Subjects: Strengthening the integrity of Australian citizenship; putting Australian workers first – abolition of 457 Visas; Manus Island; Tony Abbott.
E&EO…………………………………………………………………………………………..
DAVID SPEERS:
The man who's driven a lot of the changes announced this week is the Immigration Minister Peter Dutton. He's worked with the Prime Minister on these changes for months and I spoke to Peter Dutton earlier. Minister, thanks very much for your time.
PETER DUTTON:
Thanks David.
DAVID SPEERS:
Has it been too easy to become an Australian citizen until now and do we have Australian citizens who really shouldn't be Australian citizens?
PETER DUTTON:
Well the short answer is yes. The vast majority of people do the right thing, but we know for example that we have taken citizenship away from some people; we know that people have provided fraudulent information when they've applied for their citizenship, and in the modern age I think it is appropriate and timely that we update the way in which we apply the citizenship laws and by asking people to abide by our laws and adopt Australian values, I think it's a restatement of what has been a long-standing principle. But we move it now from an administrative process into one where we will have more checks and balances and I think then we can be assured that we are getting the most out of people that want to become Australian citizens.
DAVID SPEERS:
So the Australian values seems to be the key here. At the moment the pledge of commitment that new citizens have to take says; ‘I pledge my loyalty to Australia and its people whose democratic beliefs I share, whose rights and liberties I respect and whose laws I will uphold and obey.’ Why doesn't that go far enough?
PETER DUTTON:
Well at the moment that's a statement and we're going out to consultation to see how that might be expanded – I think it should include allegiance for example – but we're open to discussion about making sure that that is a more meaningful statement of commitment and allegiance – I think that's important – but that is principled if you like. The more substantive aspect to what we're proposing here, firstly, is in relation to the English language requirement and the reality is if you want people to take advantage of a nation like ours, we want people to be able to engage in work if they're of a working age with a capacity to work, we want their kids to be able to immerse themselves in local communities and English language is an important requirement.
DAVID SPEERS:
You're going to raise the bar from basic to competent level of English language.
PETER DUTTON:
Yes.
DAVID SPEERS:
I mean, you met just yesterday with some of the Yazidi refugees that we've welcomed to Australia in Wagga Wagga. How likely are they to be able to have competent level English in, what four years, before they want to become a citizen?
PETER DUTTON:
Well I think very likely. I think there is a very different situation that might have been faced by people coming out of war-torn Europe in the '50s or '60s and there is certainly a lot of assistance, a lot of support both online, within the community, provided and funded by the Government as well. So there is a lot of support to take up English language lessons. And again I think allowing people four years to improve their standard is important. It's important to note also that there is an exemption under that requirement for people over the age of 60 or under the age of 16. So we do target people in particular of working age…
DAVID SPEERS:
…right; so sorry, just to be clear on that, anyone over 60 or under 16 won't have to be competent in English?
PETER DUTTON:
That's right. So we will encourage that, but it's not a requirement for citizenship. So I think that's important that young children are learning and improving their English, either through school or study otherwise if they're in the workplace and for grandparents who are coming to Australia on a Remaining Parent visa or a Relative visa, whatever the case might be, then I think that's a sensible application of the measure. But by and large the English language is important for people (a) to be engaged in work or study, or to be a functioning member of society.
DAVID SPEERS:
Coming back to the values though, so this will be part of the test. What sort of Australian values would you like to test for?
PETER DUTTON:
Well I think the first principle is that people are abiding by Australian law, so we need to look at for example, whether or not people have been involved in gang violence, whether or not there's information in relation to criminal activity or…
DAVID SPEERS:
…but surely at the moment if you've engaged in criminal activity and been convicted of such, can you become an Australian citizen?
PETER DUTTON:
Well you can become an Australian citizen even with a criminal history at the moment. So this is a significant tightening of that arrangement.
DAVID SPEERS:
So any criminal conviction, you're out? Or you don't get citizenship?
PETER DUTTON:
No, I think we can look at the individual circumstances. So I think what's important to consider here is, you know the true facts, all of the facts in relation to an individual application. So it may mean that somebody who's convicted of a minor offence many years ago is viewed very differently than an offence of sexual assault or stalking, for example, or armed robbery. I think we need to be serious that…
DAVID SPEERS:
…and domestic violence?
