During the last Senate Estimates, I questioned Home Affairs on their failure to properly vet the migrants they are letting into Australia.
Education is being used as a backdoor to permanent residency, with work requirements being rorted.
23,000 dodgy qualifications have been cancelled. These individuals abused the opportunity given to them — buying degrees and working instead of studying. $11 billion is sent overseas every year by foreign students. They breached their visa conditions and should be sent home—yet only 4 people were found guilty of immigration offences in 2023–24.
With 4.5 million visa holders, is enforcement even happening?
— Senate Estimates | October 2025
Transcript
Senator ROBERTS: I’ll defer to that and respect the committee then. Let’s move on to the next question. I want to refer to reporting that the Australian Skills Quality Authority has cancelled 23,000 dodgy qualifications since late 2024. Many of these were in relation to international students, who are here on strict visa conditions. If they’ve been found to be participating in a ghost college or something similar to obtain a dodgy qualification to satisfy their visa, that’s clearly deceptive and a breach of their visa conditions, so they should be deported. Are we deporting international students in that 23,000 dodgy qualifications cohort?
Senator COX: They’re the same questions.
Senator ROBERTS: Okay. I’ll move on. I’m going to refer to the federal defendants statistics out of the Australian Bureau of Statistics, which say that only four people were found guilty of immigration offences in 2023-24. It seems extraordinarily low, given the 100,000 that we just discussed. How many people did the Department of Home Affairs refer for potential prosecution in 2023-24?
Mr Thomas: It would be across a range of different areas. For example, with the NZYQ affected cohort, we make a number of referrals to law enforcement for breaches of visa conditions. There are other referrals that happen through other parts of the business. We don’t have an aggregate number, but there is a regular flow of referrals through to law enforcement for consideration where we identify a noncitizen that’s in breach.
Senator ROBERTS: You don’t have a total number?
Mr Thomas: Not on me, and I think finding that would be quite difficult.
Senator ROBERTS: Do you have the resources to refer everyone who may be committing an immigration offence for prosecution?
Mr Thomas: In terms of referring matters, yes. That’s a fairly straightforward process.
Senator ROBERTS: But you can’t tell me how many have been referred?
Mr Thomas: Not in totality across all of the department.
Senator ROBERTS: What I’m really asking is whether every single person the department becomes aware of who may have committed an immigration offence is referred for potential prosecution—yes or no?
Mr Thomas: Where we come across the situation where we think someone has committed a crime or breached the law, we will refer it to the appropriate authority.
Senator ROBERTS: But you don’t know how many deserve to be referred?
Mr Thomas: I don’t have those figures with me. I can take it on notice to try and find out.
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you. So you can’t guarantee that someone who’s in breach will be referred for potential prosecution?
Mr Thomas: You’re asking me a hypothetical question, but, in general, as I said, when we come across an instance where we think someone is in breach of a law, we will refer it to the appropriate jurisdiction.
Senator ROBERTS: My understanding is that only four guilty verdicts out of 2.5 million temporary visa holders in the country would imply it’s not possible.
Mr Thomas: I don’t have visibility of the statistics you’re referring to, but I’m aware of a range of migration outcomes.
Senator ROBERTS: In 2021 there were three million permanent visa holders. How many permanent visa holders are in the country right now? Is it four million?
Mr Willard: I have a figure. I’ll just flag that I’m not tracking that figure of three million for 2021. There are different types of permanent visas, but the figure I have at 30 June 2025 is 1.8 million. That includes 860,000 resident return visas. That’s a type of permanent visa.
Senator ROBERTS: What are the other classifications in that 1.8 million?
Mr Willard: There’s family, offshore humanitarian, onshore protection, other permanent, skilled and special eligibility, and resident return.
Senator ROBERTS: No other temporary visa holders?
Mr Willard: That’s the permanent visa figure that you mentioned.
Senator ROBERTS: How many temporary?
Mr Willard: The temporary figure’s 2.76 million.
Senator ROBERTS: So we add the 1.8 million to the 2.7 million to get the total noncitizens, temporary and permanent?
Mr Willard: The second figure, the 2.76 million figure, is temporary visa holders, and the first figure is permanent visa holders.
Senator ROBERTS: So visa holders in total are about 4.5 million?
https://img.youtube.com/vi/pmllIL7q_Ho/maxresdefault.jpg7201280Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2025-10-20 15:37:212025-10-20 15:37:35Dodgy Degrees, Broken Rules — Where Is Home Affairs?
I joined 2SM Radio to discuss a serious breach of Australia’s visa system – 23,000 international students have obtained fraudulent qualifications.
This widespread abuse undermines the integrity of our education sector, accelerates unsustainable immigration, and places additional strain on housing, wages, and public infrastructure.
