April 8, 2024
LUKE GRANT: Shadow Minister for Home Affairs is James Paterson, the senator, who joins me on the line. James good morning.
JAMES PATERSON: Good morning. Luke.
GRANT: Third boatload to reach the mainland since November. Clearly, something is going very wrong here, particularly when we remember the federal government when seeking our votes at the last election maintained that there was nothing different in the policies of, a Labor government and, of course, a former Coalition government. That's just not worth the paper it's written on Surely?
PATERSON: Not at all Luke, and it's very clear now that the Prime Minister has lost control of our borders, and he's got no plan to get it back under control. As you say, three boats to reach the Australian mainland in just the last five months. That's a virtually unprecedented, unheard of events in the last decade of border protection policy. But those three boats, which is part of 13 boats that attempted to come to Australia carrying more than 300 asylum seekers, is a shocking indictment on this government and its approach to border protection. And it is because they have undermined Operation Sovereign Borders that this is happening. When they came to office that they abolished temporary protection visas. Their Minister for Home Affairs has been out there publicly trashing offshore processing, calling it a festering sore, and they've failed to deliver the maritime surveillance hours and aerial surveillance hours that the previous government did. The maritime surveillance hours is down 12%, that's on sea, and aerial surveillance is down 20%. So it's no surprise that boats are slipping through. And the truth is they just need to be back in Operation Sovereign Borders and fund it properly. Otherwise this is going to keep happening.
GRANT: Just how big an issue is the cessation of temporary protection visas? I mean are they totally gone? And I know at the time many of us were concerned to just, more honey in the pot, so to speak, are there temporary protection visas at all? And just how big a drawcard is it? What is it about them not being there that would excite the people smugglers?
PATERSON: Well, the problem with it Luke is it's sent the wrong signal to people smugglers and would be asylum seekers, that if you get here, that you might have a chance of staying because Kevin Rudd first promised prior to the 2013 election, if you come here by boat without a valid visa, you will not be able to stay and the delivery for that was temporary protection visas. It meant that you could never be sure that you have permanent residency here if you didn't come by valid means. But by abolishing that, it holds out hope that maybe there are some circumstances in which you can stay. That's a very dangerous and weak message to send to people smugglers, and they've taken advantage of it here.
GRANT: What's different about these boats, we're used to seeing these boats limp into our coastline or not quite get there. Well, they generally as you say don't get that far. They are in a state of disrepair there is smoke normally. Well, coming out the back, something like that. That indicates that someone's got this should be written off vessel and floated it down to Australia. So what do we know about this last three? Obviously very different.
PATERSON: I've sought briefings from the government on this issue for that reason. And unlike when they were in Opposition, they refused to provide me any briefings on a bipartisan basis. So I'm just going off what we can see in the media. But it appears that these are a different type of boats. They are much faster boats. They appear to be harder to detect, and they're slipping through the cracks that Labor has left in our offshore surveillance system. And so they're getting to the Australian mainland, they are letting off asylum seekers, they are leaving again - all without being detected. And that's an extraordinary development, as you say it appears to be a different sort of boat and a different sort of operation.
GRANT: Yeah. And they landed, they made the mainland and then they wandered onto an airport. I mean, for Australians listening to you and I talk now, that thought that, you know, we had the security thing nailed, I mean, that that is of all the things, not just the reopening of the people smugglers business, but the idea that you could float here or be delivered here somehow and then walk onto an airstrip, goodness me it's a joke.
PATERSON: Exactly Luke, I mean, it is a national security threat to our country that someone, anyone can approach our shores without being detected and drop people off and leave again. Because this time it's asylum seekers. Who knows who else would attempt this if they see this vulnerability? And it's not just any airport that they're walking onto. It's an airport where the military operates from. It's a quasi-military facility and people are walking on. I mean, how on earth should you be able to walk onto a military base in Australia without being detected?
GRANT: And then we had the Defence Minister, I think, last week flagging tough decisions need to be made on defence spending in the next budget. This is the worst time to be cutting money there, isn't it?
PATERSON: Well, there's no evidence this government's willing to make any tough decisions except to sacrifice and weaken their national security. A tough decision for this government would be to fund our defence forces properly, to fund our border protection policy. That's the hardest decision they could make because they seem to prioritise everything other than defence. Richard Marles and Clare O'Neil go to the expenditure review committee of cabinet and seek more money and they get rolled every time by Jim Chalmers and Katy Gallagher and Penny Wong and they don't come out with a cent. And that would be a bad thing in normal times. But it's particularly dangerous in the strategic environment we're in, where we face very real threats.
