-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Boat Discussion
- Thread starter Rosy
- Start date
Abbott's boat policy fails test (SMH)
Abbott's boat policy fails test
November 10, 2013
Michael Bachelard and Natalie O'brien
Prime Minister Tony Abbott's policy to turn back asylum seekers has failed a significant test, with 63 boat people arriving on Christmas Island after the government blinked in a mid-ocean standoff with Indonesia.
The backdown will be seen as a loss of face for the Coalition, which vowed before the election that Australian authorities would not act as a taxi service for refugees. It may also encourage other people-smuggling syndicates to try their hand.
Although Indonesia had agreed to Australia's request to take back asylum seekers on two recent occasions, critics of the government's turn-back policy had predicted Jakarta would eventually refuse to accept boats turned back by the Australian navy. That day came on Friday, when Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa outlined a harder-line doctrine and refused to take the asylum seekers unless there was a threat to life.
As Labor said the turn-back policy was ''in tatters'' and accused the Abbott government of inept diplomacy, Immigration Minister Scott Morrison tried to play down the stand-off in a statement issued on Saturday. He said that overnight on Friday the Indonesians has advised Australian officials that they were ''reviewing'' the request to take the boat back.
He said he welcomed Indonesia's ''review'', but ''in the best interests of the safety of the passengers and crew'' he had ordered the asylum seekers to be taken to Christmas Island for ''rapid onward transfer to Manus Island or Nauru''.
However, Agus Barnas, a spokesman for Indonesia's co-ordinating minister, Djoko Suyanto, said on Saturday: ''As far as I'm concerned, there is no review of the government of Indonesia's position/standpoint on the refugees who wish to go to Australia.''
Agus Barnas said he had checked this with the country's ambassador to Australia, who said the Indonesians had held a meeting after the incident and his orders from the minister had not changed.
Agus Barnas said Jakarta was reluctant to accept the most recent asylum seekers because the boat had been in working order when first approached by Australian navy vessel HMAS Ballarat.
''We don't want Indonesia to be a dumping ground, but we don't want Australia to accuse us of not doing anything. We want to respect Australia. At least for the time being, we will not accept them.''
The boat had been at the centre of a standoff between the two governments since Thursday when Australian ships had gone to the aid of the asylum seekers who had made a distress call.
On Saturday, Mr Abbott would not comment on Indonesia's motives for refusing to take the asylum seekers back. But he said he did not accept that the government had ''surrendered'' its policy to turn back the boats. ''We have a range of options at our disposal,'' he said.
''We deserve the right to put into place all of the policies that we took to the election and one of the options that we reserve to ourselves is the option of turning boats around where it's safe to do so and certainly that's something which is very much alive.''
Mr Abbott said the relationship between his government and Indonesia was mutually respectful.
But opposition immigration spokesman Richard Marles said Mr Abbott's diplomacy had been inept. ''Turning back the boats is certainly not happening, and you'd have to say that to the extent to which it's at the centre of their boat policy, their boat policy is in tatters,'' he said.
An asylum seeker source told Fairfax Media that the people on the boat were from Pakistan and Afghanistan, and had been organised by people smugglers called Muzahir and Sher Ali.
He said people smugglers in West Java were talking about sending another boat within three days, or up to a week. The standoff led the co-ordinating minister, Djoko Suyanto, to assert that the country would never take refugees from Australia under similar circumstances.
An asylum seeker in Indonesia contacted Fairfax Media early on Saturday to say the boat had reached the Australian territory.
''I have friends on the boat,'' the asylum seeker said in a text message, ''and yesterday he says, 'my boat [has] reached'.''
With BIANCA HALL
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/abbotts-boat-policy-fails-test-20131109-2x8w5.html#ixzz2kBoj5rk0
**********
Seems to eb a bit of conflicting info in that article. I wonder who's telling the truth. We seem to be ruffling Indonesia's feathers a bit lately.
Abbott's boat policy fails test
November 10, 2013
Michael Bachelard and Natalie O'brien
Prime Minister Tony Abbott's policy to turn back asylum seekers has failed a significant test, with 63 boat people arriving on Christmas Island after the government blinked in a mid-ocean standoff with Indonesia.
The backdown will be seen as a loss of face for the Coalition, which vowed before the election that Australian authorities would not act as a taxi service for refugees. It may also encourage other people-smuggling syndicates to try their hand.