The Albanese Government must take decisive action and should include deportations and full accountability from this government.
In 2024, 23,000 foreign students were found to have purchased qualifications—many in aged care and early childhood—from deregistered providers like SPES Education.
This is a clear breach of their visa conditions under Section 8202 and defeats the entire purpose of studying in Australia—which is to support the Australian education industry while acquiring real skills they can use to contribute to the growth of Australia or their country of origin.
The penalty for such a serious breach of trust with the Australian people must be the cancellation of the individual’s visa cancelled and deportation, along with any family members they were permitted to bring with them while studying in Australia.
I asked Minister Watt whether the government would cancel the visas of these students and others who obtained qualifications fraudulently.
Listen closely to the gaslighting, the waffle and the “backslapping” – all to avoid admitting that the Albanese Government has no intention of deporting these illegals students.
Transcript
My question is to Minister Watt, representing the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship. In July the Australian Skills Quality Authority issued notices cancelling the qualifications of more than 4,200 foreign students, who were largely studying aged care and early childhood, after their education provider, SPES Education Pty Ltd, was deregistered for running a cash-for-diplomas operation scheme. In 2024, 23,000 foreign students were caught purchasing their qualifications, which is a breach of condition 8202, applying to all class 500 student visa holders. In short, these foreign students are in breach of their visas. Minister, will you cancel the visas of these 23,000 students and any others who cheated when purchasing their qualification?
Senator WATT (Queensland—Minister for the Environment and Water): Thank you, Senator Roberts. While I understand you prefer to ask these types of questions through the frame of migration, the matters you are asking about probably fit more within the responsibilities of the Minister for Skills and Training, Minister Giles, but I do represent him here, so I can still answer that question.
We are very proud of the fact that we have reformed the compliance measures around international education to weed out the shonks who had been running international education operations and proliferated under the former coalition government. The international training system that was left behind by the Murrison government was not just a joke; it was crooked. We had shonks and crooks unfortunately running these sorts of operations, exploiting international students who were here, taking money off them and providing them with dodgy qualifications that weren’t fit for the kind of work they went on to do. So we are proud of those reforms.
As you say, Senator Roberts, it has resulted in thousands of qualifications being cancelled, as they should have been, because in some cases people were being awarded qualifications without doing any training or any study whatsoever; basically, you paid for a qualification and you got it. That’s not how the system should work. It’s how the system worked under the former coalition government, but it’s not how the system works under this Labor government. Again, we make no apology for taking back the qualifications of people, so-called students, who have obtained qualifications through those means, and we make absolutely no apology for going after the shonks who were running those kinds of organisations. They have no place in our system. They actually tarnish Australia’s reputation as a provider of international education, and we will continue to go after them.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Roberts, first supplementary?
Under both Australian and Queensland law, a person who obtains a job using a faked qualification has committed two offences: using deception and forgery to obtain a financial advantage. Both carry a penalty of seven years in jail. This is not just a foreign student breaching their student visa conditions; this is serious criminal behaviour. Minister, have you brought in so many foreign students and so many new arrivals that you have lost the ability to police clear-cut federal law?
The PRESIDENT: Minister Wong?
Senator Wong: President, I would ask you to consider whether that question is in order, given that it appears to go to a question about criminal provisions or offences under state legislation that clearly can’t be in the portfolio responsibilities the minister is representing.
Senator ROBERTS: My question goes to the quality of immigrants that are being allowed into this country and turning out to be criminals.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Roberts, you also referred to the qualifications or the penalties in the Queensland and Australian jurisdictions.
Senator Scarr: President, speaking on the point of order, it is a fact that the Australian immigration legislation does cross-refer to state criminal legislation with respect to calibrating what is serious or not-so-serious criminal conduct. I just provide that for your assistance.
The PRESIDENT: In response to your point of order, Senator Wong, the minister can answer the question to the extent that it goes to his portfolio or portfolios, his areas, but I do remind everyone in the chamber that it doesn’t go to legal opinion.
Senator WATT: Senator Roberts, I think we’re all used to you and other One Nation senators asking questions that involve pejorative statements towards migrants, and it would appear that that is the intention for this term as well. How you decide to use your questions is a matter for you.
The PRESIDENT: Minister Watt, please resume your seat. Senator Roberts.
Senator Roberts: An unfounded imputation, President. I happen to be an immigrant.
The PRESIDENT: There is no need for the added piece. Senator Roberts, the minister was describing the language with which a question was asked, so it doesn’t go to imputation.