PETER DUTTON:
And domestic violence is included.
DAVID SPEERS:
So any domestic violence would disqualify you from Australian citizenship?
PETER DUTTON:
It would likely disqualify you from Australian citizenship – and so it should – but again the decision makers – as they do now with every visa application, with the 130,000 applications that are dealt with each year and people become Australian citizens now – the decision makers within the Department look at the information available in relation to each applicant and then make a decision based on those facts.
DAVID SPEERS:
And of course those who don't have a conviction, but may have been involved in beating their wife or kids, as you acknowledged this morning, they may still lie on the test, right? They may still say; no I don't do that and yes I agree you shouldn't do that. That doesn't mean that some won't slip through the net?
PETER DUTTON:
Well of course, but that is not an argument for not applying that standard in the first place. We have a problem, like any other country, with domestic violence. There is a lot of work the Government's…all of us are doing to address that scourge. This is not specific to any race or ethnic background, this is a problem across society and I think there should be a very clear message – this is one element of what we're talking about in terms of somebody's character or signing up to an Australian value – it is not part of who we are as a country for men to treat women poorly or to abuse sexually women or children within their own family.
DAVID SPEERS:
So if someone passes the test and then does beat their wife, can they have their citizenship revoked?
PETER DUTTON:
If there is a fraudulent application and somebody pledges or gives an undertaking that they haven't committed criminal offences or they haven't been convicted…
DAVID SPEERS:
How do you prove that?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, it may well be that there is information that comes to light, a complaint that's made, subsequent evidence that surfaces; doctor's reports, whatever it might be – and whether it's domestic violence or some other crime – so there are provisions under the Act now in certain circumstances where citizenship can be revoked.
But David, this is the reason why we need to get the decision to grant citizenship right before the conferral takes place because once somebody becomes an Australian citizen, rightly, that person regardless of their background is protected under our constitution. We can't render somebody stateless and we can't having issued citizenship to somebody, then turn around and say; you know geez, we should have been more thorough in our checks on that individual.
I think what we're saying here is that we do want to be more thorough and we want to make sure that those people that go on to become Australian citizens, share the values, abide by the laws, treat their wife well, send their kids to school, are working, all of that I think makes up the complete picture.
DAVID SPEERS:
What about some other values: religious tolerance, is that one of them? Non-discrimination on the grounds of religion?
PETER DUTTON:
Yes, and look the point that I’d make in relation to values is that we have said that we are going to put out for discussion that element of our decision today, our announcement today, so that people…I mean people may well have aspects that they think should be included for consideration…
DAVID SPEERS:
…well indeed, and I'm just wondering as Minister, what you're starting point here is? If you agree religious tolerance is one of them; does that mean including respect for people to follow the religion of their choice, including Islam and not labelling that religion, for example, a disease as some Australian, as one Australian politician has. Is that in line with Australian values?
PETER DUTTON:
Well I think people can…others that have made public comments can talk to their own comments. And there is a different standard for somebody who wants to become an Australian citizen, as opposed to somebody that is an Australian citizen in terms of their expression of views – and we're not talking about taking citizenship off people – what we are saying is that absolutely we have as a fundamental belief in our system freedom of speech, freedom of religion and people can…
DAVID SPEERS:
…is it therefore fair to say there is a higher bar for those who want to become Australian citizens than perhaps those born Australian citizens?
PETER DUTTON:
Well if your point is that if you're, you know, through hereditary links able to become an Australian citizen as a birth right, well of course because somebody is born with that right …
DAVID SPEERS:
…we don't have to sit the test. We don't have to agree to non-discrimination on the grounds of religion or anything else.
PETER DUTTON:
Well because the argument otherwise would be that you don't confer citizenship on Australian-born individuals regardless of their…
DAVID SPEERS:
…I'm just saying there is a higher bar though for those who want to…
PETER DUTTON:
…well by definition is my point. Unless your argument is that we should not have a birth right conferral of citizenship, which of course will be nonsense.
