# Labor Pacific Solution



## Garpal Gumnut (6 May 2011)

From the Prime Minister Julia Gillard about using Manus Island, when she was in opposition and John Howard kept our borders secure.





> "The government would not have required this patch or bandaid if they had dealt with the matter appropriately in the first instance, but they failed to," Ms Gillard said.
> 
> "Why did they fail to? We all know, and the Labor Party has consistently said, that the so-called Pacific Solution was more about getting a solution to get the government through to election day, and for however long they could sustain it beyond election day, rather than being a comprehensive long-term solution to the issue of asylum seekers.
> 
> ...




http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/05/06/3209558.htm

It is often easier to be in opposition than in government, perhaps Julia needs a break from decision making.

gg


----------



## noco (7 May 2011)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> From the Prime Minister Julia Gillard about using Manus Island, when she was in opposition and John Howard kept our borders secure.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




It just goes to show what a 1-2-3 or 4 faced liar and hypocrite this Prime Minister of ours is.
She could not even make direct contact with the PNG leaders to discuss Manus Island, leaving it all to some useless bureaucrat.
I am sure JU-LIAR could not lie straight in bed if she tried.
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...-new-guinea-snub/story-e6freonf-1226051634255


----------



## Julia (7 May 2011)

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/05/07/3210503.htm

So the government is about to sign a deal with Malaysia, something that wasn't at all on the radar.  See above link for the terms which are hardly favourable to Australia in terms of numbers.  i.e. they will take 800 asylum seekers heading to Australia in return for Australia taking 4000 from Malaysia who have been through the UNHCR process and determined to be refugees.

Imo it's a step in the right direction in terms of admitting to Australia only those who have been determined to be genuine refugees and presumably pushing to the back of the waiting list those setting out to reach Australia directly.

But still, it's simply an adaptation of the Coalition policy purely because Gillard & Co were politically unwilling to utilise the much more sensible and presumably cheaper option of using the existing facilities at Nauru.

According to ABC Radio, Malaysia is not a signatory to the UNHCR Refugee Convention.
So this makes a mockery of the government's earlier statement that they would not entertain returning to Nauru BECAUSE that country was not a signatory to the convention.

What a tangled web they are weaving.


----------



## sails (7 May 2011)

If only labor had left the Pacific Solution alone.  It was discouraging people coming here with their eye on our generous welfare system and yet provided a haven for those genuinely fleeing persecution.

Agree, labor have managed to tangle another web unnecessarily. It seems they have these unrealistically high ambitions and a belief that they can turn the titanic with a quick turn of the wheel.  It seems they do no research into the implications of any of the major "reforms"...

And now it looks like they are about to complicate it even further with this bizarre deal with Malaysia when Nauru is sitting there waiting.  I am concerned this is another policy on the run that hasn't been properly thought out. 

Maybe Bolt will address this on his TV show tomorrow morning.

This from the article you posted, Julia, and I think it sums it up pretty well:



> Opposition Leader Tony Abbott calls the announcement "a people go round".
> 
> "Today we've seen a panicked announcement from a government which is proving yet again that it's both untrustworthy and incompetent," he said.
> 
> ...


----------



## Calliope (7 May 2011)

Julia said:


> Imo it's a step in the right direction in terms of admitting to Australia only those who have been determined to be genuine refugees and presumably pushing to the back of the waiting list those setting out to reach Australia directly.




The implication is that Gillard is at last admitting that the boat arrivals are not "genuine" refugees. So we are going to swap 800 fake refugees for 4000 genuine refugees. 

The Malaysians must think this is a good deal. They will probably send the fakes back to where they came from. The fakes won't have access to the appeals systems that they have in Australia.


----------



## dutchie (8 May 2011)

The next budget should be catastrophic if it uses the same number system as is used in the Malaysian solution. 
Give 800 and get back 4000!

This government is an absolute joke. Unfortunately Australia is paying (will be paying) for it for a long time.


----------



## Calliope (8 May 2011)

Apparently most of the genuine refugees are from Myanmar (Burma). Ninety per cent  of refugees living in Malaysia under very bad conditions are from Myanmar. The majority of these are Muslims, but unlike the  Muslims from Iraq and Afghanistan, these people are genuinely seeking asylum from a tyrannical government.


