Archive

Archive for June 28, 2012

EYE-BALL Opinion on – Immigration and Asylum Seekers Part IV – The Bill and the Debate…

The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2
Title:
Immigration and Asylum Seekers
… Part IV …
… The Bill and the debate …
28th June 2012.

________________________________________

________________________________________

Links to the – The Migration Legislation Amendment (The Bali Process) Bill 2012:

– currently before the Australian Senate – 28th June 2012:

Links to United Nations Refugee Links:

________________________________________

Copies of Selected Members of the House of Representatives and their speeches to this Bill: – extracted from Hansard records 27th June 2012 – linked here..

Malcolm Turnbull:

Mr TURNBULL (Wentworth) (14:47):

| Speaker – Malcolm Turnbull | 27th June 2012 | Link to Hansard Record 27th June 2012. Page 57. |

There are no measures deployed by governments in the battle against people-smuggling which are particularly palatable. All of them have great difficulties, contradictions and painful choices associated with them. They all have aspects which are cruel, but it is our jobs as legislators and it is the Prime Minister’s job as the head of our government to reach a balance between ensuring that there is a complete end to people-smuggling on the one hand, which could obviously be achieved with the cruellest imaginable measures, and on the other hand for Australia to maintain its duty as a compassionate and generous country respecting its obligations under the convention.

Finding that balance is very hard. There was a time after the election of the Labor government in 2007 when there was a view—and I do not suggest that view as anything other than sincerely held—on the part of the government that the rate of people-smuggling, the rate of asylum seeker arrivals, was entirely a function of push factors and that Australian domestic policy was irrelevant.

I recall, as Leader of the Opposition at the time, saying again and again that the push factors varied, certainly. Sometimes they were immense; sometimes they were even more immense, but they were always immense and therefore the factor that impacted on the rate of arrival was Australia’s domestic policy. Well, we had an experiment. Australia’s domestic policies were changed and the arrivals increased and increased and increased. As a consequence, given the nature of the vessels that these desperate people embark upon, the nature of the seas and, all too often, the inexperience of the captains, the deaths are increasing as well. And so we have come full circle and we are back here seeking to find a way to stop the people-smuggling trade.

The government wants the opposition to agree to the Malaysian solution. It states in its defence the testimony of Andrew Metcalfe, the head of the Department of Immigration and Citizenship, a very experienced man, no doubt. He says that the Malaysian solution will be effective. He recognises there are problems with it but he says it will be effective. Our objection to it is not whether it will be effective or not, because only time would tell, were it to be implemented, but because it fails to reach the right balance of protecting human rights. It abandons any human rights protection, the human rights protection contained in the convention.

Politics is the art of the possible. This nation, this parliament, needs to make a decision on this this week. The coalition has resolved not to support the Malaysia solution. That decision has been taken. The consequence of that is that even if this bill is passed in this chamber—and I do not doubt it may well be passed—it cannot possibly pass the Senate, so it can never be law. So what is this about, other than an effort to embarrass the coalition and to put pressure on the coalition?

I appeal to the Prime Minister to do this: to agree to the amendment. Let us pass the legislation so that Nauru can be reinstated. Let us do that; let us effectively reinstate not all but the bulk of the Howard government’s policy. If that does not work—because you will never know until you try these policies—then the Prime Minister has a basis to come back and argue that the balance between the humanitarian part of the equation and the desire to ensure border security should be re-examined. What the Prime Minister is doing is allowing her conception of the perfect to be the enemy of the good. There is something that can be achieved today. Nauru should be achieved. If it does not succeed then she has the opportunity to ask for stronger measures. (Time expired)

________________________________________

Joe Hockey:

Mr HOCKEY (North Sydney) (19:17):

| Speaker – Joe Hockey | 27th June 2012 | Link to Hansard Record 27th June 2012. Page 94. |

I am always reluctant to speak early in these debates. For a whole lot of personal reasons, the emotions run very deep in me in relation to refugees. The member for Kennedy said that his forebears came here in the 1870s. My father came here as a refugee on 3 September 1948. He came from a country where there was war. He had to wait his turn, but he was desperate to come here. The member for Kennedy is right: there is a great deal of hypocrisy from time to time in these debates. But I will say one thing deliberately to this parliament. I will never ever support a people swap where you can send a 13-year-old child unaccompanied to a country without supervision—never. It will be over my dead body. How dare people?