DAVID SPEERS:
Not at all. What about non-discrimination on the grounds of sexuality?
PETER DUTTON:
Yes.
DAVID SPEERS:
Is that something you want in the test as well? You should respect the right of Australians to be gay, straight, transgender, whatever.
PETER DUTTON:
Of course, of course.
DAVID SPEERS:
Will that be in the test?
PETER DUTTON:
I think that's…we're open to that suggestion. We haven't included that in the test, but we have spoken about freedom of expression of interest and that is fundamental within that.
DAVID SPEERS:
What about…and you talk about the working age; 16 to 60. Some requirement for them to show that they are at least trying to work, paying tax, does that mean that those who are solely dependent on welfare, be it the unemployment disability pension, whatever, they can't apply?
PETER DUTTON:
If somebody is of working age and they have the ability, the capacity to work, but they're choosing not to work, then that is somebody who is not adopting an Australian value. An Australian value is to work hard, provide for your children, provide for your family. That is a fundamental aspect of who we are and if people are taking a decision that they want to come to our country or become an Australian citizen – because we have one of the most generous welfare systems in the world – that doesn't make them eligible to become an Australian citizen.
So adherence to tax laws, adherence to social security laws, the fact that they have been gainfully employed if they have a capacity to do so, is fundamental. If somebody has an incapacity or an inability to work, if they're on a disability support pension and they don't have a capacity to work, well that is a very different proposition.
DAVID SPEERS:
Can I turn to the 457 visa announcement from earlier in the week; scrapping the programme replacing it with something with much tighter rules? Most employers seem to be comfortable with the change to restore community support for the scheme. Labor's raised some concerns around the labour market testing. Now explain to me how this will work under the new scheme?
PETER DUTTON:
Alright; I mean it's almost farcical the Labor approach here. Now we've had Tanya Plibersek saying that this is a sledgehammer approach. We've had Bill Shorten saying this is window dressing. We've had Jim Chalmers and Andrew Leigh and others out there. I think Ed Husic was out yesterday saying that there's some independent commission required, couldn't provide any detail. It was a thought bubble of the highest order. So what it demonstrates is that Labor is all over the shop on this.
Now part of the reason of course is that unions were big utilisers of 457 visas. They don't want to talk about that, but they were. Now, for them to talk about labour market testing when under the 457 programme, administered by Mr Shorten as Employment Minister in the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd years, there was no test. So they had six years in government where they could have applied market testing. They didn't. And what happened was there was a doubling of the number of 457 visas issued when Mr Shorten was a Minister in the Labor Government.
So for them to come out now and say that our tightening around labour market testing is inadequate is a farce and it's a joke and it's a political stunt. So what we've said is that we will adhere to Free Trade Agreements. We will adhere to Australian law otherwise, of course.
DAVID SPEERS:
And remind us what that includes for the China Free Trade Agreement?
PETER DUTTON:
So in some of the agreements that Australia has or could enter into, there may be exemption and there was some debate as you’d recall about this at the time of the Free Trade Agreement about some classifications, some industries, etc. So the detail of that is all within the agreement.
DAVID SPEERS:
Just in simple terms, a Chinese firm, for example, wouldn't have to do labour market testing. They could bring in Chinese employees?
PETER DUTTON:
In certain circumstances that is possible. Now it's not the norm across the board by any stretch, but what we've said is that Labor's system had no labour market testing at all and what we are saying is that Australian employers, sponsors of 457 visa holders, need to test the market; they need to advertise, they need to prove that they can't get an Australian for that Australian job. That is the default position. That's the mandated position and that is a very significant tightening on what Labor had presided over for six years – so for them to lecture us now, frankly, is a little disingenuous.
DAVID SPEERS:
Okay. The concern has always been that some employers don't really test the market. They say they do. Your Department, what's it going to do? Keep a check on this?
PETER DUTTON:
Absolutely and it will tighten up on it. We have compliance activities already. We've ramped that up and we will continue to do that and people who do the wrong thing – either employees or employers – well, they will have their visas cancelled or they won't be sponsoring somebody into a visa again. So already we have ramped up that activity, but we will do more.