----------



## Julia (8 May 2011)

From today's "Sunday Mail":


> taxpayers will fork out almost $10 million - $25,000 a day - to accommodate staff at Scherger Immigration Detention Centre near Weipa.
> 
> But the Immigration Department has refused to reveal how many staff will be racking up the bills over the next year.
> 
> It comes as $31,720 was spent on charter flights from March 29 to April 29 to take asylum seekers and detainees from Scherger to Brisbane.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (8 May 2011)

Julia said:


> http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/05/07/3210503.htm
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Agree Julia, Labor are making policy on the stumble. 

gg


----------



## drsmith (8 May 2011)

Regarding Labor's Malaysian solution, I got the impression when watching the news this evening that Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey could not believe their luck.


----------



## sptrawler (8 May 2011)

Calliope said:


> The implication is that Gillard is at last admitting that the boat arrivals are not "genuine" refugees. So we are going to swap 800 fake refugees for 4000 genuine refugees.
> 
> The Malaysians must think this is a good deal. They will probably send the fakes back to where they came from. The fakes won't have access to the appeals systems that they have in Australia.




Well this is a winner, send 800 get 4000 back. 
Then next round, send 800 and get the 800 you sent last time plus 3200 more its a bit like compound interest.
What an absolute winner, lets not forget Malaysia called us the white trash of Asia when the last Labor government was in.
This is going to end well. LOL,LOL,LOL


----------



## Calliope (9 May 2011)

drsmith said:


> Regarding Labor's Malaysian solution, I got the impression when watching the news this evening that Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey could not believe their luck.




Gillard's brainwave to swap 800 illegals for 4000 asylum seekers is her craziest move since cash for clunkers. 

Around 80% of asylum seekers are permanently unemployed. So what this means is that instead of having another 640 on welfare, we will be adding 3200.

The Labor government must have a focus group whose only task is to think up new ways of wasting the taxpayers'  money.


----------



## Calliope (9 May 2011)

To those who think the government hasn't got a clue about handling the boats problem, well, you "aint seen nuthin' yet". I can hardly wait to see Chris Bowen trying to load 800 reluctant illegals on to planes to transport them to hell camps in Malaysia.

This is the same hapless minister who couldn't get those clowns off the roof at Villawood, and I suppose the 800 will include women and children. The Greens and the illegals' support groups will have a field day.


----------



## Glen48 (9 May 2011)

While you have countries like USA, Australia, UK, France etc invading countries with out considering the results or why they are invading other than USA told them too, you will never stop victims wanting a better life it is a natural Human reaction. 
Here in the Philippines were the average wage is about $1,200 PA and no prospect of getting ahead and  seeing Australian life style via Home and Away, Packed to the Rafters etc and ad's run my property strokers is all fuel to the desire.

Here a Faith healer has has much pulling power as a church priest ,Of course low education and rumours make the need to flee stronger, I think there was a story going around that Howard would give every one a Tractor and a house and to us owning a tractor to plough up a back yard is plain crazy but to a poor farmer in desperation it sound like Heaven.

Indian farmers wanting a loan of $100 to buy seed's for the next crop can't afford the application fees so the lender assumes they are high risk because they didn't file the right paper work so denyed the loan so he goes off and tops himself.

 Like the _war on terror _stop the voilence or we will shoot, , drugs and Jail 's etc every thing else it need a rethink, the whole shooting match, instead of spending money on fancy jail were it will cost the most to build and give the top chiefs a free trip around the place at taxpayer expense  we would be better of handing out money to the poor not by giving it to some agency to skim a bit off the top as  handling fee but a shop front were some one could come in with an idea or be helped to form a plan and handed a small sum of money after all who will work harder than th recipient  to make the thing work.
 Here if you walk into a shop with a 100P note  ($2.50 ) not many can cash that for you
Not many can afford to send their kids to school or can't let them because they are needed to work in the field.
 I am sure most would be happy with power, a light and gas stove in a hut that does not leak agree like most in the western world were you try to buy happiness with opulence they would like the same but with education we could stem the tide BUT as long as you vote it will never change.
 If we all stop voting they the pollies will ask why.


----------



## pilots (9 May 2011)

Calliope said:


> To those who think the government hasn't got a clue about handling the boats problem, well, you "aint seen nuthin' yet". I can hardly wait to see Chris Bowen trying to load 800 reluctant illegals on to planes to transport them to hell camps in Malaysia.
> 
> This is the same hapless minister who couldn't get those clowns off the roof at Villawood, and I suppose the 800 will include women and children. The Greens and the illegals' support groups will have a field day.




What I am worried about now is that you can get any thing you want in Malaysia as long as you pay the right person, my question is how many of the 4000 coming have paid to get in to that lot, who's to say they are all OK.


----------



## moXJO (9 May 2011)

How the hell does labor come up with its solutions


----------



## noco (9 May 2011)

What I would like to know is how Gillard and Bowen will decide who will stay and who will go.