Although Indonesia had agreed to Australia's request to take back asylum seekers on two recent occasions, critics of the government's turn-back policy had predicted Jakarta would eventually refuse to accept boats turned back by the Australian navy. That day came on Friday, when Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa outlined a harder-line doctrine and refused to take the asylum seekers unless there was a threat to life.
As Labor said the turn-back policy was ''in tatters'' and accused the Abbott government of inept diplomacy, Immigration Minister Scott Morrison tried to play down the stand-off in a statement issued on Saturday. He said that overnight on Friday the Indonesians has advised Australian officials that they were ''reviewing'' the request to take the boat back.
He said he welcomed Indonesia's ''review'', but ''in the best interests of the safety of the passengers and crew'' he had ordered the asylum seekers to be taken to Christmas Island for ''rapid onward transfer to Manus Island or Nauru''.
However, Agus Barnas, a spokesman for Indonesia's co-ordinating minister, Djoko Suyanto, said on Saturday: ''As far as I'm concerned, there is no review of the government of Indonesia's position/standpoint on the refugees who wish to go to Australia.''
Agus Barnas said he had checked this with the country's ambassador to Australia, who said the Indonesians had held a meeting after the incident and his orders from the minister had not changed.
Agus Barnas said Jakarta was reluctant to accept the most recent asylum seekers because the boat had been in working order when first approached by Australian navy vessel HMAS Ballarat.
''We don't want Indonesia to be a dumping ground, but we don't want Australia to accuse us of not doing anything. We want to respect Australia. At least for the time being, we will not accept them.''
The boat had been at the centre of a standoff between the two governments since Thursday when Australian ships had gone to the aid of the asylum seekers who had made a distress call.
On Saturday, Mr Abbott would not comment on Indonesia's motives for refusing to take the asylum seekers back. But he said he did not accept that the government had ''surrendered'' its policy to turn back the boats. ''We have a range of options at our disposal,'' he said.
''We deserve the right to put into place all of the policies that we took to the election and one of the options that we reserve to ourselves is the option of turning boats around where it's safe to do so and certainly that's something which is very much alive.''
Mr Abbott said the relationship between his government and Indonesia was mutually respectful.
But opposition immigration spokesman Richard Marles said Mr Abbott's diplomacy had been inept. ''Turning back the boats is certainly not happening, and you'd have to say that to the extent to which it's at the centre of their boat policy, their boat policy is in tatters,'' he said.
An asylum seeker source told Fairfax Media that the people on the boat were from Pakistan and Afghanistan, and had been organised by people smugglers called Muzahir and Sher Ali.
He said people smugglers in West Java were talking about sending another boat within three days, or up to a week. The standoff led the co-ordinating minister, Djoko Suyanto, to assert that the country would never take refugees from Australia under similar circumstances.
An asylum seeker in Indonesia contacted Fairfax Media early on Saturday to say the boat had reached the Australian territory.
''I have friends on the boat,'' the asylum seeker said in a text message, ''and yesterday he says, 'my boat [has] reached'.''
With BIANCA HALL
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/abbotts-boat-policy-fails-test-20131109-2x8w5.html#ixzz2kBoj5rk0
**********
Seems to eb a bit of conflicting info in that article. I wonder who's telling the truth. We seem to be ruffling Indonesia's feathers a bit lately.
Morrison defends pregnant asylum answers (news.com.au)
Morrison defends pregnant asylum answers
NOVEMBER 08, 2013
IMMIGRATION Minister Scott Morrison has been accused of being tricky after it was revealed an asylum seeker he previously denied existed was flown from Nauru to Brisbane to give birth.
The 31-year-old Rohingyan woman from Myanmar was flown to Brisbane to give birth on October 11, days before a press conference where the minister denied she existed.
"My information is she was transferred from Nauru to Australia on the 11th of October," Mr Morrison said.
On October 18 Mr Morrison responded to questions from journalists about the woman by denying her existence.
"The suggestion there is a pregnant woman with twins on Nauru is simply not true ... there are no pregnant women on Nauru."
When asked about a United Nations High Commission for Human Rights report that said she was on Nauru, Mr Morrison replied "they are wrong".
On Friday it was revealed the woman left Nauru days before the October 18 briefing.
"Why are you being so tricky? Why not just tell us?" a journalist asked Mr Morrison.
