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 24 10am News -

View in ParlView

(generated from captions) heroin dealer?Look, he certainly was before the Wood Royal Commission back in the mid '90s, as so many NSW policemen were, know adverse findings were made against him.He admitted to socialising with a heroin dealer?No adverse findings were made against him and that's the key thing. No adverse findings were made against him.Isn't it an adverse finding?There are all sorts of reasons for all sorts of things happening. No adverse findings were made against him. He was promoted three times subsequent to the Wood Royal Commission and he finished his career as the Liverpool local area commander, a very, very highly respected policeman and I'm very proud to have him as our candidate and I recommend to the people of McMahon that if they want someone to serve

Parliament, as he has served our country with distinction in the police force, if they want someone who will definitely vote to repeal the carbon tax, who will definitely vote for stronger border protection policies, Ray King's their man. Are you buoyed by the fact that Labor's approval rating in Central Coast, NSW Central Coast seats like Robertson and Dobell keep slipping?The short answer is polls come and go. The commentary obsesses about them. I think this is going to be a very close, very hard-fought election and now it could go either way. Of course if it goes Labor's way almost certainly it will be a weak to the Greens but to the that is still a real to the Greens that is still a real prospect
with 3 weeks with 3 weeks to go. My own judgment is that the next election should turn much more on the last 6 years than on the next 3 weeks but nevertheless there is no doubt that the Labor Party are preparing to throw everything they possibly can into a highly negative campaign over the next 3 weeks and no-one, no-one should take the outcome of this election anywhere for granted.In regards to your plans, especially with removing access to the Refugee Review Tribunal, under a Coalition Government are you confident that it would survive a High Court challenge?I'll ask Scott to add to this but essentially the position that we want to restore is the position that operated under the Howard Government and that, to the best of my recollection is able to withstand legal challenge but I'll ask Scott to add to that answer.This is a complicated and detailed area and as you probably know there's a review process currently under way that DIAC has undertaken. What we're saying here very clearly is what the objective is of how we want the process to change and what we want it to refer back to. There are very detailed specific things that would have to be worked through with officials and others in government but you've got to direction. You've got to give
it leadership, you've got to tell it where it tell it where you want to end
up and where we tell it
it leadership, you've got to up and where we want to end up is this. We want to end the tick and flick approach of this Government that is seeing 9 out of 10 people found to be refugees when that doesn't match what we're seeing in other places around the world and we want to end the process where noes are turned to yeses in 80% of cases by these processes and where our courts and processes are being gamed and used and promoted by the people smugglers to put people on boats. So we will work through that detail in government as is appropriate. It's a complicated area but you've got to give clear direction and leadership as to where you want the process to end up. I should also stress this. The UN HCR and their executive committee are the ones who made it very clear you can have a judicial process or an administrative process but you don't have to have both and we want to go back to the non-statutory administrative process because that's what worked very well under the previous government and we think that's the fairest system, it's what's practiced by the UN HCR all around the world and we think that's the more appropriate system than the tick and flick approach we have under Labor now.Everyone will get a chance, Brooke.If you're fast tracking 30,000 people through processing, how are you confident that there won't be any mistakes made?Well, I am confident that the processing system that operated under the Howard Government, that operated under the last Coalition Government that was for a period of time administered by my friend Philip Ruddock who is with me on the campaign trail now, I am confident that will deliver a fair deal. I'm confident that that will deliver a fair deal even under our system there's the assessment, there's a second assessment then there's a review. So it's not likely done. There's the assessment, there's, if you like, a check of the assessment, a quality control of the assessment and then there's a review. So I am very confident that we will get this as right as it can be, as right as it can be.Fw - if I can right as it can be.Fw can just add to that. As Tony said there's a triage which is can just add to that. As going across the 30 and doing said there's a triage which the screening and this going across the 30 on the UK model. They treage the case load, look across it and then move to those decisions where they think they can make them quite readily and then that is reviewed by a further person. Now, what that has produced in the UK is that 93% of those decisions are being upheld. Now, that's because they're working through the case load methodically. They're triaging it and then selecting cases and then they're making decisions so you must do it in an orderly fashion and the Labor Party and Kevin Rudd want you to think that these 30,000 people are just not here and that there's not an issue with that. They must have already rubber stamped in their own mind their permanent visas for the other side of the election. That won't happen under us. We will go through this methodically, we'll do it carefully and we'll do it priorities and we'll get to the outcome which is the right outcome.The issue of savings that you mentioned earlier, Julie Bishop said this morning that the Coalition's costings will be released in the final week of the campaign think that's