Senator WATT: To answer your question, Senator Roberts, as I say, when the issue of fraudulent qualifications came to light, we took action. I was a little bit involved in this in my previous portfolio, and my recollection is that a very thorough search was done with employers who may have been employing the people involved. I will come back to you if this is wrong, but my recollection is that there was not very much evidence, if any at all, that people were being employed using those qualifications. As I say, if that’s wrong, I will come back to you. We do take this matter seriously, and we will keep acting against it.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Roberts, second supplementary?
Foreign students can now bring family members with them, a prize for which many are clearly prepared to break the law. Deporting 27,200 crooked students and the thousands of family members they brought with them will free up thousands of homes and help ease the housing crisis and record homelessness that your government has caused through catastrophically high immigration. Minister, isn’t it time we freed up homes for Australians who deserve them ahead of continuing to import criminals?
The PRESIDENT: Minister Wong?
Senator Wong: President, I would ask you to consider whether the use of that adjective, which I would prefer not to repeat, about the students in that question is in order, because it suggests all—I think it was a few hundred thousand—are in fact contravening or on the wrong side of the law or whatever. I do wonder if that’s an appropriate inclusion in a question to a minister in this place.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Roberts?
Senator Roberts: Senator Watt has already admitted that shonks are being weeded out. We want to get rid of them—out of the country.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Roberts, the minister was referring to providers of education. Minister Wong?
Senator Wong: On the point of order, the fact that some people may have breached the law does not make an entire cohort in breach of the law. That was the implication. It was a clear statement in the question.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Roberts?
Senator Roberts: We know 27,000—
The PRESIDENT: Senator Roberts, you are not in a debate here. You either have a legitimate question or you haven’t. I am going to seek the advice of the Clerk.
Senator Roberts interjecting—
The PRESIDENT: Senator Roberts, we are not in the committee stage. This is question time. You ask your question. It gets ruled in or out of order if a point of order is raised. But you are not in a debate, and you are clearly not in a debate with me. Senator Roberts and Minister Wong, as is my usual practice, I am happy to review the language, but I would remind all senators that language used in questions is ultimately their responsibility and ultimately a reflection on them if there is some offence. So I will call Minister Watt.
Senator WATT: Thanks, Senator Roberts. There are a number of assumptions in your question. One of them is that those students who obtained fraudulent qualifications were working in the occupation that that qualification was for. As I said, I am checking my records as to that situation, but I don’t think you should necessarily make that assumption. It is one thing for someone to obtain a fraudulent qualification, and that is wrong. As I said, we have taken action on that against the students by cancelling their qualifications. Also, we have taken action against some of those shonky providers. But it’s quite possible that those students may have obtained a qualification in a certain area but have been working in a completely different occupation. My recollection is that that is what the case was for those students, but I’m checking that matter. As I said, if I have heard anything further to add to that then I will advise the chamber.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/1TCHsVqId34/0.jpg360480Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2025-08-07 15:08:452025-08-07 15:08:55Fake Degrees, Real Consequences—But Not for the Offenders
A million foreign students and their families are in Australia—overcrowding schools, straining housing, and bleeding tens of billions of $$ out of the country.
Courses are being used as backdoor permanent residency pathways, with poor standards and little oversight.
One Nation will:
✅ Deport visa cheats ✅ End family visas for students ✅ Introduce 8-year wait times for benefits ✅ Free up homes for young Aussies
It’s time to fix the rort and put Australians first.
Transcript
I move:
That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for the Environment and Water (Senator Watt) to a question without notice I asked today relating to international students.
I asked: has the government lost control of student visa holders? The Australian public have had enough of the government pretending immigration is fine. So many people are entering that the government has lost control. Foreign students are now allowed to bring in spouses, de facto partners and children under 18 who attend state schools and contribute to overcrowding. Spouses can work 24 hours a week, or, if the student is a postgraduate, they can work full time with no restrictions. Buying a first degree and coming in as a graduate student opens the door to a financial windfall and helps to explain how foreign visa holders were able to last year send $15 billion home to their families—money that leaves Australia forever, making our economy and our people poorer.
In the last two years, the early education graduate diploma at the Southern Cross University has had 6,000 enrolments. The ABC reports that courses like this are being used as permanent residency pathways, with courses dumbed down to keep the gravy train going. There are confirmed issues around graduates not speaking English and not understanding child protection policies, safe sleep or even hygiene. There are 1.1 million foreign students and their families currently in Australia.
One Nation will deport every visa holder who is breaching their visa, a figure close to 100,000 when the number of dishonest foreign students is included. We will introduce an eight-year waiting period for social security benefits, including Medicare, and we will cancel the visa for spouses and siblings to accompany students entirely. In the age of online learning, there is no need for a student with children to come to Australia in person. The Albanese government’s student visa rort is selling out young Australians, causing record homelessness. We will free up tens of thousands of houses for young Australians, who, thanks to the government, currently face the worst housing crisis and the worst housing market in Australian history. (Time expired)
According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), a record 201,490 new foreign students arrived in Australia in February alone. This surge raises a pressing question: where are these people going to sleep?