Some people say they are wrestling with their conscience. I am not; I know exactly what I want to do. The compromise that the Leader of the Opposition offered today went some way forward to offering a solution, be it Nauru, Manus Island or somewhere else. I fought with the previous Prime Minister, my Prime Minister, about Nauru. I opposed it until the moment he assured me that at all times Australians would be able to supervise the people who were sent there, that they would be protected, that they would have health care and education support—until he could assure me that those most vulnerable would be protected. That was when I agreed with him. I was prepared to cross the floor in a previous government with an absolute majority in this place because I disagreed with the treatment of those most vulnerable by my Prime Minister. Until he assured me personally, together with the minister for immigration, that no child would ever be abandoned in another country once they had come under the guardian protection of Australia—until he assured me of that I would not support it. But he did.

This government is now asking us to support a situation where a 13-year-old child could be sent to another nation without any regard for their welfare after that moment. Even if we have words from the immigration minister about it being a case-by-case basis, it is the threat of it and from time to time the enactment of it that is the most damning thing for our conscience. That is why I feel entirely consistent. That is why I was so angry about being gagged before. I have wrestled, like many others, with their conscience on this debate but I am entirely consistent with my soul. I will sleep easy because I know from my own background and from what I have done in the past that I am going to be consistent no matter how painful it might be in the electorate, no matter how hard it might be explaining it to my constituents. I rest easy on this because I can be entirely consistent with what beats within my soul.

________________________________________

These two MP’s outshone everybody else in this House debate … Mr Hockey showed his emotive side in his deliverance, and Mr Turnbull who spoke without aid or script, gave an indication why he would make a PM of stature given another opportunity.  

The context of the above speeches was replicated by many other MP’s as well – all with the same intent … the debate on this Bill continues in the Senate and is expected to be defeated along party lines.

This makes the events over the last two days worth reviewing – the media and public outcry has been appeased – the tragic loss of like is no longer the media focus, and the ‘indulgence’ of having seen to be trying to do something has ben accomplished.  SO in summary terms and as the parliament heads to a six week Winter recess, the Government seems to have placated all vested interests except for the continuing stream of ‘asylum seekers’, and the future people who will die in seeking to pursue their challenge.

Let us for a moment review all the comments made by the Politicians – who I would be willing to bet have all not read the material provided via the above UNHCR links … they have all expressed empathy for the loss of life, and for the people who have lost loved ones, they have extended congratulations and condolences to the Australian Maritime and Military services who made the rescues – they have spoken about the off-shore processing, the UNHCR Refugee Convention – the Malaysian solution and yet – the three parties, GREENS, ALP, and the COALITION, along with the five Independents, Katter, Windsor, Wilkie, Thompson and Slipper,  have not found the common ground to move to a Bill that will pass the Senate.

The HOR Debate: 27th June 2012

From 2:00pm the debate on Mr Oakeshott’s bill proceeded with an Amendment Bill put forward by the Opposition (Sponsored by Mr Morrison) –  to exclude the Malaysian solution from the Oakeshott Bill.  Debate went on for almost 5 hours before a vote on whether to vote on the Morrison Amendment was introduced – at 18:42pm the House voted on whether to put the Morrison Amendments to the House –  – that was defeated 73-72 – The GREENS Member Brant did not vote, Slipper was not in the House, there was pairing for ALP Member Rowland, and the Speaker can not vote – and that accounts for the 150 HOR numbers.

Immediately after a new division at 18:48pm happened – the House went to a vote on whether to accept the Morrison Amendments – this was defeated 74-72 with The GREENS Member Brant voting with the Government.

immediately after 18:52pm – the Member for Denison, Independent Wilkie sought leave to introduce his ‘Sunset Bill’ amendment – this went to a vote – 19:00pm as to whether Wilkie’s Amendment could be presented – it was successful 75-71 – with Independent Bob Katter voting with the Government – he had voted with the Opposition on the previous two votes.