s that the case and do you think that's long enough for voters to get a good grasp of what exactly would be in store under a Coalition Government?Well, we'll be announcing policies between now and the last week of the campaign and in many instances we will be saying when we announce the policy exactly how it's going to be funded. Now, by far the most expensive commitments that we've given in this campaign were the commitment to keep the carbon tax compensation without the carbon tax and to deliver a company tax cut over the forward estimates those two commitments cost $17 billion and as I've said until I'm blue in the face, in my Budget reply and in my National Press Club speech I committed us to savings totalling $17 billion over the forward estimates period. Now, in a few days' time we'll have another very significant signature policy to be announced and we will tell you exactly how we are going to fund our paid parental leave policy. So along the way we are telling you, certainly in the
case of the more expensive policies, we are telling you how they are going to policies, we are how they are going to be funded. So I think to some extent this is frankly a confected problem by a political party, the Labor Party, which hasn't got a single figure right, hasn't got a single figure right and which before the 2007 election and the 2010 election released its own costings document at 5pm on the Friday before the polls opened at 8am the following day. So we're going to be straight with people. We can't tell you everything now because inevitably we've got to have something to say for the next 3 weeks of the campaign. But the last thing we are going to do is to add to the trust deficit by playing silly games with people the way this Labor Party has constantly.Can I just get to the numbers of this and what it means? If 9 out of 10 are coming in at the moment under this announcement today will it be 5 in 10, will it be less than 50 and how do you respond to claims that for the people who don't get in by removing access to the review tribunal you're denying their procedural fairness?Well our obligations under the refugee convention are somewhat different from the obligations that we would ordinarily regard ourselves as having to Australian citizens but we are absolutely confident that by dealing with people in the way outlined in this policy we are dealing with them in accordance with our convention obligations and in accordance with basic human decency but we also have to send a very clear signal to people don't turn up illegally by boat. Don't turn up illegally by boat and Operation Sovereign Borders is about doing that for would be future arrivals and this particular policy is about doing that for those who are already here as a deterrent as well to those who might contemplate coming in the future. But the point I make and, again I'll ask Scott to add to it, the point I make is that what we are proposing we believe fully complies with our convention obligation and fully complies with the basic obligations of human decency towards another human.The single case officer review process is what was in place last time when we were there and as I said before, the UN HCR practiced that around the world. There are many different ways you can run an appeal system. I mean this does involve a review. Trees - there's a triage, a decision process we'll have in place.
It's and a review. That's the It's the process we had place last time so It's the process we consistent with our place last time as it was proved to be place last time so it's
consistent with as it was proved to be last
time and that's the as it was proved to be we'll give to the Department to take us back in that direction and take us away fwr - from the direction we've been going the last 5 years where they've just added layer after layer after layer. What the ultimate number will be will be the number it should be and those who are genuine refugees are found to be refugees but those who are trying it on don't get the benefit of the doubt under Labor's tick and flick approach.What's your understanding out of that number? Is it 4 in 10, 5 in 10?That would be like asking you to predict court decisions. It will be what it will be. The process should be stiegt tightened and have integrity and assessed and decisions will be made. We shouldn't have a tick and flick approach which gives the Ben - - benefit of the doubt where people are throwing their documents away to undermine that making system. That's Labor's approach. That's what they're doing now, that's what will end.The circumstance under which someone on a temporary protection visa could transition to permanent residency and are there no circumstances under which someone on a TPV could seek family reunion? So if a parent arrived by boat and was granted by TPV would you deny them family reunion for 10, 20, 30 years?Sam, people on temporary protection visas don't get family reunion full of story. And no-one is going of story. And to go through of story. And no-one is to go through this are you a to go through this refugee determination process and end up with a permanent visa at the end of it. No-one is going to go through the assessment process and come out of it with permanent residency.Are there no circumstances under which you will grant someone a TPV and later allow them to transfer to permanent residency under that policy?I can't say what might happen in 10, 20, 30, years time but what I can say is that if you come here illegally by boat you should never expect to get permanent residency. We will discharge our ordinary humanitarian obligations to you but you just should not expect to get permanent residency. If you turn out not to be a refugee, if you are found not to be a refugee you will be in detention, that's where you will be, you will be in detention indefinitely. If you are a refugee you will be on a temporary protection visa and you should expect to be on a temporary protection visa indefinitely because we've got to send the strongest possible signal, the strongest possible signal to people smugglers and their clients that we are in charge of this country and we will determine who comes here. That is the signal that we are sending and I want to say to the Australian people, I particularly want to say to anyone con template ing coming to Australia illegally by boat, we have the will to stop this evil trade and only the Coalition has the proven record and the will to control the borders of this great country. Is there a specific cost attached to this policy?Live from Melbourne the Opposition Leader Tony Abbott and the immigration spokesman Scott Morrison with their major announcement of this election campaign on asylum seeker policy. People who have arrived by boat over recent years, the best they could hope for is a temporary protection visa. People would be required to work for welfare benefits and the Opposition says it will drop what it calls the tick and flick process of assessment that exists currently. We're joined now in Canberra by Binnie.
