Opposition Leader Kim Beazley must have spent too much time on the beach during his summer holidays. He has been seeing too much empty Australian coastline. On his return from holidays on Monday he announced that Labor would set up a coast guard, “a maritime cop on the beat” to fight illegal immigration, drugs and other border problems. It was good populist stuff. It played on people’s fears of being swamped by illegal immigrants. It conjured up images from American television programs of speeding boats protecting freedom and justice against evil.
A coast guard might make good sense for the US and some other countries, but not Australia. There is little if any evidence that the Australian Defence Force, Coastwatch (a branch of the Customs Service) Australian Search and Rescue (a branch of the Australian Maritime Safety Authority) are not doing an adequate job. There is little or no evidence to suggest that any better job would be done with a coast guard.
Australia’s large unpopulated coastline might seem like a liability when it comes to coastal surveillance. In fact it is more an asset. People and drug smugglers are more noticeable in sparsely populated places. They stick out more. Moreover, the people being smuggled find it hard to blend in. Chinese people smugglers tried to get closer to the main population bases for this very reason. In the north-west the people simply do not make it to major population centres and illegal work.
In these circumstances, Australia’s present arrangements work reasonably well. In any event, the best equipped coast guard in the world is not going to stop people smuggling. That is best stopped by hard work in the countries of origin, where no coast guard can go.
Mr Beazley said the many recent incursions by illegal immigrants had focused attention on the importance of effective border control and surveillance. But they also focused attention on the fact that existing arrangements work well. Over-staying visas is the main contributor of illegal immigration — not boats. But the former is less dramatic and presents less of an opportunity for an Opposition to grandstand.
Illegal drugs require a multi-pronged approach, once again with less chance for political grandstanding.
Mr Beazley’s proposal included a suggestion to build in Australia replacements for the 15 Fremantle class patrol boats, which undertake coast guard activities. One would have thought Labor’s fingers have been burnt enough with proposals to build naval vessels in Australia. This sounds like more pork-barrelling.
On cost, the Government and the Opposition as poles apart. Mr Beazley argues that it would cost little more than the $220 million already spent by existing agencies. Justice and Customs Minister Amanda Vanstone argues it will cost nearly 10 times that.
The cost-benefit argument is important. When a junior minister in 1984, Mr Beazley argued against a coastguard, precisely on this argument. To the extent you co-ordinate the running-about-in-boats element of coastal surveillance, you unco-ordinate other factors. A new coast guard would have to liase constantly with defence, customs, police and maritime safety. And a separate (costly) command and administration structure has to be set up.
Proposing a coast guard is easy in opposition. It promises action. It alleviates widely held fears. But the fears are exaggerated. In government, cold hard facts show that the creation of a coast guard would cost far more than it is worth, considering other priorities.