Debate ensured and at 19:36pm the vote to have the Amendment voted upon was put and won by the Government 75-71 along the same lines as the previous vote.  The debate ensured and when the vote on the Wilkie Amendment to the bill happened at 19:52pm – the vote was again won with a 74-72 result – the Greens Brant voting for the Opposition.

In all that five odd hours of emotive crapola – Brandt and Katter were the only ones who flip-flopped between both sides.  It achieved nothing – deals were done to ensure the vote and when the Wilkie vote was in division – Pyne and Bishop were up with the Independents out of camera shot, but with the eyes of the whole House gazing in that direction – you knew that lobbying was happening.

The days proceedings was engaging – yet the outcome was yet again extremely disappointing.  If RUDD wants to again be leader – and had  he crossed the floor on the Morrison Bill vote – that would have been an outcome.  RUDD would have defined himself and Gillard would now be an afterthought.  The media would have run with Rudd’s decision on humanitarian grounds, the electorate would have championed his decision and the ALP would have been forced to accept what fucking dickheads they have been.

Look – I don’t support any off-shore processing.  I think with the demand for off-shore workers, skilled and unskilled to help with the mining industry – there was an opportunity to open up the immigration numbers.

In the previous Part I of this series of posts I advocated a 2 million immigrant policy.  I further expand on that now to suggest that the current 150,000 a year policy be increased to 500,000 a year over the next four years.   Have Australia visit the Refugee camps to lobby the refugees with skills and the want to resettle in Australia after a vetting process to determine their status.   There is obviously a lot more to this than explained hereto – but the general point is that we can accommodate more refugees if we want to grow this Nation.

After WWII the World open its arms – why is there now reluctance to do so – not just by Australia – but by most western democracies?  Is it a ‘muslim’ problem – if that has some connection then drafting an Australian Entry declaration is an easy solution – remember the separation of ‘church and state’ debate … if it’s racial motivated then those responsible need to be exposed.

It is time that Leadership took responsibility as opposed to lawyers acting as Leaders advocating debate and more debate that only gives ego merchants in Gillard and Abbott a platform to sell their sloth.

Wake up Australia.

________________________________________

Have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Link to Previous EYE-BALL Posts.

________________________________________

The EYE-BALL Opinion …

Advertisements

EYE-BALL’s Rookie Bookie – Weekend Footy preview – 29th June – 2nd July, 2012

EYE-BALLsRookieBookie
Title:
Weekend Footy preview –
29th June – 2nd July, 2012

Click here – to read previous “Rookie-Bookie” Posts:

This page presents Rookie Bookie’s opinions covering all things ‘Aussie Football’ across the 2012 season including AFL, League, Union and other sports mediums.  As at the beginning of April 2012 I have introduced a new format and a Gambling Index* – (GI) to help followers of the selections offered – further explained here:

*The Gambling Index – (GI)– is a cumulative return, where 100 is your base, initial outlay – i.e. Base = 100.00 as at 30th Mar 2012 – and the weekends wagering performance either adds or subtracts from that index.   A cumulative and weekly updated value of the GI is presented below.

  • 04th Apr 2012 – Value of GI = (+) 216.67
  • 11th Apr 2012 – Value of GI = (+) 393.67
  • 18th Apr 2012 – Value of GI = (+) 293.67
  • 25th Apr 2012 –  Value of GI = (+) 293.67 – no activity last week …
  • 2nd May 2012 –  Value of GI = (+) 290.00
  • 9th May 2012  –  Value of GI = (+) 340
  • 16th May 2012 – Value of GI = (+) 433.3
  • 23rd May 2012 – Value of GI = (+) 517.2
  • 30th May 2012 – Value of GI = (+) 492.2
  • 6th June 2012 – Value of GI = (+)  467.3
  • 13th June 2012 – Value of GI – (+) 497.3
  • 20th June 2012 – Value of GI – (+) 463.7
  • 27th June 2012 – Value of GI – (+) 363.7

25th Apr Update: – A couple of things –  I changed the Gambling Index after Cowboy questioned me on units. I reverted from base 100 to base 0. Now it is simply +ve or -ve. Hence base is 0. Therefore – 4/4/12 is +116.67, 11/4/12 is 393.67 (currently correct) as is 18/4/12, and this week unchanged (last week no bets). This week I outlay 100 for possible ?

