• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

"Abbot's Evil Policy Work" - Fraser

arthwollipot

Observer of Phenomena, Pronouns: he/him
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
102,651
Location
Ngunnawal Country
Ex-Liberal Prime Minister has slammed Tony Abbott's recent asylum seeker policy announcements as "inhumane" and "lacks integrity".

How can you ''restore integrity'' to the policy affecting asylum seekers when the proposals embraced are based on falsehoods, misinformation and a blatant playing of politics with the lives of vulnerable people? This is the opposite of integrity. It is inhumane and demeans Australia. Is this the basis on which Abbott will operate if he, as he believes he will, becomes prime minister?

He has also highlighted innaccuracies and inconsistencies in the policy itself. Here's my favourite:

As a final indication of the value of this policy, it refers to section 49A of the Migration Act. There is no section 49A.

Read the article from The Age
 
When a revered elder of your own party turns on you, most will take notice. Abbott won't.
 
Yeah I agree that Fraser is certainly no longer "revered" by his party.

After a being a controversial political figure for so many years, a long time ago Fraser decided that he was going to spend the remainder of his post-political life championing the cause of the extremely disadvantaged and poor people in the world.

Such causes are fundamentally against modern Australian conservative political principles.
 
Julian Burnside points out more errors of fact in Abbott's refugee posturing.

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/4123872.html

Specifically, he said:

"I don't think it's a very Christian thing to come in by the back door rather than the front door. ... I think the people we accept should be coming the right way and not the wrong way. ... If you pay a people-smuggler, if you jump the queue, if you take yourself and your family on a leaky boat, that's doing the wrong thing, not the right thing, and we shouldn't encourage it."

It is not surprising that Mr Abbott has a view about the moral dimension of refugee issues. It is entirely appropriate that he should consider the matter from the perspective of Christian teaching, given that he trained for the priesthood. I would go so far as to say that more politicians should pay attention to the moral implications of the policies they have to determine.

What is striking is that Mr Abbott could get the matter so spectacularly wrong, both as to the facts and as to the moral equation.

First: the facts. Mr Abbott should know that there is no queue when you run for your life. The recent execution of an Afghan woman by the Taliban (another example of a very well-established pattern) gives some idea of why people seek asylum. A significant proportion of boat-people in the past 15 years have been Afghan Hazaras fleeing the Taliban. If an Afghan were to embrace Mr Abbott's scruples and look for a queue, the obvious place would be the Australian Embassy in Kabul. The Department of Foreign Affairs website informs us:

"The Australian Embassy in Kabul operates from a number of locations that are not publicly disclosed due to security reasons. The Australian Embassy in Kabul has no visa function."

So where is the queue?

Leave aside that the location of the Australian Embassy is a secret, the larger point is that refugee flows are always untidy. The idea that desperate people will conduct themselves as if waiting for a bus to take them to the shops is not only ludicrous, it reveals a complete lack of empathy, or even understanding, of why refugees flee for safety in the first place.

As it happens, more than 90 per cent of boat-people who have arrived in Australia in the past 15 years have been accepted, eventually, as genuine refugees. Mr Abbott should understand this: it means that they are people to whom we owe a duty of protection according to our own laws, and according to the obligations we voluntarily undertook when we signed the Refugees Convention.
 
I wonder how long it will take people to understand that Abbott is more than happy to allow the boat people to die so long as he can use it as a point to bash the government with. As long as he gets his party members to vote against whatever anyone who isn't them comes up with he can then say "Labor has failed to stop the boats".
 
I wonder how many people have to die before this game of power-play ends?
 
What outcome would you like to see?

Ultimately, that neither Abbott nor Gillard act under the pretence that they can 'play God' and decide the fate of so many people's lives just so they have an argument against the other side's policies and actions. I think it's completely ludicrous that these decisions can be made whilst hiding behind the belief that it's the best outcome for our country. Last time I checked, humanitarianism and the 'best outcome' for ANYBODY didn't result in such degredation and loss of life.
 
The Libs are certainly good at holding the lead, though.

Refugees could be sent back to their countries or imprisoned indefinitely for committing most crimes in Australia under a Coalition government.
This comes despite warnings by legal experts that the changes would be illegal under international law.
The federal Coalition announced on Sunday that, if it was elected, foreigners convicted of crimes punishable by more than one year in jail would have their visas cancelled automatically, even if they were sentenced to less than a year's imprisonment.
Such people - including refugees, asylum seekers and visitors - would lose their right to appeal except in ''special circumstances''. They would be detained until they could be deported and would not be allowed to return to Australia for 20 years, double the present period.
Advertisement
This follows Bureau of Statistics figures in March that showed asylum seekers living in the community on bridging visas were about 45 times less likely to be charged with a crime than members of the general public.


As a piece of simple minded nastiness, this is not bad.
 
Well he has policies, it's just that they're are extremely vacuous since most of them are "not Labor's".

Although their asylum seeker policy is currently "what is in place now PLUS TPV's AND turning the boats around when it is safe to do so", despite the former increasing the number of people getting on the boats, while the latter is never going to happen.

I think it's sad that the most xenophobic policy is also the most fleshed out one.
 

Back
Top Bottom