political reporter Kerrin Binnie. So Kerrin, let's go through this one by one. First of all the best people could hope for is temporary protection visas?That's right and we already knew that the Coalition were going to visas once they come into government implement temporary protection
visas once government if they win visas once they come into September 7 election but know that they're going know
September 7 election but now we know that they're apply it retrospectively for
the people know that they're going to
apply the people who have already
arrived and are already

arrived awaiting either processing are already within awaiting either are already within the
detention network in are already within So they will be detention network So they will be placed on So they will be placed on to temporary So they will be placed temporary protection visas and temporary protection visas fast tracked through the system and so number 1, if you're and found to be a refugee you will and so number 1, if be put on to temporary found to be a refugee you protection visa and if be put on to protection visa and not found to be a refugee you will be put into detention indefinitely until you indefinitely until you can be sent home.I guess the thing to add on to what the Coalition is proposing in terms of those temporary protection visas that Tony Abbott was saying repeatedly that there is no prospect of getting permanent residencies if you're placed on that although towards the end of that press conference he was saying he couldn't be sure what would be the case in 10, 20, 30 years time.That's right. That was his line. Now 10, 20, 30 years he can't predict into the future that far but he then went on to say that if you come by boat there is no prospect of permanent residency in Australia and towards the top of the media conference there was a time about 3 years put on the temporary protection visas what you could be put on. But then that was Scott Morrison that said that would be assessed on a case by case basis for how long a person is allowed to be on those temporary protection visas. And people who are found to be refugees and put on to the TPVs, as they are known, will then be either settled in another country.And now getting on to the fast tracking of the assessment process, do we presume from what the Opposition was saying in that media conference that the Refugee Review Tribunal will no longer exist or what is the actual proposal?I think that's that will
the indication from them that that will be sidelined and that it will be fast tracked based on the UK system which Scott Morrison says has a much lower rate of acceptance of people being granted refugee status. So he says he's been over there and had a look at how that system works first hand and how he thinks it can work in Australia and that it will essentially, I guess, lower the number of people who are in fact granted. He quoted a figure, top of my head I can't remember it, Joe, but he was saying it was much higher under Labor than the world average is his argument for that.OK, Kerrin Binnie in Canberra, we'll leave it there. I'm joined now by Rachel Ball, a lawyer with the human rights law centre in Melbourne. Rachel all this idea Ball, good morning. First all this idea that people will on temporary protection visas will have no chance of permanent residence y, do you see that as a measure which could be challenged in the courts?It's difficult to know without seeing the exact nature of the policies and the laws that would be produce ed, whether or not they could be challenged. I think certainly there's a number of aspects of the policy which has been announced that are questionable under Australian law and certainly many aspects that violate Australia's international obligations.Because Tony Abbott was saying in that media conference that confident this would fully comply with convention obligations. What do you see in this announcement already that is in possible contravention of those obligations?Well I think that that is entirely incorrect. At the heart of the refugee convention is a promise that we will properly assess people's claims when they come to Australia and seek protection and that we won't send them back to face danger and persecution. If people are stripped of the right to have review of their decisions then we certainly increase the danger that they will be returned from the country that they fled and face danger there. We know from experience that single departmental officers often get it wrong and this is life or death decisions that we're talking about. We simply can't afford to get it wrong in these sorts of cases.But Tony Abbott was saying in that media conference that there would be assessment, a check and a review in that process and even though it's a non- statutory administrative process there would be an assessment, a check and a review, that's not enough?No, these sorts of decisions need to be properly reviewed by the judiciary. There needs to be legal judicial review of decisions where the consequences of getting it wrong can mean people being returned to face serious danger, torture, even death.So as far as you're concerned there will definitely be a legal challenge to that process ?Well their obligations under international law, whether or not the policy and the process violates domestic law will depend on how it's crafted and that remains to be seen.Would you expect that it's possible to have this kind of process and be compliant with domestic law?From what I've seen it looks unlikely