State of Origin – (SOO) will be unique posts regarding gossip and possible selections, Snoopy writes for Queensland, League Leg End writes for NSW, Rookie Bookie is impartial.   A post on Olympics was posted as Comment on previous Weeks Preview – [ – linked here – see comment #2]

Update from last weekend – 22nd – 25thJune.

Betting

A serious wash out. Lost on Broncos/Souths, Lost on Saints/Titans and in the parlay Crows were not serious about their match against Nth Melbourne. AFL is simply killing me. Wests Tigers too are real jokes. Don’t take anything away from Knights and Tahu getting a treble. Back to basics.

Review

Some feel we saw 2 grand final previews on the weekend, Canterbury Bulldogs v Melbourne Storm and Collingwood Magpies v West Coast Eagles. That is nonsense. Both comps this year are using the same final series match ups and any team in the Prelimiary Finals simply need to play 2 impeccable 80 minute matches. Warriors taking out Melbourne last year is example enough. Hawthorne running a nominal 3rd played better against Geelong in the Preliminary final than Collingwood in the GF. So what. Selecting those 4 is hard enough.

Despite the churning caused by byes and SOO selection you do expect the better teams to show much more consistency. The only team that is really unable to show much right now is Penrith, and now I have said that, they will probably show Souths to be proper bunnies this weekend.

The Rugby Championship

My assessment is NZ $2, Australia $4.00, SA $5.00, Argentina $20.

Super Rugby Final

Chiefs –Highlanders (a) Crusaders (h) Hurricanes (a) too hard, two wins and a bonus point 67 points, win over Wellington absolutely mandatory. Most likely top 2.

Stormers –Transvaal (h) Free State (a) Rebels (h), predicted 68 comp points. Top 2

Brumbies –Force (a) Waratahs (a) Blues (h) at least 12 points, match against Tahs in Sydney critical, previously 27 – 6. 62 or 58 points. Conference Winner. 3rd spot.

Crusaders –Hurricanes (h) Chiefs (a) Force (h). Absolutely awesome against Highlanders, if they collect maximum points 15 they go to 66 points, just too hard to call. Would like to see them eliminated but just too unlikely.

Bulls –Free State (h) Natal (a) Transvaal (h). If they beat Sharks in Durban 61 to 63 points. Failure to do so race for bonus points.

Hurricanes –Crusaders bye (a) Chiefs (h) must defeat Crusaders, and season will be on the line. 50 to 51 points.

Sharks – Transvaal (a) bye Pretoria (h) Free State (h) everything rides on Bulls in Round 17, Maximum 59 points possible, a draw sees them eliminated

Highlanders – Chiefs (h) Reds (a) bye, 53 points at max. too big an ask.

Reds –.Rebels (a) Highlanders (h), Waratahs at Suncorp. Possible 59 points.

The market is framed Canterbury Crusaders $3.25, Waikato Chiefs $3.75, Capetown Stormers $4, Pretoria Bulls and Qld Reds $10, Brumbies $11 and Natal Sharks $21. Wellington is $101. Crusaders and Chiefs shorten, Bulls and Reds blow out in the betting. Said enough, Bulls need Sharks win in Natal, and Reds v Waratahs at Suncorp (Round 18) will be monstrous. Waratahs have got nothing to play for.

Crusaders likely 4th means first match in Christchurch, then two away matches, likely Capetown, possibly Hamilton. With final at the other (if they are good enough).

Tennis

Tomic seeded at 20 at Wimbledon  and Stosur at 5. Tomic beaten in 4 sets, in Round 1, Stosur defeated in Round 2. Australia does not have any players in singles matches in Round 3. We can only pray for our youth. Hewitt is upset getting a wild card into the Olympic singles, not getting a doubles berth “does playing all that Davis Cup, amount to nil?”

During the French Open my son commented how Stosur has a great record in Slam matches that go to 3rd set deciders. Match point this morning was lame.

Wimbledon Prices – Djokovic $2.50, Nadal $3.20, Federer $5.00, Murray $12. In the ladies Kim Clijsters is at $12 (in from $21) Sharapova $3 and Serena Williams $4 are favoured.

