Save Search

Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
   View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Wednesday, 25 August 1999
Page: 7722


Senator FERGUSON —My question is to the Minister for Justice and Customs, Senator Vanstone. Is the minister aware of calls for the creation of a coastguard service in Australia? Can the minister inform the Senate what is the government's position in relation to the creation of a coastguard?


Senator VANSTONE (Justice and Customs) —I thank Senator Ferguson for the question. Yes, Mr Beazley, the Leader of the Opposition, recently said on radio that Australia should have a coastguard. Madam President, you might be interested to know that he went on to say:

The image that would come with a coastguard would be a very substantial upgrade of—

you really have to wait for this—

an appearance of preparedness.

All he wanted was an image of `appearance of preparedness'. The only thing of substance proposed was a `substantial upgrade of an appearance of preparedness'. His sentiments have been parroted by the shadow minister in the past.

Coastal surveillance is a serious issue and it has to be taken seriously. If you want to contribute to the policy debate in a considered and well thought out manner, well and good, but if you just want a few appearances you will be judged accordingly. In their enthusiasm to get a grab on radio, Mr Beazley and Mr Kerr seem to have forgotten the Beazley report. The Beazley report was done in March 1984. It was a review of Australia's peacetime coastal surveillance and protection arrangements. It was done by Kim C. Beazley, Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence. Mr Beazley's own report makes it clear that a coastguard was not an efficient or a cost-effective option. Labor had 13 years in government and they did not establish a coastguard, because they knew, as the Beazley report made clear, that it was not an efficient or a cost-effective option. Now apparently they like the idea. They think it has got something going for it. This is a clear case of policy amnesia simply brought about by media starvation.

People smuggling is a growing global problem. Canada, for example, in recent weeks has had two boatloads of Chinese illegal immigrants: one boatload of 134 and one of 123. The United States Coastguard has an annual budget of $US4 billion, and they still find it necessary to operate in tandem with other agencies. They protect a coastline of about 20,000 kilometres in length compared to our 37,000 kilometres.

While the opposition sit there on the sideline carping away in their normal negative fashion to which we have become accustomed, the government has actually done something to properly handle the growing problem of people smuggling.

Senator Bolkus interjecting


The PRESIDENT —Order! Senator Bolkus.


Senator VANSTONE —Australia is currently negotiating three extra protocols to add to the transnational crime convention dealing with these matters. The Prime Minister's recent task force announcement pumped an extra $124 million into combating people smuggling. That is not an upgrade of appearance; it is an upgrade in substance. It includes two new Dash 8 aircraft with sophisticated electronic surveillance, a night capable helicopter—

Senator Bolkus interjecting


The PRESIDENT —Senator Bolkus, you are persistently interjecting. I invite you to read standing order 203.


Senator VANSTONE —And 12 new immigration officers in source and transit countries. Labor are languishing at the moment, simply lost at sea themselves. They seem to believe that their ill thought out, blustering rhetoric will fill their sails. Unfortunately for both Mr Beazley and Mr Kerr, hot air simply rises, and their calls for the introduction of a coastguard simply demonstrate their desperation to whip up a populist reaction to anything they can. The substance of the matter is that, as outlined in the Beazley report in 1984, it is not a cost-effective or efficient option.


Senator Hill —Madam President, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper .