Skip to content

“That’s just what Jesus said, sir!”

14/08/2012

.

So the panel have handed down a report. And already people are not pleased. Not even the coalition which reckon that this is some how a vindication that John Howard should be made a saint. Andrew Bolt did what Andrew Bolt does. Within minutes of a 160 page report being actually released, he had already printed his summary. Excuse me? Did you even read the report Andrew?

But do not worry Andrew! You were joined in the stupidity by other so called respected journalists and their sub editors. I was keenly interested this morning on seeing a link entitled “At last! People before politics” in The Australian. But when I clicked on it, I was disappointed. And I didn’t have to go long into the article

LABOR will today legislate to reinstate offshore asylum-seeker processing in Nauru and PNG, signalling a return to the Howard-era Pacific Solution. 

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/immigration/labor-accepts-compromise-on-asylum-seekers/story-fn9hm1gu-1226449593867

Now the article goes on and discusses the political sides. It even mentions some of the recommendations. Somehow they saw the word Nauru and did not read anymore. The Prime Minister was VERY clear. This is something totally different. Sure its in Nauru, but it is NOT Howard’s Nauru.

And it was not until LATELINE that anyone actually bothered to ask.

STEVE CANNANE: So just to clarify that, it wouldn’t be like Nauru and Manus Island was before with fences around it and people being detained?

PARIS ARISTOTLE: No. There would have to be accommodation established for them. They may have to return to that accommodation each evening, but it’s not intended that it would be a detention centre in any of the proposed transfer arrangements.

The other thing that’s different to the past is that there were no independent monitoring and oversight mechanisms of what was happening. We’ve recommended that there be oversight and monitoring mechanisms through high-level groups comprising of cross-party membership, experts from the non-government sector or academia, senior officials who would monitor and oversight the adherence to the conditions of any transfer arrangement and international obligations.

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2012/s3567010.htm

Yes. That’s right. The report recommends off shore processing and a move to a regional processing agreements. But they do NOT recommend fences around camps. They do not recommend detainment.

Asylum seekers that are ‘fleeing’ for their lives will be made safe, processed, but given no advantage for getting on the boat. In other words, do not risk your lives as it will not get you to Australia, or any other country in the region faster.

The report also advises an increase in refugee intakes to again take away a disincentive and lessen waits in UN processing and regional processing arrangements. It advises that boat turning can not be done if the country you sent them back to did not want them.

And it insists that the Malaysian arrangement should be made to work and any points of contention be addressed as it is VITAL part of regional agreements.

Yet all we are seeing in the media is the political scoring. And no one is even using the report for factual evidence of this scoring.

Paris makes it clear.

STEVE CANNANE: OK. Just to deal with that principle, the panel came to the conclusion that a no-advantage principle should apply to people arriving here by boat so that they’d gain no benefit by choosing to circumvent regular migration mechanisms.

Does that mean that Philip Ruddock was right to say all those years ago that those coming by boat were queue jumpers?

PARIS ARISTOTLE: No, I don’t believe in the queue jumping argument. You have got to remember, back then there was no regional arrangement. There wasn’t an enhanced humanitarian program. There were no adequate processing structures across the region for people to actually apply into.

So there wasn’t really a queue. And this isn’t talking about establishing a queue, but it is talking about establishing a credible system that people now can apply through. That didn’t exist previously, and so what was occurring historically was there was more of a deterrence base which had more of a punitive element to it in order to dissuade people.

And that is the key. Under the Howard arrangement, there was NO REGIONAL arrangement. This was totally a solution for Australia. Bugger our neighbours. THIS plan’s main plank is the regional arrangements, particularly the deal signed in 2009 that strengthened the Bali Process. And it is crucial that the plan they outline remains regional.

So will this plan be the Jesus miracle Australia need’s to cure its leprosy? Or will it be yet another case of ‘no pleasing some people’?
.

.


.

A. Ghebranious 2012

3 Comments
  1. Catching up permalink

    I will be surprised if Abbott agrees to this. His only aim is to prevent Malaysia being used. The report sees Malaysia as a necessary.

    He does not have the PM ability to back flip, when it is warranted.

    I am not so sure, that many will not, when faced with the new reality, decide to return to where they embarked on the boats.

    There is nothing stopping that from happening. That is unless the countries will not take them back.

    So any action of Abbott barring Malaysia and other countries in the region is likely to be futile and empty gesture. If this is true, the PM is unlikely to make a .issue of it.

    • Nice post ‘Catching up’.

      I agree with you that Abbott will most likely not agree. (well actually ‘that you’d be surprised if he did).

      But I think that ‘his only aim is to prevent Malaysia being used’ isn’t quite accurate. His only aim WAS to prevent Malaysia being used, yes, but that was because Malaysia was the nominated destination in Labor policy.

      Abbott will not agree to ANYTHING that the Labor party comes up with because as far as he is concerned HE should be prime minister, and HE was robbed of that role, and HE will undermine any and every attempt to achieve anything by the Labor party.

      It’s going to be an interesting time watching Mr Narcissist Abbott squirm and writhe away from having ANY agreement made regarding offshore processing of asylum seekers.

      God forbid that the ALP might get some traction by getting this contentious bill passed. So imho no way will he let this through without a dirty fight … he’ll probably have to call on his old ‘buddy’ Kevin Rudd to do some more undermining.

      RTN

      (hmm, might get some cheese … I’m sure the ‘whine’ is about to start flowing)

      • jane permalink

        rupytn, as we know Liealot has given it the thumbs up and he and his fellow clowns are cock-a-hoop rubbing Gillard’s nose in the triumphant return of the Pacific Solution.

        But what these idiots don’t have the wit to understand is that they are well and truly wedged, because the minute just one boat appears on the horizon, Gillard can trumpet triumphantly that Liealot’s preferred plan DOESN’T work. All the blame can be sheeted home to Liealot and the Liars Party.

        Then the government can get on with implementing what will hopefully be a decent regional solution, while the Liars try to dislodge their undies.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,336 other followers

%d bloggers like this: