Asylum immigrants - Green Light

[drsmith]

In the end, their actions are as they are, the effects of those actions indicate their motives, the origin of those motives are a secondary question .

Governments and political parties go wrong when there idiological beliefs become inconsistent with the well being of the people they represent.

In the case of Federal Labor, their primary idiological belief is power at any cost. Like NSW Labor, they will pay a heavy price at the ballot box and the longer they are in power, the bigger the economic price Australia will pay. Many Labor politicians would realise this, but like the Titanic afer it hit the iceberg, their internal culture is such that they can't stop the ship from sinking.

John Howard was personally not much different in the leadup to the 2007 election. He was addicted to power and the culture within the Coalition was such that nothing effectively could be done.

 

[derty]

In the case of Federal Labor, their primary idiological belief is power at any cost.

I don't think they are that insidious. I think they are just inept and reactionary and are kowtowing on too many fronts.

 

[IFocus]

I don't think they are that insidious. I think they are just inept and reactionary and are kowtowing on too many fronts.

Have to agree derty

 

[sails]

...In the case of Federal Labor, their primary idiological belief is power at any cost....

According to the Essential Media research report dated yesterday, 27th April, 72% of those polled agree with you. As I said on the other thread, we are not alone...lol

Derty and IFocus, that leaves 28% agreeing with you.

Here is the poll again - thought some of that poll fitted in with the conversations on this thread as well:

http://www.essentialmedia.com.au/essential-report/

 

[Julia]

I don't think they are that insidious. I think they are just inept and reactionary and are kowtowing on too many fronts.

Agree about them being reactionary (usually to polls) and having to kowtow to too many interest groups.

Can you expand on your use above of 'insidious'?

 

[sptrawler]

The problem is the more things change, the more they stay the same.
To give it a football analogy, Labor is so busy trying to to take a screamer to turn things around, the game is getting away from them.
We are entering the last quarter they haven't taken a mark, they haven't kicked a goal and the rushed behinds are their highest score.
With the high draft pick Garrett, badly injured in the first quarter substitute Combet has not thrown his body into the pack as the team would have wanted.
But after loosing the captain to a nasty in the back from one of his team mates, who can blame him.
The vice captain is finding the suspect in the back on the catain has elevated her to the corporate box. She's finding it is much easier to enjoy the trappings of the top job, than getting the ball and turning it over in the first quarter.
Ruck rover Swan keeps skirting the pack but seems afraid to pick up the ball, when it lands with him he is quick to move it on. Lacklustre performance in the first three quarters.
Big things were expected fro Ferguson, but seems to be worried the opposition knows his weakness and is playing one kick behind play, hopefully to pick up the crumbs.
Actually I'm finding it hard to pick someone in the team who can turn it around and kick a winning score

 

[derty]

That's a funny analogy sptrawler

Julia, malignant may have been a better choice of words. To have your primary political ideology being power at any cost places you in the realms of Gaddafi, Amin, Mugabe, Pinochet e.t.c. Labor doesn't fit this bill. They are a minority govt that is rating poorly and acting desperately. Judging by their actions and the results of their actions it's hard to see how they are attempting to hold onto power at any cost. You would be excused from thinking that they are trying to loose it.

Sails, it was only a month ago that the Libs polled 72% for the same question. I'd be surprised if any political party didn't poll high on that question.

 

[sails]

...Sails, it was only a month ago that the Libs polled 72% for the same question. I'd be surprised if any political party didn't poll high on that question.

Derty, Labor is gaining and Liberal is dropping on that score. I think (and hope) Aussies are waking up to what's really going on. This is almost a case of Howard's work choices being repeated but this time it's Labor with carbon tax, failed asylum issues and NBN with some big question marks.

During that time, only the most diehard Lib supporters would have defended work choices. I realised Libs were flogging a dead horse with the policy and the demise of Liberal was as clear as crystal. I now see the same with labor's stubborness to not take the issues of carbon tax to the next election and to fail so miserably in their pre-election promise to stop the boats.

On the polled question of keeping promises:
Labor: 20% said yes (down 13%) since March 2010
Liberal: 33% said yes (up 10% since March 2010

It's interesting that Labor actually polled much better during Rudd's time as elected PM - it seems that Gillard has lost her way more than Rudd.

 

[drsmith]

Julia, malignant may have been a better choice of words. To have your primary political ideology being power at any cost places you in the realms of Gaddafi, Amin, Mugabe, Pinochet e.t.c. Labor doesn't fit this bill.

Power at any cost in the context of our political environment.

That does not mean that they would not accept the result of the ballot box and behave like the leaders above. It is more a reference to their general slide in political honesty and the deals they do with minorities such as the carbon tax.

 

[drsmith]

Meanwhile, in East Timor......

http://www.smh.com.au/national/east...l-talks-on-refugee-centre-20110428-1dynq.html

 

[sails]

Meanwhile, in East Timor......

http://www.smh.com.au/national/east...l-talks-on-refugee-centre-20110428-1dynq.html

Well, they are clearly much smarter than our questionably honourable PM...

After the violence and riots over here, I suspect they don't want any more violence than they already have.

I expect this government to suffer huge losses at the next election is a similar way to 2007 over Howard's work choices. Between this failure to follow through with her pre-election promise of stopping the boats plus lie over carbon tax is creating massive voter outrage.