Will it be by Russian roulette, ballot, who draws the short straw or will someone throw a dice. Will it be brother separated from brother or father from son? 

Will it be the next 800 who arrive at Christmas Island and what happens after that?

All I can see is the more discontent, more demonstrations, more riots and more vandalism.

What happens if they refuse to go or they decde to take legal action to stay.

One hell of a debacle aka Pink Bats, BER, NBN, grocery watch, fuel watch and the Green scheme.


----------



## Julia (9 May 2011)

moXJO said:


> How the hell does labor come up with its solutions






noco said:


> What I would like to know is how Gillard and Bowen will decide who will stay and who will go.



Two good questions.
I doubt the government has any plan other than their determination to avoid reverting to what worked when the Coalition was in government.
It totally beggars belief that Nauru is already set up, no further investment required, the Nauruans keen to have the centre functional again, with the stated objection by the government being that Nauru is not a signatory to the UN convention, yet now they are going to do the most unbelievable 'deal' with Malaysia (with its reputation for gross abuse of detainees) which also is not a signatory to the convention.

The government has zero credibility left.


----------



## joea (10 May 2011)

noco said:


> What I would like to know is how Gillard and Bowen will decide who will stay and who will go.
> 
> Will it be by Russian roulette, ballot, who draws the short straw or will someone throw a dice. Will it be brother separated from brother or father from son?
> 
> ...




It will be the next 800 who will arrive.
I watched a statement from her on TV.
She said that should deter them.
Joea


----------



## joea (10 May 2011)

Julia said:


> Two good questions.
> I doubt the government has any plan other than their determination to avoid reverting to what worked when the Coalition was in government.
> It totally beggars belief that Nauru is already set up, no further investment required, the Nauruans keen to have the centre functional again, with the stated objection by the government being that Nauru is not a signatory to the UN convention, yet now they are going to do the most unbelievable 'deal' with Malaysia (with its reputation for gross abuse of detainees) which also is not a signatory to the convention.
> 
> The government has zero credibility left.




Julia you always compile a well thought out post.

I watched Julia Gillards speech on TV about the subject of the Malaysia agreement.
She commented about "risk", the "roll of a dice".
I was embarrassed how she spoke as PM,  in relation to people's lives.

Joea


----------



## Calliope (10 May 2011)

joea said:


> It will be the next 800 who will arrive.
> I watched a statement from her on TV.
> She said that should deter them.
> Joea




I think you can guarantee that they won't be forcing any children on to the plane for Malaysia. It is not a good look.


----------



## drsmith (10 May 2011)

I'd be very suprised if anyone is sent from mainland Australia to Malaysia, if anyone is ever sent at all.


----------



## drsmith (10 May 2011)

http://www.smh.com.au/national/malaysia-outgunned-australia-on-refugee-plan-20110509-1efvs.html



> Two months ago Australia was discussing a two-for-one exchange, an official familiar with the talks said.



Our government, having entered the room on its knees, was then obviously requested to adopt a bend-over posture to which it duly complied.


----------



## sptrawler (10 May 2011)

It sounds as though Malaysia get to choose who they take anyway. What a terrific solution to the problem. We pay Malaysia to choose which 800 refugees they want and we get 4000 that they presumably want to move on.
Gillard pulling of another blinder, shot in the foot again. Fortunately I am sure mainstream Australia will find it as idiotic, as we on this forum do.
It is starting to look like death by a thousand blunders.


----------



## startrader (10 May 2011)

So now we have the same refugee problem we had before this brilliant "solution" was announced, PLUS we are going to get another 4,000 refugees over the next four years which we weren't going to get before (and I will be surprised if we see 800 refugees going from here to Malaysia and if they do it won't be long before they are replaced by another 800).  I don't think the refugees will see this as any deterrent whatsoever.

This is INSANE!  

Who would have thought those idiots in the Labor Party could dream up anything to make the refugee problem worse than it was but they have managed!  What a situation to be in with Malaysia where we are being treated like fools with them calling all the shots.  Truly unbelievable!

Can we PLEEEEASE get rid of thise idiots NOW before they do any more damage?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (10 May 2011)

It came as no little surprise to me to discover that the present ALP elites had gotten in to bed with the Malaysians on their problem of illegal migrants arriving by boat.

It is another stupid decision in the litany of errors commited since they came to government.

Malaysia is ranked 135 on a list of 150, of those who value human rights, in other word there are only 14 more in the world, worse than they.