At the Olympics it is Djokovic $2.65, Federer $4.00, Nadal $4.75, Murray $6.50, Tomic $31.00 with Sam Stosur in the ladies also $21. Interestingly Kim Clijsters is at $8.

Olympics

July 17th can’t come fast enough

Weekend 29th – 2nd July. [Fri – Mon].

Super Rugby – Round 16

  • Highlanders (+3.5) v Chiefs (in Dunedin) My estimate $2.42/$1.75 Actual $2.30/$1.60
  • Rebels (+9.5) v Reds (in Melbourne) My estimate $3.00/$1.50 Actual $3.85/$1.25
  • Crusaders v Wellington (+9.5) (in Christchurch) My estimate $1.70/$2.42 Actual$1.25/$3.85 (It will be rugged defence, low score no more than total 35 points)
  • Force (+4.5) v Brumbies (in Perth) My estimate $4.00/$1.33 Actual $2.50/$1.50
  • Stormers v Lions (+15.5) (in Capetown) My estimate $1.40/$3.50 Actual $1.08/$7.00
  • Bulls v Cheetahs (+11.5) (in Pretoria) My estimate $1.50/$3.00 Actual $1.15/$5.25

Best Bet: 

Waikato Chiefs, ACT Brumbies

Value: 

Wellington Hurricanes,

At the margin:

____________________________________

AFL – Round – 14

  • Carlton (+23.5) v Hawthorn estimate market $2.50/$1.67 Actual $3.55/$1.30
  • Collingwood v Fremantle (+39.5) estimate market $1.67/$2.50 Actual $1.10/$7.00
  • Adelaide v Richmond (+17.5) estimate market $1.80/$2.22 Actual $1.40/$3.00
  • West Coast v Gold Coast (+70.5) estimate market $1.10/$11 Actual $1.01/$17.00
  • Essendon v Bulldogs (+30.5) estimate market $1.75/$2.42 Actual $1.20/$4.60
  • Swans v G W Sydney (+67.5) estimate market $4.00/$1.33 Actual $1.01/$17.00
  • Geelong v Port Adelaide (+44.5) estimate market $1.40/$3.50 Actual $1.07/$8.50
  • Brisbane v Demons (+26.5) estimate market $1.90/$2.11 Actual $1.25/$4.00
  • St Kilda v North (+20.5) estimate market $1.75/$2.33 Actual $1.25/$3.25

 

Best Bet:

Melbourne Dees???? (look at the starts, lowest Richmond, every favourite has shortened since early markets posted on Monday) Of the favourites far too short. Why would you back West Coast or Swans @ $1.01

Value:

Melbourne Dees

At the Margin:

Fremantle, Collingwood regain their prowess, Fremantle weak in the ruck. Fremantle happy to be the Giant killers

Grand Final Betting:

Hawthorn $3.25, Collingwood, $4, West Coast $6.50 & Swans $8

________________________________________

NRL – Round 17 – Split Round

  • Broncos v Sharks (+5.5) – estimate market $2.00/$2.00 Actual $1.55/$2.50
  • Eels (+2.5) v Knights – estimate market $2.11 /$1.90 Actual $2.10/$1.75
  • Souths v Penrith (+8.5) – estimate market $1.33/$4.00 Actual $1.28/$3.75
  • Warriors v Cowboys (+14.5) – estimate market $1.25/$5.00 Actual $1.18/$5.00
  • Canberra (+4.5) v St George estimate market $2.43/$1.70Actual $2.45/$1.57

 

Best Bet:

Really tough, Cowboys so weakened by SOO, Canberra have great record against Saints

Value:

N/A

At The Margin:

N/A

State of Origin:

My assessment Qld v NSW (+4.5) $1.60/$2.67 actual $1.65/$2.30. Both coaches playing tricks. Billy Slater don’t rush, Glenn Stewart named in the squad. Billy Slater named in the squad. Ryan Hoffman enjoys the bye anyway so there is no point in not bracketing him in the squad. Stuart wants Queensland to have to guess. Harrison will be fine. Several other uncertainties but Qld have been backed in. Since Monday NSW have been backed. Until you see the full proposition it is hard to assess.