"I answered your question at the time," the minister said.
The woman told the UNHCR and refugee activists she had been told - following medical scans - she was pregnant with twins.
She gave birth to one child in Brisbane and has since been diagnosed with diabetes.
She also said she was fearful of returning to Nauru with her baby.
The Rohingyan family has two other children, a seven-year-old daughter and a four-year-old son.
"Despite the minister's boasting, it is now clear that even his own department does not think there are adequate medical facilities for pregnant women on Nauru," Refugee Action Coalition spokesman Ian Rintoul said.
Morrison defends pregnant asylum answers
NOVEMBER 08, 2013
IMMIGRATION Minister Scott Morrison has been accused of being tricky after it was revealed an asylum seeker he previously denied existed was flown from Nauru to Brisbane to give birth.
The 31-year-old Rohingyan woman from Myanmar was flown to Brisbane to give birth on October 11, days before a press conference where the minister denied she existed.
"My information is she was transferred from Nauru to Australia on the 11th of October," Mr Morrison said.
On October 18 Mr Morrison responded to questions from journalists about the woman by denying her existence.
"The suggestion there is a pregnant woman with twins on Nauru is simply not true ... there are no pregnant women on Nauru."
When asked about a United Nations High Commission for Human Rights report that said she was on Nauru, Mr Morrison replied "they are wrong".
On Friday it was revealed the woman left Nauru days before the October 18 briefing.
"Why are you being so tricky? Why not just tell us?" a journalist asked Mr Morrison.
"I answered your question at the time," the minister said.
The woman told the UNHCR and refugee activists she had been told - following medical scans - she was pregnant with twins.
She gave birth to one child in Brisbane and has since been diagnosed with diabetes.
She also said she was fearful of returning to Nauru with her baby.
The Rohingyan family has two other children, a seven-year-old daughter and a four-year-old son.
"Despite the minister's boasting, it is now clear that even his own department does not think there are adequate medical facilities for pregnant women on Nauru," Refugee Action Coalition spokesman Ian Rintoul said.
It's a disgrace how blase we've become about locking up children and sending desperate people to their deaths. Anyone who uses the terms 'boat people' or 'illegal immigrants' ought to be ashamed. We're all boat people in this country, except for the blackfellas if you believe they walked here. We all came here to escape hunger or persecution, in the hope of a better life. To deny others a battler's chance is emblematic of how far we've drifted from our supposed egalitarian roots. Whenever I see or hear someone espousing 'border security' as a euphemism for denying others their human rights, I want to ask them how long their family has been in Australia - and if it's less than 170 years, telling them to get the *smile* out of MY country.
The second (never performed at sporting events) verse of our national anthem states that "for those who've come across the seas, we've boundless plains to share". Time to officially scrub that or live up to it.
It's ironic that the same people and politicians who want to spend far more money to lock up asylum seekers than it would cost to release them into the community are generally the same ones who carp about government waste.
If you want to punish people for risking their lives to escape death and persecution, put them to work in a nation-building project while assessing their claims. Oh wait, we don't do them anymore. That would require vision and courage from our leaders, and the last display of either was Howard with the gun laws.
The xenophobia, cynicism and opportunism of politicians and media going back to the Tampa is reprehensible. Malcolm Fraser, the arch-conservative PM of the 70s and 80s, is a pinko-lefto-commie compared even to the Labor Party these days. His compassion towards Vietnamese refugees is a stark contrast to the current shameful approach.
The second (never performed at sporting events) verse of our national anthem states that "for those who've come across the seas, we've boundless plains to share". Time to officially scrub that or live up to it.
It's ironic that the same people and politicians who want to spend far more money to lock up asylum seekers than it would cost to release them into the community are generally the same ones who carp about government waste.
If you want to punish people for risking their lives to escape death and persecution, put them to work in a nation-building project while assessing their claims. Oh wait, we don't do them anymore. That would require vision and courage from our leaders, and the last display of either was Howard with the gun laws.
The xenophobia, cynicism and opportunism of politicians and media going back to the Tampa is reprehensible. Malcolm Fraser, the arch-conservative PM of the 70s and 80s, is a pinko-lefto-commie compared even to the Labor Party these days. His compassion towards Vietnamese refugees is a stark contrast to the current shameful approach.