GRANT: Let me ask you about Israel, and in particular, I spoke on the weekend to Senator Dave Sharma, who said to me that the government's doing a lot of talking, but are they doing anything more in order to resolve the issues they have with Israel? And he made the suggesting that someone senior in the military, perhaps someone retired, might be able to if the government doesn't believe what Israel's saying about the the tragic, horrible death of these seven aid workers, including Australian, Zomi Frankcom. But we should have, you know, people on the ground there, in fact, asking Israel what what's going on? So we hear today and this is unprecedented, I think you'd agree. Air Chief Marshal Mark Binskin is now special adviser on Israel's handling of the situation which led to these fatalities. What are your thoughts on this?
PATERSON: Well, it looks like the Albanese government has followed Dave Sharma's advice on this. And Mark Binskin is a very eminent, very respected, senior former defence official. And he is an appropriate person to appoint to do this. And Zomi Frankcom should not have been killed. It is tragic that it happened. And Israel needs to take steps to address that. They have taken some steps already, and it's appropriate that we further investigate that and satisfy ourselves. But I do note Luke that Zomi Frankcom tragically is not the first Australian who's been killed in this conflict. Another Australian, Galit Carbone, was killed on the morning of Saturday the 7th of October, in her home in Kibbutz Be'eri, when Hamas came in and killed her while she was minding her own business. Now, the prime minister hasn't displayed the same level of outrage over that. He hasn't appointed anyone to investigate that. He hasn't called on Hamas to fire its fighters for that. And my view is that all Australian lives are of equal value and equal worth and should be equally condemned when their lives are taken unjustly.
GRANT: You see, I hear you say that. I heard Dave say something similar on the weekend, and it pains me to conclude that there is a fair bit of politics, isn't there, in this. I don't want to be unfair to anyone in politics, but the idea that you, you know, you go to the lengths that the government seemed to have gone to, in relation to this issue and, and not had the same enthusiasm is not the right word, but perhaps horror to the loss of an Australian back on October 7. There's something wrong there.
PATERSON: I fear that you're right, Luke. And that is what a lot of Australians will conclude observing this. It seems that the government is very worried about the pressure on its left flank from pro-Palestinian people in the community, and that's why they've been unbalanced in their response to this. That's why they've walked away from the initial support for Israel. That's why they've departed from our allies at the United Nations like the United States, and it's voted for unilateral ceasefire. I mean, on the one hand, this government says Hamas cannot remain in control of Gaza. And on the other, they voted for a unilateral ceasefire that would put Hamas in control of Gaza again by leaving them in place in Rafah, from where they could expand again. So this government has been all at sea on this issue. And I think it's because of that political pressure.
GRANT: Yeah. And quickly, before I let you go, have you had time enough in opposition to formulate a policy in relation to border security? I imagine you'll tell me that we'll just go back to what worked.
PATERSON: Well, we will go back to what works, but we will have more to say about that as well closer to the election, Luke. Our policies have been very carefully and thoughtfully developed and costed and will be announced in good time to allow the Australian people to judge us. But I think they can also judge us on our record. I think they know last time Labor let control of our borders slip when they are in office and thousands of people died at sea. They know that the Coalition came in and cleaned up that mess, and we are prepared to come in again and clean up the mess that they've again caused by departing from our successful policies.
GRANT: Before I started today, I looked at what I said a year ago when Ray was away and I was here in his place, and the Newspoll on that day was 55-45. And I think widely the commentariat, certainly from the left, was saying that you were a rabble that the Opposition leader didn't know what he stood for. And I guess indication was that you'd been opposition for a very long time now. One doesn't know what might happen, because a year on that 55-45 has become 51-49 on Newspoll. And the enthusiasm I'm hearing from listeners, in their writings and those that call, in their dislike of the current government indicates I think you have a real chance, even though that's a long way down the track. It is a good reminder isn't that a lot can happen in one year?
PATERSON: That's right, Luke. And I think the Albanese government has let down a lot of Australians. They've had the wrong priorities since they came to office. I mean, they spent the first 18 months of their term obsessed with the Voice, trying to divide our country in the Constitution, when most Australians were concerned about the cost of living, when they were struggling to pay their grocery bills, when they were struggling to pay their electricity bills, when they're struggling to pay their mortgage and their rent. The government showed no interest in those things and instead focused on a divisive symbolic change to our constitution. And I'm not surprised that things are more competitive, and I think the next election will be competitive.
GRANT: Yeah, terrific. Nice to talk to you James, Stay well.
PATERSON: Thanks Luke.
ENDS
