Submitted by Shatner'sBassoon on Fri, 11/06/2015 - 19:48
AN ALL-ENCOMPASSING KALEIDOSCOPIC JOIN-THE-DOTS/ADULT COLOURING BOOK EXPERIMENTAL PROJECT IN NARCISSISTIC/ONANISTIC BIG PICTURE PARASITIC FORUM BLEEDING.
LIKE POLITICAL LIFE, PARTICIPATION IS WELCOME, ENCOURAGED EVEN, BUT NOT NECESSARY.
150 a year indo
but if they got here indo, wouldn't we just send them back to NZ? the law would provide the means.
unforunately your description wholey describes merely one of politics indo. is this a reasonable explanation for locking people up for years and then refusing their acceptance to NZ?
If you are a signatory to the UN
Then yes the refugees should be allowed to go to NZ
But as OZ govt is ignoring their obligations to the UNHCR they are LETTING LITTLE CHILDREN ROT ON AN ISLAND THAT HATES THEM
@Inzider 150 per year you might be right?, they never say that in articles though.
If the USA deal does get complete though, i think it will resettle pretty much every refugee, but i think we can all agree there is no certainty in that and you would expect more likely to only take a few hundred rather than the 1000+ .
I would have thought it would be a smart move to not completely turn down the offer, and if possible put in some clause black listing every refugee accepted to NZ from us from ever setting foot in Australia.
And then if needed just resettle them slowly to curb any trigger effect.
For further reference and common sense.
General Social issues: Rita Panahi & Lauren Southern
Indigenous issues: Jacinta Price and Anthony Dillion
Gender: Debra Soh.
Islam: Armin Navabi & Brigitte Gabriel
Population: Dick Smith
so NZ is willing to take 150 refugees, educate them, teach them english, train them, give them residency, and finally allow them to leave (if they even want) for AUS as viable members of the workforce and probably with already a few spending dollars in their pockets.
and we are turning this deal down. this is outsourcing 101. the government should be all over it. bah. morons.
It's interesting Indo D , that you refer to the Manus Island Refugees , as Refugees , but treat them like they are Australia's enemies .
Do you understand what an actual refugee is?
Because a few nationalistic right wing politicians and their supporters fear Australia being over run by illegal refugee , we make an example of them and treat them inhumanely , as an example of what Australians have waiting for anyone that mess's with Australia's border controls.
So you can talk as much as you like about whats right from a Right wing perspective , but our treatment of them is just a reflection of how miserable Aussies can be when it comes to diluting our social fabric , Aussie aussie aussie oi oi oi!
Nothing illegal about, another preface added for political purposes by conservatives ...
Sorry you obviously have no understanding of the issue.
Despite what most people think, the issue is about how we decide how we process refugees in general and who we give processing priority too?
(although it is also about border control, but lets try to keep it simple)
Is it right wing to believe all refugees should be treated equally and fairly when deciding who we process and resettle?
The reality is most refugees in this world don't have the resources to travel halfway across the world and pay people smugglers thousands of dollars, which in many of these countries is the equivalent of a year to many years of average wages.
Most don't understand this one important factor because we are privileged to a life in a developed country where most of us have the ability to travel and have a disposable income, so most just assume every refugee can travel halfway across the world and pay people smugglers thousands of dollars.
Any sane person can understand the most fair and humane way to process and resettle refugees is to do it as fairly and equally as possible and give as many refugees as possible the chance of a new life, we do this through various resettlement programs that don't discriminate and are run like a lottery type system where you enter and then hope you number comes up, resettlement programs are run in this manner because the simple fact is there is millions of refugees but there is limited resettlement places.
These programs are not just for refugees in camps they are available for any refugee or asylum seeker including the 13,000 in Indonesia waiting to get here, or the millions in countries a stones throw from where they have fled, all receive a similar chance of a new life as it should be.
This is contrast to the common misguided mainstream believe that I'm assuming you hold who believe priority should be given to the minority of refugees who can afford to travel and pay people smugglers, which like it or not if allowed would come at the expense of other refugees.
No these people don't deserve less help, but they also don't deserve more.
If you think treating people equally and fairly is right wing or nationalistic then I'm confused, end of the day we receive and process what our quota is set at per year, the issue shouldn't be about if we should or should not resettle refugees, and its not about race or religion, the refugees we accept are generally of exactly the same race and religion as those who have the resources to travel and pay people smugglers.