Senator Watt responded by highlighting the government’s efforts to build new housing (and claiming they’ve done more in three years than the coalition did in almost a decade), however he failed to address the core issue: the government’s inability to control immigration numbers.
Despite promises to bring numbers under control, the reality is stark. The latest data shows that housing starts have decreased since the current government took office, exacerbating the housing crisis. The government’s measures to reduce overseas student numbers have also fallen short, with significant increases in arrivals compared to previous years.
We need a government that put Australians first. One Nation is committed to addressing these issues head-on. We will continue to push for policies that prioritise the needs of Australians, hold the government accountable for its failures and make migration net-negative until our housing and infrastructure catches up.
Transcript
Senator ROBERTS: My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, Senator Watt. According to ABS data—that’s Australian Bureau of Statistics data—last month 201,490 new foreign students arrived in Australia. This is a new record for the month of February. Where are these people going to sleep?
Senator WATT: Thank you, Senator Roberts. For starters, obviously, this government has done more in three years to build new housing than we saw in almost 10 years under a coalition government. That’s the first thing. Of course, what we know is that every measure this government has introduced to build more housing while the coalition have been in opposition they’ve voted against. So, for almost 10 years in government, they did nothing about housing, didn’t build a single public home and didn’t build a single social home; they get into opposition and they vote against everything we do to build more homes. That’s the first part of the answer.
Senator Roberts, as you’ll recall, not that long ago, this government sought to pass legislation that would reduce overseas student numbers, because we did recognise there had been an increase to that. Who voted against that as well? That was the opposition that voted against that. Who was the shadow education minister who led the charge against that? That was Senator Henderson. She’s got a lot to say now, but she led the charge against our legislation to try to introduce caps on international student numbers. We will continue to act on both of these things. We will continue to deliver the housing that the opposition voted against; we have taken different measures outside of legislation to deal with the number of international students.
I might also make the point that, in the meantime, our government has acted, and migration levels are coming down as a result of the measures that we’ve taken. In fact, there are fewer people arriving into Australia now than when someone else was the home affairs minister. Who would that be? Peter Dutton—Mr Dutton. So, for all of the promises Mr Dutton is making about immigration now, when he was actually the minister in charge of this, there were more people moving to Australia and migrating to Australia than there are now. (Time expired)
The PRESIDENT: Senator Roberts, first supplementary?
Senator ROBERTS: On 11 December 2023, the then home affairs minister, Clare O’Neil, issued a press statement, which included the comment, ‘We are going to make sure we bring numbers back under control.’ Minister, clearly you have not succeeded in getting the numbers back under control. Can you please explain the reason why this government has not been able to control how many people arrive in Australia?
Senator WATT: As I said, as a result of the actions this government has taken, we are seeing migration numbers fall in Australia compared to what they were when we came to office, as a result of the policies of the opposition. In fact, to give you a few more statistics on this, Senator Roberts, there were 10,000 more overseas student arrivals in Australia in January 2019, when—guess who—Mr Dutton was in charge of our borders. More importantly, the number of student visa applications in Australia has dropped by 30 per cent compared with this time last year. This is proof that our measures are working, despite the coalition voting to block our plan to cap overseas student numbers. We’ve all seen, over the last couple of years, the results of Mr Dutton leaving us with a broken migration system—the Albanian crime gangs who have been rorting our visa system and more still. We have been dealing with that and cleaning it up, and we’re now seeing the results with migration numbers falling.
The PRESIDENT:Senator Roberts, second supplementary?
Senator ROBERTS: In the June quarter of 2022, just after your election, housing starts were 47,000. The latest ABS data for the September quarter last year shows just 42,000 starts. You are building fewer homes but bringing in more new arrivals and that has caused the housing catastrophe. If this government is not controlling immigration numbers, who is? Is it the bureaucrats? Is it the universities? Is it the Chinese and Indian governments? Who is in control of Australia’s immigration program?
Senator WATT: I can assure you, Senator Roberts, it’s not the one world government in control of our policies. That’s definitely not the case. The Australian government, of course, is in charge of our migration policies, and it’s the Australian government who has reduced migration numbers over the last three years through a variety of measures—
Senator Canavan: *interjecting—*
Senator WATT: including a number of measures that the very vocal Senator Canavan over there voted against. They’ve got a lot of things to say from the cheap seats over there in the opposition, but, whenever they get the chance to vote on something, they vote against it.
