Sharman Stone MP

E&OE……………………….………………………………………………………………………………..

 

 

 

PRESENTER:                Good morning Sharman Stone.

 

S STONE:                     Good morning.

 

PRESENTER:                Now it does seem that it is a Julia Gillard verses Tony Abbott on the asylum seeker debate now. Tony Abbott has used some jargon over the last 24 hours or so such as “If you want to stop the boats you have to change the government”, “Labor created this problem of more boat arrivals” and Abbott’s “No card-no entry” policy. Are you in complete agreement with all of what the Federal Coalition is proposing?

 

S STONE:                      Well of course. We have got a serious problem with over 4000 coming via the boats and for every one who comes via the back door, our legitimate intake, those stuck in camps who don’t have the $15,000 or more US dollars to pay a smuggler, they just simply stay out there, many of them in fear of their lives.

 

So what we have got now is the Julia Gillard policy created when she was Shadow Immigration Minister. It clearly has not worked, it’s not fair, it’s not humane and certainly there are people, we think about over 150 now drowned at sea as well.

 

PRESENTER:                But the Coalition’s policy for example of it making harder for asylum seekers to be granted refugee status if they deliberately destroy their identity documents; are you comfortable with that policy?

 

S STONE:                     Well the point is that many of the people who finally do a short leg of boat trip out of Indonesia doing a run to Christmas Island, have flown to that point in Indonesia. They have come via Malaysia very often. Some have spent many years of course in other countries like Indonesia, or Malaysia or Pakistan.

 

I know for a fact because the refugee constituents who I have in my own electorate of Murray tell me that they are encouraged by their people smugglers to throw away their documentation in the last leg of their trip because that will bring more chance, they were often told, of the assessment coming out in their favour; with no documentation they cannot prove they are from Pakistan or Iraq for example, and it makes it harder for the officials, so go on throw away your documents.

 

Now that is a problem for Australia. It should absolutely be the case, if you have flown, you know you have got documentation. You don’t hop on a plane we all know without a piece of paper saying who you are. If you have deliberately throwing that away then it is really up the individual to prove who they really are.

 

PRESENTER:                But if they have thrown it away out of desperation as you say, if they are on a boat with a people smuggler who is telling them to throw it away, and if you are a genuine refugee and you have fled a country, you have done it for a reason, you have done that out of desperation. I don’t understand about that approach? How can it be easier or harder for someone to prove they are a refugee if they don’t have the documentation and why have that presumption of them deliberately destroying them, rather than loosing them or something else?

 

S STONE:                     Well as you would have heard from Tony Abbott’s announcement, if you are a genuine refugee, if you have come out of a war zone. If you have come directly from Kabul or some other part of Afghanistan for example, then that can be proven that you have made your way via overland routes and so on. If you have been on the plane however you have some paperwork which says who you are and your destination. Where you got on the plane and where your getting off the plane. As anybody who has flown knows internationally and domestically that is absolutely what happens. 

 

So if you are a genuine refugee and you can show- hey- I haven’t got documentation because this is how I got to Australia then of course your case will be regarded as legitimate. But if you have flown parts of the journey then you should have that documentation in the back pocket and that will help the Australian officials and ASIO very quickly establish your security status and your identity. That’s what we need to do rather than spend years trying to sort out if this person is this person genuinely from Afghanistan or Pakistan or have they come via Indonesia after many years in Indonesia perhaps. We are keen to pick this up -that’s what we need to know because unfortunately Australia just simply can’t be an open door for everyone that just wants a better life or if you like; is after an economic outcome, who doesn’t in fact have a problem of genuine war related concern that we want to target.

 

PRESENTER:                What about the re-introduction of Temporary Protection Visa’s?

 

S STONE:                     It is a very important measure. We introduced that before as you know, when we were in Government….

 

PRESENTER:                Yes then it was stoped because the public wasn’t happy with it.

 

S STONE:                     No it was stoped because the number of asylum seekers dropped right away. We ended up with only a couple of boats a year, you would recall before 2005,2006, 2007. So the problem had been solved. We didn’t continue to have what we have now of 3 or 4 boats a week arriving.

 

PRESENTER:                But this uncertainty that Temporary Protection Visa’s brings - if they are accepted as refugees, shouldn’t they just be able to gain permanent protection?

 

S STONE:                     Well if they are accepted as refugees the UNHCR Convention doesn’t require the country to give permanent residency with citizenship, with all the trimmings like family reunion, welfare and so on. What it says is you give this person seeking asylum protection for as long as it takes for the country of origin of that person to be secure and just as it is now the case in Sri Lanka, when the country settles down, when it’s safe for you to return back to your home country and be reunited with your extended family, where you came from, then that’s what should occur.

 

So we will look after people under our policy for as long as their country of origin is unsafe for them. And under the Temporary Protection Visa system that’s checked every couple of years and if the country is safe again then we assist the person to get on a plane and go back home.

 

PRESENTER:                It is hard for people to plan their future in that case?

 

S STONE:                     Well it is much better for us to give people temporary protection than to not have our very generous policy of over 13 500 intake, which we do have right now. We have got to make sure the people we accept as refugees are genuinely people who are in danger of real persecution. Not simply people who had been able to find $15,000 US to buy their way through the back door into our country because of the slack policy of the Rudd-Gillard Government. That’s what we have got now, and that’s not fair to the refugee’s out in the hell holes in Africa who don’t have the $15,000 US, who are now pushed further back in the queue because the people smugglers are so busy in their trade of human smuggling.

 

PRESENTER:                Sharman Stone thank you for joining us this morning.

 

S STONE:                     My pleasure.