Grand Final Betting:

Melbourne $3.50, Manly & Brisbane $6, Canterbury $7, Wests Tigers $7.50. I really thought Canterbury would be substantially shorter after such a comprehensive display. Maybe $5.50. Maybe they simply can’t afford to push Melbourne out to a more realistic $5. Canterbury are about 3 wins away from a finals berth.

 ________________________________________

Tennis

________________________________________

Soccer

________________________________________

Betting Summary

  • Australia to win more than 11.5 gold medals at London Olympics (2 Units) bet placed 19/5/12 @ $1.87
  • ACT Brumbies ($12) and Natal Sharks ($11) to win Super Rugby 1/8/12 (½ unit ea) bet placed 19/5/12

 

This Weekend

 

In the sin bin after last weekend, best bet is in Rugby. Chiefs need this win or their campaign falls to pieces same for Brumbies. Crusaders are expected to run up a big score against Wellington, I don’t think so. Stormers and Bulls both need the win. In NRL both Broncos and Sharks are without too many stars. AFL simply no value.

 

________________________________________

The Rookie Bookie …

EYE-BALL Opinion on – Immigration and Asylum Seekers Part III – Cause and Effect …

The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2
Title:
Immigration and Asylum Seekers
… Part III …
… Cause and Effect …
28th June 2012.

________________________________________

________________________________________

This ‘asylum seeker’ debate is and has always been a responsive policy action.   Australia is a land and a country build on immigration.  Since the Bush Administration went to war in Iraq in the early 2000’s the refugee problem throughout the muslim world has exploded.

In all Wars refugees displaced become a global problem – humanitarian efforts to house, feed, and protect these refugees has been the distancing policy of all Western Governments.  Australia is one of three Nations around the World that has a commitment to take in genuine refugees that make a small indent to the current 45 million displaced persons around the globe.  The USA take in about 100,000 a year, Canada is second and Australia third with a number around 13,750.    Any other Nations intake is less than 1,000 – and that leaves 99% still living in squalored conditions and desperate.

Some of these refugees have wealth and use that wealth to find ways to escape their lives in an effort to start new lives.   This is where the ‘people smuggler’ enters the equation – he seeks to make a profit to help these desperate people get to Australia.   Bob Katter was half right when he spoke to the House last night – he said – “… these refugees were surviving on $3000 type income – they come to Australia they immediately earn $35,000” – these are Bob Katter’s numbers.

Bob Katter does not get it – nor does most of the Parliament … they debate a way to stop the boats to try and prevent loss of life – they present a solution to redirect boats and their occupants and have them processed offshore.  These Boat people are the wealthy refugees jumping the que rather than live in refugee camps waiting their turn to be processed.

The likelihood is that these boat people have criminal, terrorist, and other activists among them.  Australia is right to be wary in the process of checking the bona-fide credentials of the refugees.   To do any less would be negligent and invite terror onto our Nation under humanitarian circumstances.

What can be done when faced with an angry electorate sick of seeing and reading about the tragic loss of life of these asylum seekers risking the sea voyage to get to our shores?  Redirecting them to off-shore processing is deterrent value at best.   It does nothing to help the 45 million displaced persons.

The UN does not have the financial resources to take care of and protect these refugees – it is their problem initially and up to them to find Nations who will take them in.  it obviously is not working.   The muslin ‘tag’ is a mistrust sell to the western world.  They have a right to feel that mistrust.  But the humanitarian instinct felt by ordinary people who see the loss of life creates an emotive response demanding Politicians do something about it.

Hence the charade of the last two days in our parliament.  It is a show – it is a mime – despite the noise and emotional offerings – they all know that there will be no outcome … raising point score cards on speech content and  deliverance by all the Members of both Houses is a complete waste of time.  They know it – they know that how much emotion pours forth – the vote will not pass the Senate.   This makes it an easy decision to call our Politicians ‘cowards’ – people not worthy to hold office – for if they are not prepared to cross the floor to vote their conscience it all accounts for nought … nada … absolute crapola.

The solution is in a complete review of immigration policy.  We are a Nation that has room – that has resources – that has a population that by in large are compassionate as revealed by the public outcry forcing this Government to take the action it has over the last two days.