Senator Roberts, I don’t know whether the figures you have just quoted about the number housing starts are correct or not; I’d have to check them. But what I do know is that the construction of new housing being funded through our Housing Australia Future Fund was held up for month after month after month by the unholy coalition of the Liberals, the Nationals, One Nation and the Greens. They blocked our legislation and prevented spending on housing that has finally been passed by the Senate, still with the opposition of this lot over there. We’re now getting on with building those homes.
Australians have valid concerns about Indian degrees being considered equal to Australian degrees, especially given the serious issues with cheating and degree fraud in Indian universities, where degrees can be purchased for as little as $3,700.
Minister Wong’s response was unsettling in the lack of concern for Australians. The Minister did acknowledge that industries with professional associations, such as health, could require further study, testing, or mentorship.
However, Minister Wong did not mention that this agreement will lead to competition between Australians who have studied for 3-5 years and paid substantial fees, and Indian “graduates” who may not have. These Australians now have a substantial HECS debt, which requires a salary capable of paying off the debt while providing for their future.
This situation is a recipe for the erosion of wages and job prospects for Australian graduates, and ultimately, a reduction in the number of Australians prepared to risk the expense of university.
One Nation will tear up this agreement.
Transcript | Question Time
My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Wong. Minister, does the mechanism for the mutual recognition of qualifications between India and Australia give equal merit to an Indian degree in Australia as an Australian degree in Australia?
Senator WONG: Thank you to Senator Roberts for the question. I will see what additional information I can get for you in relation to mutual recognition. I’m hoping that the appropriate portfolio finds some information for me. There are a number of economic agreements and other partnerships where we do have mutual recognition schemes with other jurisdictions, and obviously the safety of consumers remains paramount. I can’t recall at this moment whether that is delivered through the mutual recognition schemes themselves or through separate registration schemes for particular professions, for example, such as the health professions, but I’ll certainly find more advice for you and provide you with that. I’m assuming it’s the health sector that you are most interested in, but maybe you can clarify.
The PRESIDENT: Senator Roberts, first supplementary?
Transcript | First Supplementary Question
It’s all degrees. Indian universities have a substantial problem with cheating and with degrees being sold for as little as $3,700. Indian criminals are establishing ghost colleges in Australia. The Australian Skills Quality Authority acknowledged this in 2019. Minister, will there be any attempt to recognise qualifications on the basis of the originating institution or some other system for verifying the legitimacy of the qualification, especially in critical areas such as health services and engineering?
Senator WONG: That covers a number of portfolios, certainly in relation to vocational colleges and so forth. You would have heard the minister and, I think, the representing minister here speak about the importance of better regulating the sector, and some of our forums in relation to international students and international education go to the issue of making sure that here in Australia students can attain high-quality qualifications. But, in relation to—I think you said—engineering and health, again I will see what we can find for you. My recollection is that these arrangements between countries which might give pathways to recognition are one thing, but the requirements of particular professions to ensure that people have the requisite qualifications to be able to provide the relevant services to consumers remain. (Time expired)
The PRESIDENT: Senator Roberts, second supplementary?
Transcript | Second Supplementary Question
I simply need to get the government’s logic straight, Minister. Are you saying we don’t have the places to train our own graduates because we have 500,000 foreign students occupying those places who will then take their degrees back home, so we have to bring in Indian graduates to get the skills we need? Minister, wouldn’t it just be easier to reduce foreign students and educate more of our own children?
Senator WONG: The government’s view is that you need a vibrant, world-class, high-quality higher education sector. You do that in many ways, including by making sure it is appropriately funded. We do that also by making sure that there is some consideration to the mix of domestic and overseas students. You would have seen that the government has announced caps in relation to international students, and that is in part recognition of the quality of education provided to them as well as to the broader student community. So I think it is important to have both, but I would make the point that this is an important export industry. We are able to earn income for Australians, which we can then ensure is invested wisely. There is a reason Australia is an open and trading nation, and that is that it has grown our economy, but we are seeking to reduce the number of international students over time. (Time expired)
https://img.youtube.com/vi/vKWq79EH9ew/maxresdefault.jpg7201280Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2025-03-25 19:11:242025-03-25 19:11:28Australian Graduates at Risk: Concerns Over Indian Degree Equivalency
Under the One Nation plan, anyone that owns residential property yet isn’t an Australian citizen or permanent resident, will be given two years to sell their property back to an Australian. The two-year grace period will ensure there isn’t a flood of properties onto the housing market.
Let’s get Australians into affordable houses while keeping the market sound.
Transcript
Australians are rightly stunned and confused. Why are foreigners, people from other countries, allowed to buy real estate while Australians are made homeless and sleep on the street? China dominates foreign purchases of Australian real estate, snapping up the most of any country in the world. China snaps up houses and farmland across our country, yet Australians are banned from buying a house in China. Add to that Hong Kong, Taiwan, Vietnam, India, the United States and the United Kingdom. The list of countries that grab Australian real estate goes on and on.