The Malaysians are a racist, homophobic and controlling nation, and many old school ALP supporters must despair at this idiotic decision.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Malaysia

gg


----------



## Calliope (10 May 2011)

The cost of getting rid of 800 illegals and replacing them with 4000 legals will be $292 million This works out at a cost of $365.000 per head for each of the 800 we get rid of. I think we could bribe  them to go home for a fraction of this. And remember the 4000 newcomers will be a continuing cost for welfare.



> The deal is expected to cost $292 million over four years



.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/ipad/refugee-exchange-costs-to-hit-300m/story-fn6ck51p-1226052109944


----------



## noco (11 May 2011)

Gillard's Pacific solution with Malaysia and PNG is already fraying at the edges.

Final details with Malaysia have not been ironed out and PNG are upset with the low level of negotiations.

What is Gillards new excuse for not talking to Nauru? 


http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...ds_latest_boat_people_scheme_already_fraying/


----------



## noco (12 May 2011)

noco said:


> Gillard's Pacific solution with Malaysia and PNG is already fraying at the edges.
> 
> Final details with Malaysia have not been ironed out and PNG are upset with the low level of negotiations.
> 
> ...




Has Gillard actually thought this whole saga through?

The latest parliamentry news is Adam Brandt, the Greens MP, is about to move a motion to reject the Malaysian deal. If it goes through and is supported by the Coalition and the Indys, it will be the beginning of the end for Ms. Gillard.



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...unlikely-to-work/story-e6frgd0x-1226054242732


----------



## Julia (12 May 2011)

Typically hard headed and realistic analysis by Greg Sheridan above, thanks Noco.

This from the article


> Apart from its ineffectiveness as policy, this is corrosive of Australian democracy. Typically, the government makes an announcement with great fanfare seemingly involving a diplomatic breakthrough and new action. Except it is never followed up. It never actually happens. The advertised policy is always kept vague and the diplomatic element unravels slowly, humiliatingly, across several months.




So true of pretty much everything the government attempts.


----------



## Calliope (13 May 2011)

Julia said:


> So true of pretty much everything the government attempts.




I hope this one goes ahead. I can't wait to see the fun when they try to get these people on the plane. If those doing the loading are as inept as those trying to get the protesters off the roof at Villawood then we are in for some fun.

It will be a complete shemozzle.


----------



## sails (14 May 2011)

Another boat arrives today with 32 on board.  It seems they don't know where they will send these new arrivals:

Full article at News.com: Coalition questions government's policy on asylum seekers after fresh boat



> The group will be taken to Christmas Island pending removal to another country after Labor last week announced its plans to send asylum seekers to Malaysia and restart processing in Papua New Guinea (PNG).
> 
> Opposition immigration spokesman Scott Morrison said the arrivals showed people smugglers had not been put off by Prime Minister Julia Gillard's spin on a people-swap deal with Malaysia.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (14 May 2011)

noco said:


> Gillard's Pacific solution with Malaysia and PNG is already fraying at the edges.
> 
> Final details with Malaysia have not been ironed out and PNG are upset with the low level of negotiations.
> 
> ...






sails said:


> Another boat arrives today with 32 on board.  It seems they don't know where they will send these new arrivals:
> 
> Full article at News.com: Coalition questions government's policy on asylum seekers after fresh boat




Let us see now how this government deals with the Malaysian beastieboys.

Why not go with Nauru.

It defies belief.

gg


----------



## sails (14 May 2011)

And then here's a later article from the Courier Mail stating that the newest arrivals may be removed to an undisclosed "third country" - whatever that means...

Asylum seeker boat intercepted near Broome; arrivals to be removed to undisclosed "third country"


----------



## noco (15 May 2011)

Some facts revealed about the treatment of asylum seekes in Malayasia. Does Julia Gillard understand that she may be sending these asylum seekers to a life of misery.

Move on refuges makes no sense



The Government's latest foray into the asylum seeker issue is beyond comprehension and I would suggest, contemptible. Malaysia's record on the treatment of refugees is so deplorable we should never agree to send people into what can only be described as a mire of inhumanity and hopelessness. 

We send 800 people to a country that Labor acknowledges is not a signatory to the United Nation’s protocol on Refugees and in exchange they send us 4000 back. I just cannot fathom how they could be so stupid as to send a policy like that out into the public arena. Perhaps they planned for a home goal or maybe there is a Coalition maliciously proposing loopy ideas. 

It is as if they want to be taken out of their misery and are pleading to have the reins of government taken from them. If it's right to send these people to a country that is not a signatory to the UN protocol then why is Nauru off the table? It would be a far better option. 