to me but as I said it's impossible to say without seeing the details of the plan.And what would be the outcome of this if this was put forward? I've heard someone say this morning that there would be a flood of litigation into the Federal and the High Court if cases were - if people were rejected by this non-statutory administrative process?Well, again, without knowing how this process is going to work and the detail it's very difficult to say but certainly if people's rights are being abused, if they they face serious danger and there's some prospect to prevent that danger from happening yes, they will challenge it and rightfully so.I'm not sure if you're able to hear the media conference but there were a couple of figures that the Opposition Leader and the immigration spokesman brought up and that was the number of people who are coming here seeking asylum and 9 out of 10 being approved and then if there's a review the noes turn to yeses 80% of cases and those figures don't tally with what's happening overseas, is that the case as far as you know?I am aware conference but I I'm sorry, I conference but I am aware that
there is I'm sorry, I didn't hear the
conference but I there is a very high rate of there is a very overturn upon independent there is a very high rate overturn upon review by the Refugee Review
Tribunal. But Tribunal. But it seems to me a bizarre Tribunal. But it bizarre response to that to bizarre response to that take away the review mechanism or water it down when in fact what that's saying is that the initial what that's saying is that initial decision makers are in many cases getting it wrong. What that says to me is we need to improve the initial decision making, not rely upon it in its entirety.And what about the initial stage of that process? Why do you think it's the case that in Australia many more of these people, asylum seekers are accepted as genuine compared to other countries?I think we know that a lot of asylum seekers, particularly those who arrive by boat in Australia are accepted as genuine because of the immense risks that people face in getting here. You're not going to take those sorts of risks unless it's truly a last resort for you, it's what you need to do to secure safety for yourself and for your family. So it's not surprising that people who take those risks are in fact genuine refugees.As someone working in this area how do you feel about the standard of debate generally in this election campaign and this is one of the major announcements that we can expect on it today?I think the standard of debate from the disappointing
major parties is deeply disappointing in Australia where we're proud of ourselves for being a fair policies don't meet up to either of those standards. nation and these sorts of We're talking about some of the most vulnerable people in the world most vulnerable people world here and both parties are proposing world here and both proposing treating them in extremely cruel ways.OK, Rachel Ball in Melbourne, thanks for talking to us.Thank you .The PM Kevin thanks for talking to you .The PM Kevin Rudd is campaigning in Perth today as Labor targets the marginal Liberal seats of Hasluck and Swan. Our reporter Andrew Greene is travelling with the PM and joins me now. So Andrew, what's on the agenda today?A very busy day for the PM, we understand, Joe. He's today, as you mentioned here in Perth. This is one of the first time the major leaders has headed to WA for the campaign and Kevin Rudd, we understand, is today announcing that Perth will be the centre of a new oil and gas innovation centre. So this is all part of the PM's theme of what Australia does as it transitions away from the China-led resources boom. We've heard him talk a lot about this throughout the past week talking about new skill training for people in the mining sector and people in the manufacturing sector talking about high-tech jobs. Well today here in WA the resource-rich State, Kevin Rudd is going to unveil what the Government sees as its vision for the future of the oil and gas industry. We've heard a lot, of course, about other resources in the past, iron ore, etc, particularly in this part of the world, well that is today where Kevin Rudd is having his focus and of course there are also a few marginal seats in this area that we no doubt will be stopping in on as well.What's the sense you're getting about the response to what the PM had to announce yesterday about he was keen on seeing tax breaks for companies operating out of the Northern Territory? That's received a fair bit of attention today.Well, here even in Perth the local newspaper, the 'West Australian' has described it as a real slap in the face to WA because the plan says nothing about our biggest State. So the reaction certainly here in the west has been quite scathing and on the front page they're certainly not pulling any of their punches. We did also see some criticism from economists who question the policy and just generally speaking the lack of detail has raised some eyebrows, the fact that there are no costings being put into the document and the suggestion that it has been a rushed out in very recent times, probably since the cooling - calling of the election. So there has been quite a bit of scathing criticism and also the Opposition, of course, pointing out that much of the ideas were lampooned by Labor when they suggested something not so long ago.OK, Andrew, so in a couple of hours we can expect to see the PM. Do you think we will be seeing some sort of media conference that we can carry on ABC News 24?That's heading to the first event of understand the PM will the day in the next hour heading to shortly after that we will the day in shortly after that we will be