Australians are suffering through a housing crisis, a catastrophe. The average mortgage size has never been higher, with expensive repayments crushing household budgets. A house in Brisbane used to cost three times the average income. Now it’s 10 times. This combination of high house prices and high interest rates means the average Australian is paying more of their wage on mortgage repayments than a homeowner would in 1990, when the Reserve Bank of Australia’s cash rate was at 17 per cent. I’ll say that again. As a proportion of income, mortgages are more expensive today than when the RBA had rates at 17 per cent.
The rental market in Australia is broken. Vacancy rates, a good measure of whether it’s even possible for people to find a rental, have been at crisis levels for years. The average rent for a house in Brisbane has gone from $467 a week in 2020 to $740. For a unit in Brisbane, rent has gone up from $381 to $587 in the same period, since 2020. What’s the government’s response to the hurt Australians are feeling trying to get into a house? Labor will keep letting foreigners buy residential real estate.
While the Liberals signal they might do something about it, their proposal doesn’t go far enough. Peter Dutton doesn’t want to stop foreign ownership of real estate. He wants foreigners to be back here buying up the farm in two years. The Liberals’ temporary pause is not good enough. Australia needs a complete ban on foreigners owning houses in this country. The Liberals won’t do anything about the houses that are foreign owned right now—they can keep them. In 2017, ANZ estimated that foreigners owned up to 400,000 Australian homes. That’s enough for a million Australians to live in, and that number of homes can only have increased since then.
One Nation would implement a true ban on foreign ownership. Under our plan, anyone that owns residential property yet isn’t an Australian citizen or permanent resident will be given two years to sell their property back to an Australian. The two-year grace period will ensure there isn’t a flood of properties onto the housing market. Let’s get Australians into affordable houses while keeping the market sound. When the Liberals would be opening back up purchases for foreigners, One Nation would be completing the greatest transfer of houses out of foreign hands and into Australian hands in history. In this debate, we will hear Labor senators get up and claim that foreign ownership is less than one per cent. We’ll hear them claim it’s foreign investment. That’s a lie. It’s ownership. And their numbers aren’t true.
In that 2017 report I mentioned, ANZ said, based on Foreign Investment Review Board data, foreigners had purchased an estimated 25 to 35 per cent of new Queensland homes. Later in 2017, the government introduced a new annual vacancy fee for foreign owners of residential properties. You won’t believe this next coincidence. After the government started charging a fee on foreign owners, the number of foreign owners declaring themselves to the government dropped from between 25 and 35 per cent to one per cent. It was just like magic! When NAB asked real estate agents directly how many foreigners they were selling to, the percentages were in the double digits. That’s more than 10 per cent. We know that. It’s a fact. The New South Wales government has even recorded foreign purchases at more than double what the federal Labor government claims they are. It doesn’t matter what the real number is anyway. One foreign purchase is one too many while Australian families are sleeping on the street.
Foreign ownership is one part of the housing puzzle. One Nation has comprehensive solutions to all of the levers we need to pull to get Australians into affordable houses. These including pausing immigration to reduce demand, abolishing GST on building materials, establishing five per cent fixed rate mortgages, enabling HECS debtors to get a loan and deporting 75,000 illegal residents now.
On foreign purchases and ownership, we are clear. Only One Nation will implement a real, permanent ban on foreign purchases. Only One Nation will force foreign owners to sell their houses to Australians. Only One Nation will extend the ban on foreign ownership to our valuable farmland, to protect our ability to feed Australians first. Only One Nation can be trusted to truly put Australians first.
Senate Estimates: I asked Senator Watt what was being done to reduce net immigration.
The government’s planned reduction is insufficient. Cutting immigration is not enough. Temporary visa holders need to leave now.It’s time to put Australians first.
Transcript
Senator ROBERTS: My questions are concise and straightforward, and hopefully the answers will be the same—so that the chair is not disappointed! In the context of the mass release from immigration detention of approximately 150 noncitizens awaiting deportation, how many of these detainees were in fact released as a result of the decision in NZYQ?
CHAIR: Senator Roberts, I’m very, very sorry: you asked me whether we were talking about migration in outcome 2, and we are, but the matters you’re raising with those questions are relevant to outcome 3, and we’ll be dealing with that tomorrow.
Senator ROBERTS: There you go; you got an early night!
CHAIR: Do you have other questions? I thought there were more general questions about migration numbers. I apologise.
Senator ROBERTS: No.
CHAIR: I’ve listened to so many of your Senate speeches, Senator Roberts. I thought I was pre-empting your questions. But we will be here tomorrow to ask questions of Border Force particularly around those issues.
Senator ROBERTS: And also Immigration, I hope—Home Affairs?
