Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
Disclaimer: The Parliamentary Library does not warrant the accuracy of closed captions. These are derived automatically from the broadcaster's signal.
ABC News Breakfast -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) police violence to be

compensated. J In legislation

before parliament, detention

fees for asylum seekers are set

to be abolished today. As much

as $9 million in debt is going

to be lifted from as many as 47

h refugees who have been

charmed for the cost of their

own di tension. Rab announced

the plan in March and on

Tuesday within the support of

both independent cross benches, Liberal backbenchers say they'll cross the floor though

to vote if favour, for more the

Minister for immigration, and

citizenship, Chris Evans join

us us from Canberra. Good

morning. Good morning. There's

no relrisk is there that this

legislation won't get

through? Well the independents

have indicated that they're

favourably disposed but you're

never sure in the Senate The

House of Representatives

separationed at the level of

support from the Opposition? No

not really, because one, the

policy the clearly not working,

and it's actually costing us

more to run the scheme than the

money we collect, so if you

looking at good public policy

the scheme ought to go, but

what's clear is that the joint migration committee with all

the Liberals on it supported

unanimously that we abolish the

detention debt ajeem. They

asked me to do this. I respond

and some time between them

asking me andis bringing in the legislation the Liberal Party

decided to I think be politically opportunist and

oppose the billment we know the

shadow Minister when to the shadow Cabinet asking that they

support the bill and she got

rolled. She was defeated at the

shadow Cabinet to we end up in

the ludicrous position that

having had the Liberal members

of the committee ask me to

bring in the bill, they've now

determined to vote against

it When you say you're

abolishing it because it costs

more to administer it is that

the reason behind it, it's not

that you're flofically opposed

to the practice of charging

detainees? It's both. I don't

think this is good policy both

in terms of the principles

Under the Howard Government involved or the ever kasy.

they waived more than 90% of

the Debs they raised as well.

It just hasn't worked. I think

charging people for their

detention when they're found to

be, that their allowed to be in

Australia, these are people

we've given visa, to, who are

trying to make the most of

their lives here and we say,

"No yo, owe up $the00 or

$300,000 for the privilege of

having been locked up." It's

wrong in principle, but also

it's just not a deterrent and

there's not raising any money,

it's costing us more to

administer than we raise, so

far outline those reasons it

ought to be defeated and the we

is why would the Opposition

oppose it owner than they want

to try and again talk about

people smuggling and those

sorts of things. But they're

clearly deeply divideded apt

that this as on many other

things and that division is act

as a road block to good public

policy in the country. Tgt

waived this payment in 90% of

the cases. Is it an

embarrassment to you at all

that the bill was originally,

the law was introduced by ha

Labor Government? No, that's

more than 17 or 1 # years ago.

Since it's been in place it

hasn't worked. We've had during

the Howard era more than 10,000

unauthorised boat arrivals, it

can't work as a

committeeterent. We know from

practice it that has t hasn't

worked. We've got young couple

I know trying to borrow money

to buy a home to start a

family, they have got a

$200,000 debt hanging over

their head that they're trying

to repay. They're one of the

few groups trying to repay and

they can't get a bank loan

because of this debt. They want

to get on with their lives f

they're married. The man has a

visa to stay here

permently. What do you say to

the one,ment that Opposition

seems to be ugt up that this is

just one other disincentive to people smugglers that you're

not removing. That's a complete

no-one sense. It's been in and

it didn't work as a deterrent

and Dana veil a Minister in the

Howard Government demolish ed

that argument in the House of

Representatives yesterday. She

made a compelling argument

against the case. It's about fear again. When the Liberals

are under pressure they run

fear campaigns. This bill is

good public policy. It was

supported unanimously by the

join migration committee, all

the will bes on that committee

supported and asked me to do

this and now because of the

division in the Liberal Party

we've seen Malcolm Turnbull I

think move to the right under

pressure, and look to take some

sort of opportunist stance,

good public policy would have

us seeing this bill