I absolutely agree. Our society, national identity etc were largely built on people coming here hoping for a better life.spook said:
Ironically (and frustratingly in my book) we are now opening our arms to more and more economic migrants; people who are doing OK where they are, whether that is the UK, Ireland, China or India. Both parties facilitate this because they want immigration rates to be high to (in my opinion) artificially inflate GDP and make the economy look good while, in my strong view, this leads to a host of other social and economic problems.
Unfortunately the media do not sufficiently distinguish between high immigration rates and the (very low) number of asylum seekers we receive so the average Aussie (if not the average uneducated one) thinks we are being overrun by asylum seekers and 'this is why our kids can't afford to buy a house...why the freeway is chocked full of cars...blah blah...'. It is rubbish. If we want to preserve our national identity and get back to our egalitarian roots we should welcome the boats. If we want to address the other problems we should STOP (read limit) THE PLANES.
People are stuck in the the paradigm of stopping people coming here, be it by plane or boat or whatever.
I reckon people should be free to make their way here regardless of how they do it, and people should be free to bring them here without being considered as people smugglers. People should be free to move to where they need to without interference from governments.
I reckon people should be free to make their way here regardless of how they do it, and people should be free to bring them here without being considered as people smugglers. People should be free to move to where they need to without interference from governments.
mld said:
Immigration is very important to our country no doubt.
In an ideal world I would agree with the above.
I think Australia needs a national debate on what population that we think we can sustain while maintaining current living standards. Until this can be answered people will fear immigration and the face of it boat people.
mld said:
In an ideal world, this would be great....
BUT...
Australia is supposed to be the lucky country and if you believe some of the posters on the "global warming' thread, then our weather is going to get worse and therefore our infrastructures and natural resources will be under pressure.
Is throwing the borders open for an influx of people going to threaten our country and maybe condemn it to a future third world country?
Seeing as this is a new thread that wasn't about during the previous Government's reign, as we can see, the current Government does have a lot of work to do to try and get it back to how it was before the 2007 election:
The amount of boat people arriving did surge dramatically (as well as the deaths of people trying to get here) from 2007 onwards.
Howard and the Libs may have their detractors on here but nobody can deny they had our borders under a much tighter control when in power compared to the subsequent Government.
As a result, Abbott needs time...he needs time to deal with our neighbours, he needs time for his policies to work, and he needs time to reverse the mistakes of Gillard/Rudd/ALP.
Not just the population but the rate of population growth. Also not just the growth nationally but how it is distributed across cities, towns and states.MB78 said:
I've got no problem with Australia's population being 100+ million one day (there is no question we have enough liveable space) but I also think that Melbourne and Sydney are currently growing at unsustainable rates and it has started affecting the living standards in these cities; especially for those aged 20-40. This has very little to do with asylum seekers though. I probably should hold further rants for the overpopulation thread.
mld said:
I wouldn't feel so safe if people could just enter Australia freely with no restrictions or government input. Don't you think people entering need to be processed and recorded in any way? Do you think they should be entitled to welfare, health benefits etc?
spook said:
I don't think I have ever read a post that so well sums up my own feelings about this issue. Thanks spook. Faith in humanity restored.
Good the Libs aren't getting it all their own way.
Senate passes motion ordering Immigration Minister Scott Morrison to reveal details of asylum arrivals
3 HOURS AGO NOVEMBER 14, 2013 11:41AM
THE Senate has passed a motion compelling Immigration Minister Scott Morrison to release internal reports on asylum seeker boat arrivals and incidents at sea.
The Australian Greens motion demands Mr Morrison table all communications about ``on-water operations'' between the election and November 14, and email and correspondence between the minister, his office and the Department of Immigration and Customs.
The motion passed in the Senate this morning, with the support of the Greens and Labor.
Documents about the chronology of events, unauthorised boat arrivals, interceptions at sea, distress calls and response times by the Australia Maritime Safety Authority, nationality of passengers, boat turn backs, tow backs, child asylum seekers and water transfers must also be tabled.
The motion also requires Mr Morrison to table documents about future incidents within 24 hours of the event.
``This will bring an end to the coalition's arrogant silence,'' Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young said.
``The tired, empty excuses and refusal to discuss so called 'operational matters' have shown the Australian people that secrecy is more important to this Abbott government than transparency.''
Assistant Immigration Minister Michaelia Cash initially said the government would vote against the motion.