CHAIR: There are other questions that might be relevant to outcome 2. If you want to put them, they might have the officials here for you.
Senator ROBERTS: No, these are to do with the legality of immigration.
Ms Foster: If I can help: because the questions relating to the High Court cover both outcome 2 and outcome 3, we typically try to cover them as a group together so we’re not saying, ‘We can answer a little bit of that and not the rest of it.’ But if there are more general questions on the migration program then we should be able to answer them for you tonight.
Senator ROBERTS: These are more to do with the legalities and what is happening about removing people.
CHAIR: They are related to the same cohort of questions—is that right?
Senator ROBERTS: I think they are.
CHAIR: They are related to the same issues.
Ms Foster: If they are related to the same cohort, it is probably sensible to do them tomorrow as a batch.
Senator ROBERTS: The same cohort and a similar cohort.
CHAIR: It sounds like we will be able to deal with them tomorrow.
Senator Watt: I predict there will be many questions around this issue in the morning. So you will be in good company.
Senator ROBERTS: Perhaps one might be covered off now—the last one I had. For visas requiring accommodation in 2019 it was 1.9 million people; in 2024, at the start of the year, it was 2.3 million plus students at over half a million, plus a higher percentage of non-productive people. Housing demand has been driven through the roof and prices and rents are skyrocketing. We are in a per capita recession and have been for three quarters. Minister, it appears to a lot of Australians that the government does not want to be tagged as the government who took us into recession so it is flooding the country with migrants to avoid a technical recession. Having said correctly that we’ve had three-quarters of a per capita recession, the government, to me, seems to be uncaring about the plight of Australians. In our state’s capital city there are people living under bridges, in cars and in caravans—and I’m talking about working families coming home with their two kids to sleep in a car. I don’t know where they go to the toilet and where they shower. We’ve got it right up the coast—not just in our capital city but right up the coast. The Labor government must remove visa holders. When will Labor resolve the housing crisis and stop the out-of-control and unsustainable growth of Australia’s population? We had 750,000 come in last year.
Senator Watt: I’m not sure that that 750,000 figure is correct, Senator Roberts. But the point really is that the government does believe that migration levels have been unsustainably high. We believe that that is a direct result of the failures of Mr Dutton and other coalition ministers to manage the migration program correctly. That is exactly why we have dramatically reduced the grants of international student visas and that is why we are on track to halve what is known as the net overseas migration figure by next financial year. If you look at the numbers, where they were when we came into office and post-COVID, we are on track to halve that figure by next financial year. I do not think the 750,000 figure is correct, Senator Roberts. What is known as the net overseas migration—
Senator ROBERTS: I wasn’t implying that was net; that was incoming.
Senator Watt: You also have to look at the number of people going out.
Senator ROBERTS: Correct; but 750,000 people coming in is a heck of a lot of people.
Senator Watt: Sure; I agree.
Senator ROBERTS: It is way above the previous record.
Senator Watt: Agreed. As I said, our government believes that migration has been too high. That’s why we’ve taken a range of steps to reduce it, and we are on track to achieve that target. On the point about housing—which is obviously a matter for a different committee—as I pointed out to you before, Senator Roberts, it would really help if we could get your vote in the Senate when we try to spend more money on housing. Unfortunately, so far, you haven’t—
Senator ROBERTS: How many houses have you built, Minister? Zero.
Senator Watt: We have committed about $32 billion worth of funding.
Senator ROBERTS: You have committed how much to housing? You have committed $20 billion to a housing future fund.
Senator Watt: Of the $32 billion that we have committed for housing, $10 billion was for the Housing Australia Future Fund, and unfortunately both you and Senator Hanson voted against that with the coalition.
Senator ROBERTS: We don’t want more bureaucracy; we want tradies to be set loose. That is why we did it.
Senator Watt: But the vote was about creating a housing fund and you voted against it. You voted for less spending on housing.
CHAIR: Senators, I don’t think the question is relevant to—
Senator ROBERTS: How many houses have been built in the last two years?
Senator Watt: You would probably need to go—
CHAIR: Senator Roberts, your question—
Senator ROBERTS: Okay; let’s come back to my question, as the chair is reminding us.
CHAIR: Minister, could you assist me in not speaking over me while I give Senator Roberts some direction. The question you have ultimately ended up asking is not relevant to this committee. That is probably why you have received a response of the kind Minister Watt has given you. If you have more questions in relation to migration, this is the outcome to put them. Otherwise, we will back tomorrow with outcome 3.
Senator ROBERTS: With due respect, Chair, this is calling out Senator Watt because he has not answered my question.
CHAIR: Senator Roberts, you say ‘with all due respect’ and then continue to talk over me when I have given you a direction as the chair to ask a relevant question, or I can give the call to someone else who has relevant questions.