Gillard is a dumb politician – she only has one eye in this debate – her way or the highway.   The fact that there is not an ALP caucus Member not prepared to cross the floor o such an issue rings loud and clear that Democracy is for sale – every vote in the House and Senate now has a price – survival for each and every MP – they dare not cross the floor, yet that walk would bring such dignity and public support that it could liberate all Members of Parliament and bring undon this illusion that Party Leaders are all god almighty and their will shall never be challenged.

Prime Minister RUDD came to power in 2007 and one of his first agendas was to dismantle the Howard Nauru solution to asylum seekers.  He and his Government believed there was a more humane process and instigated an on-shore processing policy.  Some 20,000 asylum seekers later has rendered that policy a monster failure.  Not on its intent – but in how the media and Opposition has created negativity on the costs and resources invested to maintain this policy.

Gillard since 2010 has promised to deal with the problem – the High Court bounced her and her Immigration Minister Chris Bowen off the court because the Bill they put up did not afford protection to the asylum seekers once they were under Australian protection.   It proved that Bowen is out of his depth and that Gillard has no understanding of the Law even though she is a lawyer by trade.

The cost since ALP came to power in dealing with the asylum seeker problem hs become a $1.2 billion cost as opposed to $20 odd million under the last days of the Howard term.

If there was any seriousness in stopping the boats – nd as Wilkie raised in the House last night – it has to be by having the peopel smugglers left with nothing to sell.   This is a World problem and cannot be solved without a UN and Member Nation solution.

In all of the debate thus far – very little attention has been given to the ‘queue jumping’ aspect these ‘boat-people’ are undertaking – for every one that does get into Australia – a genuine refugee in a camp somewhere else around the world is pushed back.   The ‘people smugglers’ troll these camps and seek out those with wealth and make the offer – given the conditions these people live in the risk is acceptable, they are prepared to die than continue to live in the camps.   Those without the ‘wealth’ to pay for the ‘dice with death’ in a different format remain and form part of the 45 million people who will live and die never having a chance to live their lives as we live our lives.

do you think George Bush, Tony Blair, and John Howard made contingencies for these war refugees when they made the choice to go to war in these Nations.

The ‘War on Terrorism’ has no winners – and most of the 45 million displaced persons is a by-product.   After WWII the world open its doors to allow immigration – why is it now refusing to do so.   Is it the ‘muslim’ threat – what threat, define the threat, fear in itself will defeat all – in the face of a threat or a perceived threat bravery can be the only option.  Sadly in this debate – bravery is being mistaken for cowardice.

________________________________________

Have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Link to Previous EYE-BALL Posts.

________________________________________

The EYE-BALL Opinion …

EYE-BALL Opinion on – Immigration and Asylum Seekers Part II – Dumb and Dumber – Politicians too scared to act …

The-EYE-BALL-Opinion-Header-2
Title:
– Immigration and Asylum Seekers –
Part II …
… Dumb and Dumber – Politicians too scared to act …
28th June 2012.

________________________________________

________________________________________

The House passed Oakeshott’s Bill with the Wilkie Amendment in the evening hours last night.  It was a full six hours of emotive debate that all who understand had never a chance of ever becoming Legislation.  So why go there – why give the appearance that this was essential debate over essential Legislation that had no chance of ever achieving anything at all.

To many these seemed genuine from the outset – but in following the timeline of events it has more to do with responsive policy as opposed to anything to do with a solution to the ‘asylum seeker’ problem.  Gillard was all about denying Abbott any semblance of a victory in the House.

The blame on this outrageous charade over a matter that Australians feel deeply about rests with the Independents and the Labour backbench’s who voted in favour of the Bill.

The Greens stuck to their policy, the Opposition caved and offered up off-shore processing except for the Malaysian solution – and Gillard and her Government yielded on the Nauru option.   If Gillard had of yielded on the Malaysian option the Bill with the amendment offered by the Opposition would have passed in the Senate and we would have had Law and a move forward to a solution to the ‘asylum seeker’ problem.

There are many in the ALP Caucus who don’t support the Malaysian option yet they voted for it.  This once again demonstrates why democracy is not at work in this Nation.  The Media in this matter are as useless as a ‘soft-cock’ – they flap around and create ambiance background – but they don’t ask the questions that need to be asked.