DAVID SPEERS:
A couple of quick ones just finally. Manus Island; there was an incident on Friday there where members of the PNG Defence Force allegedly fired shots at the detention centre after a fight with asylum seekers. Do you know much more about this?
PETER DUTTON:
My understanding is that the Commissioner of Police in PNG as well as the Defence Force Chief are conducting an investigation in relation to the matter. So I think we're best to wait to see what that uncovers.
There was difficulty, as I understand it, in the community. There was an alleged incident where three asylum seekers were alleged to be leading a local five year old boy back toward the facility and there was a lot of angst around that, if you like, within the local PNG community.
DAVID SPEERS:
Why was there angst about that?
PETER DUTTON:
Well because I think there was concern about why the boy was being led or for what purpose he was being led away back into the regional processing centre. So I think it's fair to say that the mood had elevated quite quickly. I think some of the local residents were quite angry about this particular incident and another alleged sexual assault.
So again, I don't have the full details and those matters are under investigation, but there had been an elevation in the tempo if you like on the ground.
But I’d make this point; I mean it's unacceptable if firearms have been discharged unlawfully. That is unacceptable by anybody's standard.
DAVID SPEERS:
Is it a safe place?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, it's a difficult place because people don't want to stay in PNG. They've come on a people smuggling boat. They've paid their money. They want to come to Australia. We've said they are not going to settle here. So people understandably; some of them will act out, some are refusing to accept settlement packages to go back to their country of origin – even though hundreds before them have done so – and essentially some of them are doubling down on the advice of advocates that look, the Government will bend and they will come to Australia and we've been very clear that they're not.
So in that environment it is difficult for people because they've paid their $10,000 or whatever it was to a people smuggler and they want to come here, but we aren't going to allow that to happen.
DAVID SPEERS:
And final one; Tony Abbott, he's been again warning this week that Labor's going to win the next election unless his five point plan is put in place. It includes ideas in your portfolio space, cutting immigration to help with the housing market he says. What do you think of that idea?
PETER DUTTON:
We've brought the number down if you like. It was over 300,000 net figure per year under Kevin Rudd. It is this year at about 190,000 or so, but again the programme as the Prime Minister's pointed out in the last couple of days – as was the case under Tony when he was Prime Minister – the programme is designed to act in our national interest. When the economy is humming along and when there's demand in the mining sector and elsewhere, we will get more people coming to work here because labour will chase opportunity and that's understandable and numbers will go up. In downturns in the economy, there will be less demand under the programme.
DAVID SPEERS:
And Tony Abbott presumably knows all this?
PETER DUTTON:
Of course. Of course and…
DAVID SPEERS:
Why is he saying we need to cut…
PETER DUTTON:
…well he's right to point out that a large number of people under the streams, the visa streams, end up living in Sydney and Melbourne predominantly; Brisbane as well, to a lesser extent the other states and territories.
DAVID SPEERS:
So do you need to cut the intake further?
PETER DUTTON:
I don't believe that we do, but again I think we should be driven by what's in our national interest. So I think it's appropriate for Tony to be adding to the public debate. He's a former Prime Minister…
DAVID SPEERS:
…you don't have a problem with what he's doing…
PETER DUTTON:
…he's well respected by his colleagues. I think he's well respected by people and he has said his comments in this context, this very important context; he does not want Bill Shorten to be the next prime minister of our country and he wants us to embrace policies which will allow us to win the next election. I think he should be applauded for that. So I don't have any issue...
DAVID SPEERS:
…and your colleague Mathias Cormann a couple of months ago called it pretty sad what he was doing…
PETER DUTTON:
No, but that was in a different context. Mathias responded to particular comments that were made that went to a different debate and a different context if you like. What Tony's talking about in his contribution that he made in the last week or so, I think is all designed at trying to make sure that Bill Shorten doesn't win the next election. That's what all of us are about because it would be a disaster for the economy. It would be bad for families and small businesses and it's not what our country needs at the moment. We don't need a Daniel Andrews-style government where the CFMEU is effectively running the country.
DAVID SPEERS:
Immigration Minister Peter Dutton, good to talk to you.
PETER DUTTON:
Thanks David. Thank you.
[ends]