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you, Chair. The question for the minister is the same: when will the Labor government remove visa holders to ease the pressure on housing in this country?
Senator Watt: Sorry; are you saying that we should have zero migration to Australia?
Senator ROBERTS: We should have negative, until we get the housing pressure and the infrastructure to catch up.
Senator Watt: What do you mean by negative migration? Do you mean forcing people to leave?
Senator ROBERTS: More people who leave than come.
Senator Watt: The government’s policy is to halve the net increase in migration or net migration numbers by next financial year, and we are well on track to do that. We agree that we have a housing shortage in Australia. That’s why we’ve devoted so much money towards that project. We also recognise that we have a range of jobs and there are not enough people to fill them. If you speak to any building firm in Queensland, they will tell you they need more people. We are funding a lot of training of locals, but the reality is that we need some level of migration to fill those jobs. If you go to any aged-care facility in Queensland or anywhere in Australia—and I go to one pretty regularly to visit a family member—you will see lots of migrant workers there. Our aged-care system would collapse if we did what you suggested, which is stop migration. So it’s a balancing act to make sure that we don’t have too much migration in this country—as was occurring under the policy settings we inherited from the former government—while still making sure that we can deliver the workforce that we need.
Senator ROBERTS: Minister, isn’t it true that, under John Howard’s prime ministership, immigration was dramatically increased and it has stayed high since then under both parties—both Labor and Liberal and National party governments?
Senator Watt: My recollection is that the major change under the Howard government was a big shift towards temporary migration. I don’t know what the overall figures were under the Howard government.
Senator ROBERTS: I think it went from 80,000 to over 130,000. Then it went up under the Rudd-Gillard, and the subsequent LNP governments to over 230,000 net. What are you proposing for next year?
Senator Watt: We are proposing that net overseas migration next financial year would in the order of 260,000.
Senator ROBERTS: That’s still very, very high.
Senator Watt: It’s about half of what it was a year or so ago.
Senator PATERSON: This year?
Ms Foster: In 2022-23.
Senator ROBERTS: Senator Watt, I could say that you are much taller than me. That’s not saying much!
Senator Watt: A competition of the shortest men in parliament! Let’s put Senator Farrell in there as well. Senator Ghosh, do you qualify?
Senator ROBERTS: My point is that 250,000 is still a lot.
Senator Watt: But we’re big in heart, Senator Roberts.
Senator ROBERTS: But 250,000 is a lot. It may be half, but it is still very, very high and it is putting a lot of pressure on housing.
Senator Watt: I agree; which, again, is why we—
Senator ROBERTS: Do we agree?
Senator Watt: I agree that migration has been too high and it is putting pressure on housing, which is why we would have really liked your vote for the Housing Australia Future Fund—which is another committee.
Senator ROBERTS: I want to stay on immigration.
CHAIR: Me too.
Senator Watt: There are two parts of the equation. It is about immigration and—
Senator ROBERTS: That’s right: you’re driving up the demand for housing.
Senator Watt: If we had more homes we mightn’t have such an issue with migration numbers. But we don’t have the homes and that’s what we’re trying to fix. But we are halving migration numbers. International student grants in April were down 38 per cent on last year’s levels. We’ve taken a whole range of other actions to crack down on some of the rorts in the migration system that were left behind by Mr Dutton and his colleagues. But, equally, as I say, if you want to have people look after your family members in aged care, they are not all going to come locally. If you want people to build the homes, they are not all going to come locally. If you want people to work in hospitals, they are not all going to come locally. If we actually said, ‘Close the door entirely to migration,’ you will have a lot of people waiting to get into emergency departments and into aged-care homes et cetera.
Senator ROBERTS: That’s the state our country is in right now. Are you going to build 250,000 new homes next year to accommodate the 250,000 new people coming in?
CHAIR: Senator Roberts, I have given you direction about whether those questions are relevant to this committee.
Senator ROBERTS: How is 250,000 new net migrants a low number simply because it is half of what the previous one was? It’s not; it is a very high number.
Senator Watt: The departmental officials could probably take you through the work that was undertaken to determine that figure. I would be confident that, in developing that figure, they took into account the need to reduce migration and the pressure on the housing system, but also the workforce needs of hospitals, aged-care facilities, construction firms, et cetera. It would be interesting to know what the opposition did to arrive at the various different figures we’ve heard from them. I don’t know if anyone from the opposition here can tell us what their policy actually is.
CHAIR: They’re not here to give evidence, Minister Watt. They are here to ask questions.
Senator Watt: But a lot of work has gone in from the government’s side to come up with the right figure.
CHAIR: Is that the end of your questions, Senator Roberts?