A simple question to ALP Members who are known to be against the Malaysian option needed to be asked why they voted the way they did.  They have to be exposed to be Party first and everything else a distant second.

The same can be said for the Independent Wilkie – he spoke of his horror at being forced to vote for a Bill with the Malaysian solution still a part of the Legislation – knowing that it would fail to pass the Senate.  There is no excuse for Politicians who do not vote their conscience and do deals to advance their own agenda’s as a compromise.

Constitutionally – any Governor General with Australia as the priority would be taking a close interest on what is happening.   Our GG has a conflict of interest – her son-in-law is a Member of the Cabinet and a mooted contender for the PM job.   What can she do – the Australian Constitution has this to say:

Australian Constitution

| Date: 28th June 2012 | Link to On-Line Australian Constitution. |

58 Royal assent to Bills

When a proposed law passed by both Houses of the Parliament is presented to the Governor‑General for the Queen’s assent, he shall declare, according to his discretion, but subject to this Constitution, that he assents in the Queen’s name, or that he withholds assent, or that he reserves the law for the Queen’s pleasure.

Recommendations by Governor‑General

The Governor‑General may return to the house in which it originated any proposed law so presented to him, and may transmit therewith any amendments which he may recommend, and the Houses may deal with the recommendation.

These clauses give the GG clear authority to reject the Legislation as the agent for the Queen if she does not agree with the Bill.

She will not do it – the Sir John Kerr dismissal of the Whitlam Government in the early 70’s was the last time the GG caused a double dissolution election.  It lives on in infamy as a part of Australia’s history and this GG is no John Kerr.   If the GG rejected this Bill if it did pass the Senate – it would send a clear message to PM Gillard that she is not a rubber stamp.  The GG has a responsibility independent of the role of Government – she must in all good conscience act as the Queen would want her to act.   If she does not – then her position is nothing more then ceremonial and this Nation should rid ourselves of this wasteful pomp and frill expense and luxury.   We need Leaders who are prepared to lead – not follow like sheep.

Since the Bill passed last night the media has focused on the froth and none of the substance. A bad Bull remains a bad bill – the urgency in which Gillard acted in reintroducing Oakeshott’s Bill that was on hold since late last year and not resurrected as a response to Abbott’s intention to introduce his own Bill to the House is a matter that the media have not pursued. If not for the two boat tragedies in the last week and the loss of life – the House would not even be debating this issue. It is the truest indication that this Government is all about responsive policies and will do anything to halt opposition strategy.

Gillard’s tone-change when she fakes her empathy for the loss of life is as transparent as a woman on the ‘rags’.   Given all the emotion on display in the House yesterday – Albanese, The Labour Whip, and Cabinet Ministers ensured that wavering ALP Members stayed loyal.   It was the same on the Opposition side with MP’s from that side of the House threatening to cross the floor to ensure that some sort of Legislation was enacted.

If ever RUDD had an opportunity to stick it to Gillard – his humanitarian instinct would have had him support the Opposition amendment – his stocks have fallen in the eyes of this author.

Southern Asia is the king of the ‘sex-trade’ industry in our part of the world – doing a ‘people-swap’ i.e. we send them 800 and they send us 4000 is at the grass root level a policy that lends counterparty support to people trafficking.

How can any person with a humane conscious vote in favour of a policy that has this as an outcome?

Member’s might want to hang their hat’s on the fact that they believe that the Legislation will not be passed by the Senate – that is a ‘bee’s-dick’ excuse – why not have the balls to cross the floor and make a statement to the Leaders – why sit steely in the camp protected by all those around you telling yourselves that ‘safety in numbers’ will give you some protection when a stroll across the floor will give us all hope that at least some of our Leaders have balls.

This is why the Australian electorate have contempt for this Gillard Government, and all politicians who are afraid to vote against their party allegiance.

________________________________________

Have your say where it counts: – contact your Local Federal Representative via the links below and let them know how you feel about this, or any other topic that you feel strongly about – or you can just post a comment below and let off some steam.

Link to Previous EYE-BALL Posts.

________________________________________

The EYE-BALL Opinion …

%d bloggers like this: