Internal settlement on migration policy would give Sussan Ley a more positive year end
Ley isn’t about to repeat the mistake committed prior to the election by setting arbitrary targets against numbers they didn’t and can’t possibly understand a year in advance let alone what they might be by the next election. Where this is low-hanging fruit for the opposition, however, is the legacy caseload of asylum-seekers and claims made after arrival by plane. This is where Ley is likely to go harder.
These numbers are now significant and growing due to Labor’s unwillingness to address it. Before the 2022 election, then Labor home affairs shadow Kristina Keneally and immigration spokesman Andrew Giles started to make a big thing about illegal arrivals by plane.
They even conducted a roundtable on it. Since then there’s been practically nothing done. There are still thousands of failed asylum-seekers in Australia who fall under the legacy caseload of the disastrous policies of the Rudd and Gillard governments.
The Albanese government’s migration review suggested areas to look at that still haven’t been acted on. They have cleared some of this backlog from more than a decade ago, but not all of it. It has continued to grow annually.
One suggestion is that Ley might adopt something akin to the Canadian model, which was loosely referred to in the migration review.
It is no longer irregular arrivals by boat that are the problem for government. What the Coalition might seek to do is replicate an Operation Sovereign Borders-style arrangement for those arriving by plane – which has traditionally represented a higher number of asylum applications.
The problem with plane arrivals is that those coming by plane do so having a valid visa to enter the country in the first place, such as a tourist visa. Once in the country, and on expiration of that visa, asylum claims are then lodged.
As an example of how this system is being abused, the most recent caseload included a British resident claiming asylum. Being rubbish at cricket surely doesn’t put someone at risk of persecution. And this is at the heart of what can be deemed a legitimate claim.
So far there are an estimated 50,000 asylum-seekers living in Australia who have been rejected in their claims for protection, having exhausted the legal labyrinth of appeals. There are an estimated 50,000 more who are currently engaged in this system, with the likelihood that many or most will also be rejected.
When Canada experienced a similar problem, rather than trying to round them all up and send them home, it sought to punish the migration agents and lawyers putting in often frivolous claims on behalf of paying clients.
It did this by applying fines and the threat of disbarment to agents lodging frivolous claims in the knowledge they had little chance of succeeding. Ley may very well seek to copy this approach as a crackdown on the system that has allowed this to balloon.
The only alternative and unpalatable approach would be to adopt a “Trumpade” and send out the goons to round up all these people and send them home. But even Donald Trump is finding this impossible – and costly.
The moderates in the Liberal Party would never countenance such an approach. This is where Ley needs to strike a balance. Her policy and the name Trump have to have as much distance from each other as she can construct.
At the same time, this is an obvious target for the party if it wants to throw red meat to its base in the absence of a fully formed migration policy that sets hard overall numbers.
The asylum-seeker caseload is likely to be a major focus of the policy release this week. There will also be an attempt to resurrect a “values” component to new arrivals. The problem with this is its subjective nature. The Coalition has ventured down this road before. While it might send the right signals, the Coalition would want to communicate that it can become impractical in the end.
Net overseas arrival numbers and student visas, as well as the humanitarian streams, must be addressed by Ley. In the case of the first two, it is likely to be directional rather than prescriptive.
Peter Dutton found out very quickly that setting a hard number without proper consideration to the consequences left the Coalition vulnerable to attack on the economics. This must be part of Ley’s calculus, as does the blowback from constituent groups such as hoteliers.
The problem is that you can’t set targets against unknowable numbers in two years’ time. Locking in numbers now would be madness.
The relationship between migration and housing supply is an easy one to project, even if migration is only one part – perhaps a smaller part than is often promoted – in the broader housing shortage crisis.
Nevertheless, in its simplicity it is an easy concept for concerned voters to grasp. If any of the polls are a guide, the level of concern in the community is high. People don’t like political parties beating up on migrants, but the argument concerning housing has significant bite.
One of the most astute political decisions the opposition has taken since the election has been to delay the announcement of this policy until this week.
There was little disagreement among the Liberal leadership group last Monday that the primary principle should be applied: Why get in the way of your opponent while they are making a mistake.
Whatever the collateral damage from the Anika Wells expenses scandal that might fall the Coalition’s way, it is always the government that has more to lose in these fights. As a result, the past week has been undeniably the best politically the opposition has enjoyed since the election. And that’s largely because the opposition has forced the government to talk about its own extravagance rather than drawing attention to its own issues.
Ley will this week be forced to do just that but if an internal settlement can be reached on migration policy, the Liberal leader will have capped off a far better end to the year than where it was heading just a few weeks ago.
More Coverage
What kind of Jewish life is possible in this country?
Sussan Ley faces a second critical test of her leadership this week when she confirms the shape of the Coalition’s revised immigration policy. But those expecting hard numbers on permanent migration and student visas are either ignorantly or deliberately trying to set her up for failure.