We would control the treatment of these refugees and have the final say on their processing. We know that the Nauru government would welcome a reopening of the purpose-built centre. The only possible reason for the government not considering it is that the piqued Howard Government did it but it worked.    

Let us just have a brief look at what Malaysia offers as a venue for the 800 we plan to send there. The US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants said in a 2009 World Refugee Survey “Malaysian immigration officials continued to sell deportees to gangs that operate along the Malaysia-Thailand border. The gang members extort bribes from the deportees in exchange for smuggling them back to Malaysia and sell those who cannot pay into slavery. Men frequently end up on Thai fishing boats, women in brothels and children with gangs who exploit child beggars”.

Malaysia also, of course, believes in caning where offences involve striking the body that inflicts a wound to the bone. Amnesty International now informs us that in Malaysia, caning of convicts and asylum-seekers has reached “epidemic proportions”. 

Disease in camps in Malaysia is commonly caused by insufficient sanitation, poor quality food and irregular access to clean water.

In 2002, the Malaysian parliament made certain immigration offences punishable by caning, notably illegal entry to the country. Australia has just publicly announced a deal which says that we will take 4000 refugees from Malaysia and send 800 there.  It stands to reason that we have given implicit consent by our actions of their conduct. 

Since we are now a part of Malaysian immigration policy, it might be interesting to note that Amnesty has delivered evidence from Nian Vung, a Burmese refugee, who described his trial “There were 50 of us in court.  They tried us in groups of five at once. It lasted half an hour.” 

Nian Vung was caned. 

What a proud moment this is for Australia, what an honourable arrangement your partially democratically elected government has orchestrated. We can all walk with our heads high around Civic and look up at the noble building on the hill across the other side of the lake.

Say what you like about the Howard government policies on refugees but Papua New Guinea and Nauru did not participate in these barbaric acts which the current Labour government now proposes.

People are being sent to a county where they were denied an individual trial and subsequently caned after a half an hour investigation. 

The Howard policies had their detractors, I do not deny that.  There were no children in detention by the end of the Howard government because there were no boats arriving. There were no buildings being burnt down under the Howard Government because there was barely anyone there to light the matches. There were no people losing their lives on a desperate boat journey because no one was making the journey in the first place. 

But still we were taking 13,000 refugees just as we are now. 

Perhaps people won't consider these genuine concerns but merely a rant from a crazy, old boy from the country.  This is not about precluding granting asylum to genuine refugees.  It is about stopping people from paying smugglers thousands of dollars for a dangerous boat journey in which probably 200 people have been killed over the past year. 

Sending people to a place where the possibility of their treatment would be deemed to be completely barbaric.

Barnaby


Jenny Swan

Office of Senator Barnaby Joyce

Leader of The Nationals in the Senate

Shadow Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Water

P: 07 46 251 500

M: 0438 578 402

F: 07 46 251 511

E: jenny.swan@aph.gov.au

www.barnabyjoyce.com.au


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (15 May 2011)

My contacts tell me that Tony Abbott has slated Barnaby Joyce as Immigration Minister in the coming Lib/Nats Government.

What a breath of fresh air he will be, compassionate and able and stable.

gg


----------



## sptrawler (15 May 2011)

From what I  have heard Thailand want a piece of the action, they take 800 asylum seekers and will send brides. This is getting sillier and sillier. 
It obviously has to get to a stage where Gillard and Brown have to walk down the ailse and say we have completely f.....d up please help throw us out. LOL


----------



## drsmith (16 May 2011)

Brown's idea of marriage with Gillard is to put the whip to her back, not the rock on her finger.


----------



## noco (16 May 2011)

drsmith said:


> Brown's idea of marriage with Gillard is to put the whip to her back, not the rock on her finger.




LOL. How true, how very true.


----------



## Ferret (18 May 2011)

Over the last fortnight I haven't yet heard anyone in the government asked to explain why they still oppose using Nauru.  

The old excuse of not being a signatory to the UN treaty on refugees obviously doesn't wash since the Malaysia deal was proposed.


----------



## sails (18 May 2011)

I believe a third boat has arrived.  Obviously asylum seekers aren't put off by this malaysian deal (or is that now another debacle?).


----------



## tothemax6 (18 May 2011)

The amount of time and effort and noise and commotion that is wasted on the most stupid of things .
What a saving that would have been made if the policy had been set 20 years ago as 'if you attempt to sail through our waters and land on our beach without permission, we shall express our discontent with this situation with a large cannon'.
ONE boat would have been lost 20 years ago, people would have realized 'Oh Sh-t, they're serious!', and the issue would have ceased instantaneously. No more lives lost, no more political nonsense, nothing.


----------