 

[sails]

And another 77 more heading to Christmas Island with the usual copy'n'paste about undergoing security, identity and health checks and their reasons for travel to be established:

From the HeraldSun: Navy assists asylum seeker boat northwest of Ashmore Islands



Let's hope that what is happening in the UK is not going to happen here:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rgeting-women-gays-bid-impose-sharia-law.html

 

[Julia]

Meanwhile, in East Timor......

http://www.smh.com.au/national/east...l-talks-on-refugee-centre-20110428-1dynq.html

Well, that's pretty clear. Where do the government go from here?
Meanwhile, Mr Abbott continues to urge the government that all they need to do is pick up the phone to Nauru, where the facilities already exist and the government would welcome the reinstatement of the detention centre.

I think Labor would gain more support by acknowledging their failure and taking this option than they will from continuing to be in denial about the problem.

 

[sails]

Looks like the government is finally, finally going to do something about it, albeit a couple of years too late. Manus Island is small, so the government might still need Nauru until word gets around that they won't be coming directly to Australia. But at least this seems a step in the right direction and let's hope it is stitched up quickly:

Full article from ABC: PNG confirms talks to reopen Manus Island detention centre

The ABC has confirmed that the Federal Government is seeking to have the Manus Island offshore processing centre in Papua New Guinea re-opened.

 

[Ferret]

Yes, credit where credit is due, this seems like a good move.

 

[derty]

Looks like the government is finally, finally going to do something about it, albeit a couple of years too late. Manus Island is small, so the government might still need Nauru until word gets around that they won't be coming directly to Australia. But at least this seems a step in the right direction and let's hope it is stitched up quickly:

Full article from ABC: PNG confirms talks to reopen Manus Island detention centre

In a reaction to the polls, Labor is beginning to adopt Liberal policies to attempt to defuse the rise in Liberal popularity and impending electoral defeat. It's very similar to the Liberals absorbing the One Nation voters by stealing their polices. She is getting scared.

 

[sails]

And another free perk offered by Rudd/Gillard governments at tax payer expense. No wonder these people are willing to risk their lives to come to the land where there is a never ending money supply. Never mind that the people who supply the money might be doing it tough.

Labor are refusing to detail the costs, but Morrison had this to say:

Opposition immigration spokesman Scott Morrison described the refusal to detail the cost as a joke.

"Labor's refusal to disclose the cost of their open-ended policy for taxpayer-funded phone calls by detainees is typical of a government that has grown insensitive to the blowout in asylum-seeker costs that now stands at $3 billion on their watch," Mr Morrison said.

Full story here from the HeraldSun: Refugee phone bills paid by us

 

[drsmith]

All is not well with Labor's proposed refugee swap with Malaysia.

Prime Minister Julia Gillard has staked a large part of her political future on achieving the Malaysia agreement.

Her announcement in early May that Australia would swap refugees with Malaysia set off a flurry of diplomatic talks and meetings.

But the documents obtained by Lateline show how difficult it will be to achieve an agreement and how hard Malaysia is pushing.

The draft agreement includes amendments made by Malaysia on Monday last week, including that Malaysia wants to decide which asylum seekers it accepts.

"The following persons shall not be transferred to Malaysia for processing," the document said.

"Persons who the Malaysian authorities do not provide consent or approval for the transfer."

And Malaysia wants Australia to cover nearly all costs of the refugee swap, including transport, education, health, housing, resettling costs as well as the relocation of asylum seekers to third countries.

"Where the Transferee do (sic) not agree to return to their country of origin, voluntarily forced returns may be necessary. In this event, the Government of Australia will be fully responsible to accept and ensure voluntarily forced returns," the document said.

Malaysia is also insisting on sending 4,000 refugees to Australia regardless of how many asylum seekers it takes in return.

"This number of illegal immigrants in Malaysia who have been officially issued with the UNHCR card will be resettled even if the Government of Australia does not seek to transfer the total 800," the document said.

The draft agreement also reveals that Malaysia has removed all reference to human rights in the revised document and does not want the UN Refugee Convention to cover its side of the deal.

"The treatment of the Transferee while in Malaysia will be in accordance with the Malaysian laws, rules, regulations and national policies," the document said.

Refugee and Immigration Legal centre coordinator David Manne says the documents expose Malaysia's reluctance to commit to human rights.

"What the document shows is that there is a real reluctance by Malaysia to commit to a clear inclusion of human rights standards and guarantees," he said.

"For example, in the document refugees are referred to as illegal immigrants. There's no reference to the word asylum seeker. There's certainly no reference to human rights."

The deal also relies on the participation of the United Nations High Commission on Refugees (UNHCR), which will process the asylum seekers.

But the UNHCR is concerned that Malaysia is not a signatory to the UN Convention on Refugees and has a reputation for treating asylum seekers harshly.

They live in cramped conditions and police routinely arrest them for working illegally.

Lateline has obtained a series of internal emails from the UNHCR that shed light on the negotiations.

From these emails, it is revealed why there is no reference to human rights in this draft of the agreement - Malaysia removed it.

In one email, Alan Vernon, the UNHCR's representative in Kuala Lumpur, outlines the changes made.

"The Malaysian text removes the standards of treatments contained in the earlier versions with language stating the transferees will be treated in accordance with Malaysian laws, rules, regulations and national police," the email said.

"Other changes include that Malaysians would clear the list of transferees [and the] removal of the reference of human rights in the introduction."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/06/02/3234280.htm?section=justin

 

[bellenuit]

All is not well with Labor's proposed refugee swap with Malaysia.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/06/02/3234280.htm?section=justin

What infuriates me most about the planned agreement with Malaysia is that Australia is made to look like idiots, just to save face for the Labor party.

 

[drsmith]

What infuriates me most about the planned agreement with Malaysia is that Australia is made to look like idiots, just to save face for the Labor party.

A glimmer of hope is that this government is looking like idiots to a growing majority.

They start fires they can't control and are then inept at putting them out.