effective about protecting our borders, just as it is from providing proper services to the Australian people on a daily basis. The government is far from alert. If this is the primary example of its measures to counter the operations of the people smugglers, it is alarming and it is a disgrace.

Since the last election, only the people on this side of the House have put forward an effective and workable program, not only to counter the people smugglers but to comprehensively protect our borders. Excising any number of parts of this country on paper will do little in real terms to halt the people smugglers and protect our borders. What would make an impact would be a properly trained and equipped coastguard. This country has more than 37,000 kilometres of coastline but is without any effective form of maritime policing. It is no wonder that the people smugglers have found a nice little earner. Compounding the problem for this nation is the fact that Indonesia, with its myriad islands, has no such capacity either. We are open to the operations of the unscrupulous, whether it be by way of people-smuggling, illegal fishing, gun running or drug running. And this government's solution is a paper excision of our offshore islands to the north. They cannot be serious. Certainly we in Tassie are hoping that the minister does not have another rush of blood to the head and we find ourselves so excised.

Because we are living in an uncertain international security environment and because the threat of terrorism is real, we need a comprehensive strategy that will provide real protection for the Australian people. Our existing border protection system, as evidenced by the government's perceived need to do something about it—albeit something totally inadequate—is ineffective and inefficient. It leaves Australia's borders wide open to the worst of international crime. To effectively protect Australia's borders and cut the people smugglers off at the knees, we need better capability, specialist personnel, trained and informed volunteer efforts and the best use of national intelligence.

On this side of the House, we believe that this can be best achieved by an Australian coastguard. We will not be able to tackle the people smugglers with a piece of legislation designed simply to scare them off—which, if it did have any effect, would probably only redirect them and their passengers to some part of the mainland. We would provide purpose-built ships, with effective capability for surveillance and interdiction duties. These would be more effective and less expensive to operate in protecting all of Australia, including our more remote Indian Ocean territories such as Christmas Island. We would ensure that they were staffed by trained personnel specialising in maritime policing. Royal Australian Navy and Australian Customs Service vessels and personnel would continue to play support and complementary roles, enhanced by the posting on board of specialised coastguard personnel.

Far more effective than a paper excision would be the training and engagement of a nationwide team of coastguard volunteers—a major civilian effort which is crucial to the protection of our borders. We also need to develop a coastguard volunteer vessel program. Fishing vessel owners and other operators should be given incentives and opportunities to play a role in protecting our borders and their fellow Australians. At the same time, it would give us a chance to address other issues, such as maritime safety generally, pollution, and search and rescue. These would be serious attempts to do something about protecting our borders, whilst at the same time providing numerous other benefits and services to the Australian people.

But the government instead looks elsewhere: to legislation such as this—legislation that will do nothing to really address the problem. It is a cynical exercise, firstly, to try to dupe the Australian people into thinking it is doing something and, secondly, for purely political purposes. We on this side of the House remain absolutely serious about protecting our borders and we have put before the Australian people a viable and effective strategy to do exactly that. Our strategy is not a stab in the dark or a pie-in-the-sky approach. The existing structure of border protection, surveillance and enforcement is flawed. The basic organisational structure is weak and other aspects of government policy distort its effectiveness. Our approach is achievable and would make a difference. The specialist personnel and volunteers could be trained at the Australian Maritime College in Launceston and, as the minister will discover when he visits the Australian Maritime College soon, the college has significant capacity to properly prepare those who can effectively police and protect our borders. This would also significantly assist their survival attempts as they now struggle under some visa restrictions. The college already trains patrol boat personnel and can readily accept a brief to provide training in maritime policing, border protection and intelligence liaison. This training can be provided to both full-time and volunteer personnel.

Self-reliance, independence and community security are qualities and values which the people of Australian hold dear. They are very much embodied in a program which would provide us with an effective coastguard. We need leadership on these issues. What we do not need is token, politically motivated legislation which does nothing to effectively address an issue which the Australian people have indicated is clearly of great importance to it—the protection and sovereignty of our borders. If this bill is passed, it will achieve nothing and will most likely simply open the way for the government to bring forward further legislation and regulations to excise more and more offshore islands—perhaps, as I have said, even the whole of Tasmania. It seems that this is all that this government can come up with to protect our borders. I urge this House and those in the other place to deal with this legislation with the disdain it deserves.