hearing from him. the day in the next hour and
shortly after hearing from him. It will be interesting to see who he will be fronting the media conference with. Of course the high profile minister Gary Gray who has portfolio responsibilities in the resources sector during the recent leadership crisis was very, very strong in his defence of Julia Gillard and very strong in the way he attacked Kevin Rudd but we understand those differences have now been put aside as Labor really tries to hold on to its very few number of seats here in Perth and also eyes some of the key marginals that have slipped away from Labor including the seat of Hasluck in the city's south here. It's a very marginal seat held by the first indigenous MP Ken Wyatt for the Liberal Party, first indigenous MP in the House of Representatives. Labor has its eye on that seat and possibly another seat, the seat of Swan.Andrew Greene in Perth, we'll speak to you again later. Moving on to other news now, Muslim Brotherhood supporters have begun to bury those killed in yesterday's violence. Our Middle East correspondent Matt Brown reports from the imam mosque in north-east Cairo and a warning, you may find some of these images distressing.This mosque's just a few kilometres away from Rabaa al-Adawiya mosque where the main massacre occurred.Even now dead bodies are being brought in. Many have been stored under blocks of ice, the victims many of them are charred, burned very, very badly. Whilst the sense of mourning here is palpable so too is the sense of outrage and anger. Outside on the way in to this mosque the crowd was chanting "The people want revenge" and how will they get revenge, that's the question. The Islamists of Egypt turned to the ballot box and won. They won control of the parliament and indeed the presidency. They've lost that in a coup and now in a bloody, bloody crackdown. So the question mosque around Cairo and throughout Egypt, is where will they now go throughout Egypt, is they now go from here?And so that death toll from the military moving in, military and police moving in to clear out those protest camps now above 600. The US President Barack Obama has condemned the steps taken by the Egyptian military
authorities and cancelled military exercises with Egypt but there are questions about whether America and Europe have done enough.As the scale of the bloodshed in Egypt steadily becomes clearer, earlier dreams of a country on a road to democracy based on consensus are in ruins.Governments around the world have wrestled with their own dilemmas, how to react, and whose side are they really on.So international pressure on Egypt's military has been very carefully considered. President Obama condemned the violence against civil - civilians and cancelled joint US Egyptian military exercises due next month.We've sustained our commitment to Egypt and its people but while we want to sustain our relationship with Egypt our traditional cooperation cannot continue as usual when civilians are being killed in the streets and rights are being rolled back.But that does not mean the US will stop long-term funding for Egypt's military. America wants to keep Egypt as an ally, especially in the Middle East peace process.Here at the Foreign Office, Egypt's ambassador was summoned to be told Britain condemed the use of force to clear the protests. Similar messages were delivered by many European governments but the harder part is deciding whether any active sanctions should be applied. Perhaps spending EU trade deals with Egypt, would that make any difference?Egypt's military defied all the international pressure piled on over recent weeks not to use overwhelming force against the protestors backing former President Morsi and it's clear the interim government in Egypt is going to tough it out and defend their tactics around the world.What the Egyptian Government did and the police is an obligation from any State towards its people, to defend their interests and to protect them.So where does this leave this Muslim Brotherhood, main victims of the violence?Six weeks ago when their President Morsi was deposed by the military they were allowed to rally and demand his reinstatement. Now they have been driven off the streets and a spokesman is warning the bloodshed means that anger is beyond control.That report from the BBC. A powerful bomb has exploded in a densely populated area of Beirut. At least 20 people died and 120 to have gone off between 2 apartment were wounded. The bomb appears
to have gone apartment buildings destroying several nearby buildings and cars. The area is a known Hezbollah stronghold and the attack is thought to be in retaliation for its support of the Syrian regime.Two people have died and at least 16 others have been hurt in a 20-car pile up near Buenos Aires in Argentina. Heavy smoke from a nearby grassland fire reportedly caused the accident. It happened on a busy highway connecting Argentina's capital with the resort city. The beef industry is often accused of causing traffic problem on roads outside Buenos Aires and local farmers burn off grasslands for cattle grazing.

The top story today, the Opposition has unveiled more details of its asylum-seeker policy. Under the plan unveiled today, the Coalition would remove access to the refugee

our country with distix in the