PETA CREDLIN: I want to turn now to an important matter of border security and what appears to be a significant new policy direction by the Labor Party today in Canberra.

Now as it stands, the Coalition has a longstanding policy to fast track the processing of boat arrivals into Australia. This process was developed by the Liberal Party, and I was there when it came into operation. It was an election commitment in 2013. And as a response, it came to be because there were over 50,000 asylum seekers coming under the Rudd and Gillard Governments, which overwhelmed the usual processing systems at the time.

Now this process has been in operation for six years and it's now an important component of the Government's Sovereign Borders regime. But, for how much longer?

In the Senate, the Greens have introduced a disallowance motion - that's a technical device to disallow or effectively repeal the Government's fast track processing system. To date, Labor has not opposed fast track processing, but there's been some subtle shifts. And under the new Shadow Minister Kristina Keneally, well today, they've totally flipped their position because their joining with the Greens to vote for the repeal of the Government's longstanding policy on processing.

Now if this disallowance motion is supported by other crossbenchers, it will carry. And the Government is warning it could result in asylum seeker applications blowing out from being assessed in 23 days to 504 days.

What's this all mean and why is it such a concern? I'm joined now by the Minister for Immigration, Mr David Coleman, live from Canberra.

I hope I've tried to explain what's pretty complexed there as effectively as people can follow it at home, Minister. But essentially, what's the ramifications for your Department and officials as they process applications if this change was to be made?

DAVID COLEMAN: As you said, Peta, this applies to people who arrived unlawfully by boat under Labor. What we've been dealing with for years now is the legacy of that time and dealing with those cases as efficiently as we can. There were 50,000 people that arrived, as you know.

Now the fast track process that we have in place now means that if someone doesn't like the decision of the Department about their claim, we put it through the fast tracked process, and that usually takes about 23 days on average. Now the alternative, which Labor is teaming up with the Greens to support, is to put it to the AAT, which is a completely different process, much more complex, much more like a court case. That takes on average over 500 days.

So you've basically got a situation where you've got people who are only here because of the failings of Labor on border security policy. Now Labor are teaming up with Richard Di Natale to say: let's make the process of assessing them take longer. It’s absolutely ridiculous. It's just another example of Labor's chaotic approach to this policy area.

PETA CREDLIN: So let's talk about the ‘why’. Why would Labor be doing this massive backflip when they say that there isn't a cigarette paper between the Government and them when it comes to border protection?

Clearly, by going back through the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, that's the AAT, people can avail themselves of activist support, government-paid lawyers to assist their applications.

Many have been in Australia now for six plus years. So the longer they could stay here, the likelihood that they could perhaps will have children, they can argue the case like the Biloela family. That's more likely to be there to their advantage than the assessment under your system. Explain to me why you say your system is fair and it allows someone to have another look at their application, and that they aren't getting more natural justice, let's say, under the AAT process.

DAVID COLEMAN: Kristina Keneally said just this week this system is neither fast nor fair. So we know it's 95 per cent faster than the AAT, so that deals with the fast issue. Now in terms of a fairness issue, this issue has been considered by the High Court, who found that the process is a robust process. Ian Callinan, the former High Court judge, in his review of these issues, found that it's a very appropriate process.

People can still put forward their claims. They put those in writing, and they're considered in that way. Whereas with the AAT you have, as I said, a court-type process with witnesses, with new information introduced, and a whole series of obligations that can mean those cases drag on for literally years.

It's extraordinary that Labor, not only are responsible for the situation in the first place, of all these people being in Australia, but now are saying they want it to take longer to actually resolve the situation. And of course, Peta, this has cost taxpayers - this whole thing - $17 billion now. We had 50,000 people arrive. We had 8,000 kids placed in detention by Labor. And of course, 1200 people tragically drowned at sea.

If you look at our post-war public policy history in this country, it's very hard to find an example of anything that is worse than this. And now Labor says: let's compound the problem by further delaying the processing of these people.

PETA CREDLIN: Yeah. I can't understand the politics in this for Labor. I would have thought they wouldn't want to remind people of the 50,000 arrivals under their watch. I wouldn't think they'd want to remind people, particularly when we're all asking for more money for farmers, and it costs taxpayers - not the Government - $17 billion to manage this mess.

What's happening inside Labor, do you think? Because this is a real departure - as I said, Labor likes to pretend that they're close to the Government on these issues but Kristina Keneally, in a number of recent moves on the issue of immigration, has signalled a real shift with Labor. So, is the bipartisanship, if it was ever there, is that ending?

DAVID COLEMAN: Well look, it was never there, Peta. And it's certainly - the gap is getting bigger and bigger. It was already huge, but it's getting bigger. I mean, Kristina Keneally's views on these issues are pretty hard to follow, to be frank. Just a couple of weeks ago, she said that the Government had what she described as a “moral obligation of time”, to effectively provide permanent residency to unlawful boat arrivals if they'd been here for a long time in the country. Now, the reason they would be here for a long time in the country is because of appeal processes. So that's what she said a couple of weeks ago. Then this week, she says: let's make the appeal process longer and slower. So, it doesn't make any sense.

Basically what Labor is saying is: in a choice between Scott Morrison and Richard Di Natale, they want to line up with Richard Di Natale, and that is just extraordinary. It is completely out of step with mainstream Australia's values.

As you know, Peta, we do have a generous refugee and humanitarian program. There are few countries in the world that have programs like we do, but it's got to be run in an orderly way, where the Australian people decide the manner in which the program is run. What Labor is saying is: let's not do that, let's extend and extend these processes at immense cost to taxpayers.

PETA CREDLIN: Thank you very much, Minister. You've covered the issue there very carefully. Obviously, it will come down to the crossbenches. If people are watching tonight, now, and you have a strong opinion, pick up the phone or email a crossbencher's office. I could put them up on my Facebook page for you. Let your voice be known, because if the crossbench do not vote for this disallowance motion then the current rules, the rules brought in under the Coalition in 2013, will remain. Minister, thanks for your time tonight.

DAVID COLEMAN: Thanks, Peta.

[ENDS]