This article is an instalment in a new series, “Peter Dutton is racist”, on Dutton’s history of racism and the role racism has played on both sides of politics since the 1970s.
I was surprised when Peter Dutton called for a ban on Palestinians coming from Gaza. Not because it wasn’t consistent with his appalling record on issues of race. On that front, Dutton is utterly predictable. No, I was surprised because as a former minister responsible for the Migration Act, he would know that banning people of a particular nationality, race or religion is beyond the powers in the act.
It was akin to Donald Trump’s Muslim ban. Trump would have been told once he became US president that such a ban is illegal also in the USA. That was why Trump had to find another way to implement a much more limited visa scrutiny requirement for people of certain nationalities.
While Dutton could demand the Migration Act be amended to provide the power to ban people of a particular nationality, race or religion, that legislative amendment would need to override the Racial Discrimination Act. Dutton or his colleagues have not yet made such a demand — although they, parts of the Murdoch press, and Coalition luminaries such as John Howard continue to support Dutton’s ban in some form or other.
I was less surprised Dutton would make such a call so soon after the race riots in the UK and the ASIO director-general’s warning to political and community leaders to watch their words. Dutton would have little respect for such warnings when there is much political advantage available. He is likely to have made little connection to the Cronulla rioters or the Christchurch mass murderer, both of whom were inspired by parts of the right-wing media and politicians.
Since Dutton’s call for a ban, his colleagues have suggested various explanations for how it might be implemented. Nationals Leader David Littleproud and opposition Home Affairs spokesperson James Paterson have suggested use of Temporary Protection Visas (TPVs) in a ham-fisted attempt to exploit Labor’s decision to abolish these. They seem to have now backed out of using TPVs, perhaps having realised TPVs were for people arriving in Australia unlawfully, mainly boat arrivals, not people arriving with visas.
Labor may decide to implement some form of temporary humanitarian visa in an effort to mitigate its mistake of initially using visitor visas for displaced Palestinians. Visitor visas have the wrong criteria for prioritising people in humanitarian need. For example, a well-off person who has many options for securing visas would likely be prioritised under visitor visa criteria while a child recently orphaned due to the war but with relatives in Australia would not qualify. That is why Australia has usually used humanitarian visas to deal with situations of people fleeing war just as we did when the Taliban took over Afghanistan.
Faced with the current situation in Gaza, the Canadians have allocated 5,000 humanitarian places. That is what we should have done. But that would not prevent Palestinians who have arrived on visitor visas relinquishing their right to apply for a permanent protection visa. Labor should have used permanent humanitarian visas from the outset, just as Canada has done.
That mistake opened the door for Dutton to scare Australians by implying inadequate security checking. That is nonsense.
Palestinians trying to escape Gaza are being closely scrutinised by the Israeli military for any links to Hamas. The Israeli military, more than any organisation on the planet, knows which Palestinians have a link to Hamas. Those Palestinians would never be allowed out of Gaza.
Egypt is also closely scrutinising people escaping Gaza and entering Egypt which houses around 100,000 Palestinian refugees. That country would also have extensive data on Palestinians with links to Hamas.
Australian government scrutiny of visitor visa applicants out of Gaza would use a combination of Movement Alert List (MAL) checks that may include a range of Hamas leaders and operatives, as well as targeted scrutiny of other applicants with characteristics of concern. There would be no point to ASIO scrutinising applicants who have visited Australia many times before, are not on MAL, and have no characteristics of concern.
Palestinians who get a visa to Australia would also be checked at numerous points of travel to Australia and then again checked extensively if they apply for asylum after arrival.
There is no previous cohort that I can recall that would have gone through such extensive security checks.
While Dutton has every right to criticise the Labor government for not using humanitarian visas from the outset, trying to scare Australians about inadequate security checking is just another appalling example of Dutton dog-whistling.
It also marks the first time that that a major party leader in Australia has refused point blank to assist people with family links to Australia fleeing a war. It seems we are no longer the nation that helped displaced Jewish refugees after World War II; refugees fleeing the aftermath of the Vietnam War; Kosovo refugees fleeing the Balkans War; Timorese fleeing the Indonesian Army; people fleeing ISIS rampaging through Syria/Iraq; Afghans fleeing the Taliban; or Ukrainians fleeing the Russian invasion.
Do we really want to traduce our long and proud humanitarian record through a ban on helping Palestinians fleeing the war in Gaza?
Do you think Peter Dutton is racist? Let us know your thoughts by writing to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name to be considered for publication. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.