``We do not run a shipping news service for people smugglers,'' she told the Senate.
However, the motion was carried 33 votes to 28.
Mr Morrison be criticised for refusing to answer journalists questions at his Friday Operation Sovereign Border media briefings or provide information about incidents during the week.
Comment is being sought from Mr Morrison's office.
Senate passes motion ordering Immigration Minister Scott Morrison to reveal details of asylum arrivals
3 HOURS AGO NOVEMBER 14, 2013 11:41AM
THE Senate has passed a motion compelling Immigration Minister Scott Morrison to release internal reports on asylum seeker boat arrivals and incidents at sea.
The Australian Greens motion demands Mr Morrison table all communications about ``on-water operations'' between the election and November 14, and email and correspondence between the minister, his office and the Department of Immigration and Customs.
The motion passed in the Senate this morning, with the support of the Greens and Labor.
Documents about the chronology of events, unauthorised boat arrivals, interceptions at sea, distress calls and response times by the Australia Maritime Safety Authority, nationality of passengers, boat turn backs, tow backs, child asylum seekers and water transfers must also be tabled.
The motion also requires Mr Morrison to table documents about future incidents within 24 hours of the event.
``This will bring an end to the coalition's arrogant silence,'' Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young said.
``The tired, empty excuses and refusal to discuss so called 'operational matters' have shown the Australian people that secrecy is more important to this Abbott government than transparency.''
Assistant Immigration Minister Michaelia Cash initially said the government would vote against the motion.
``We do not run a shipping news service for people smugglers,'' she told the Senate.
However, the motion was carried 33 votes to 28.
Mr Morrison be criticised for refusing to answer journalists questions at his Friday Operation Sovereign Border media briefings or provide information about incidents during the week.
Comment is being sought from Mr Morrison's office.
I understand the politics behind the motion but sets a pretty slippery slope for any future government with a hostile senate.
In essence a senate could pass a motion requiring reporting on all manner of things which would make government almost unworkable. Interesting times.
In essence a senate could pass a motion requiring reporting on all manner of things which would make government almost unworkable. Interesting times.
Not sure I agree Baloo/Azza.
There will always be things that governments of both persuasions don't want publicly known. You only have to look at the number of FOI requests and how they are contested by governments (of either persuasion) to see this. You may recall how for years Brumby and Bracks in Victoria called for the GP contract to be made public only for them to have an epiphany when they came to power and decide it really was commercially sensitive! What always happens is oppositions always expect governments to abide by standards of behaviour they don't (and didn't) hold themselves to.
I don't seem to recall the ABC/Fairfax/Senate calling for a media release every time a boat arrived under the previous government (3 or 4 a week or so).
In addition the motion ignores the fact that one operational strategy deployed by the present government to reduce the number of boat arrivals (and also deaths at sea for that matter) was to reduce the incessant media reporting which was seen as being advertising for the people smugglers. If boat arrivals increase after the motion is put into effect I guess the conservatives will be proven correct that the constant reporting is part of the problem. The truth will be in the numbers I guess.
Pleasingly on the issue it appears that under the new policy that boat arrivals have been reduced. In addition I understand that there have, as yet, been no deaths at sea of boat people attempting to come to Australia since the election. This has to be a good thing.
There will always be things that governments of both persuasions don't want publicly known. You only have to look at the number of FOI requests and how they are contested by governments (of either persuasion) to see this. You may recall how for years Brumby and Bracks in Victoria called for the GP contract to be made public only for them to have an epiphany when they came to power and decide it really was commercially sensitive! What always happens is oppositions always expect governments to abide by standards of behaviour they don't (and didn't) hold themselves to.
I don't seem to recall the ABC/Fairfax/Senate calling for a media release every time a boat arrived under the previous government (3 or 4 a week or so).
In addition the motion ignores the fact that one operational strategy deployed by the present government to reduce the number of boat arrivals (and also deaths at sea for that matter) was to reduce the incessant media reporting which was seen as being advertising for the people smugglers. If boat arrivals increase after the motion is put into effect I guess the conservatives will be proven correct that the constant reporting is part of the problem. The truth will be in the numbers I guess.
Pleasingly on the issue it appears that under the new policy that boat arrivals have been reduced. In addition I understand that there have, as yet, been no deaths at sea of boat people attempting to come to Australia since the election. This has to be a good thing.