Again the issue is about how we do it and how we should priorities those who receive resettlement.
One of the main problems about this issue is two things.
1. the refugee convention we are signed to is over 60 years old and as relevant as an analogue black and white TV, it obviously needs to be updated for the modern world in which we live. https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parlia...
2. the UNHCR definition of what a refugee is is also outdated, i think this PNG politician explained it perfectly here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wd5ktqA3yBw
Fix these two things and we are halfway there to solving many of these issues that are a problem for Australia on this issue.
BTW. technically speaking there is about 50 countries signed to the refugee convention that are closer in distance to the areas most refugees come from middle east and north Africa, Australia is actually one of the furthest and hardest to get too countries signed to the refugee convention , start counting https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/505187992.pdf
Like I have said in previous forums
Heaps of refugees on Nauru are Iranian christians and their young families.
Most of which can speak English and have skills from teaching to underwater welding.
Having spent a lot of time with these people and their families I wouldn't hesitate to have them be my neighbour.
They are hard working industrious, respectful and polite. They do the best Barby kebabs ever. Priority should be getting the Nauru refugees sorted over the single males of Manus
Most want Canada or NZ as resettlement option as they are not keen on OZ at all.
"One of the main problems about this issue is two things".
?????? WTF hahahaha ... I'll take it there are two problems then and both are opinion rather than fact!
The law is the law is the law .... just ask Bumbling Joyce.
Oh yes GuySmiley/Floyds default post when he doesn't agree with something
That's "opinion rather than fact"
Can you prove it's not fact?
Maybe you need to actually read the facts
And if you want to believe it's just an opinion this is just a sample of others who agree, i could post more but you get the idea.
Australia remains a signatory to the UN's Refuge Convention. This convention requires Australia to act in certain (compassionate - my word) ways towards people seeking asylum.
This convention gives people the legal right to seek asylum. All fact.
Whether the convention remains relevant in today's world is open to debate/opinion, however, until the day Australia withdraws itself from this convention it remains law and the law deals with facts not opinion.
Australia has not breached the Convention. The asylum seekers sought protection by Australia, and they were provided that in the majority. The fact that the protection is occurring overseas is principally irrelevant.
That being said, keeping people in a camp for well longer than they deserved and now denying their right to live in NZ is disgusting, its just spiteful.
I think it's interesting that media seem to fail to report the facts
The RPC where refugees are camped out has closed as per court order, it would be illegal for the government to continue operating here.
The following exists to accomodate its residents:
East Lorengau refugee transit centre has services for 400 refugees,
Lorengau House has services for 300 refugees if required.
Hillside Haus has services for 198 non refugees (only 150 rooms required).
All locations have essential service connections and air con, sufficient rooms and shared kitchen arrangements.
Cooking and other life skills classes are available for everyone.
Security is available at all three locations.
Service provision support for PNG for contract management of garisson (meals for non refugees), refugees are provided funding for personal items and food cooking in their own kitchens.
Vehicle/bus services between centres and town are provided.
Anyone in an RPC receives three meals per day, various beverages, education, laundry facilities, cigarettes, internet, and private medical care including psychologist, psychiatrist, health nurses and counsillors and $88 USD/week allowance.
Anyone living in the community has access to similar services but with $174 USD/fortnight allowance.
Healthcare for all on Manus is provided at East Lorengau transit centre
Other general support is provided (including employment services) to ensure ongoing support to PNG, and returns arrangements for anyone who elects to return home.
166 in Manus of the 800 have been rejected as refugees (ABC reported 200 last week?) once returned they will receive a $25,000 USD resettlement package. (id imagine in places like Sri Lanka that would go as far as in Indonesia, $25,000 USD will get you a modest house in a city, and a very nice house and decent sized land in country areas, you could even buy two decent houses with that much in many areas)
To further put those above dollar figures in perspective the current min wage in PNG is 140PGK ($43USD) so after all their basic living expenses are paid for they receive double the min wage to spend on what they like.
This may mean nothing to most people, but i personally have many friends in Indonesia that live in villages without toilets or one between many people, all water is from wells must be boiled before drinking, a few hours electricity from generators at night for electricity, sure don't have AC, I've had two friends die from birth complications because of lack of access to medical care, and know of many people that have died from simple and preventable disease or medical conditions, there diet is poor and based on basic staples and fish and if there is storms or no fish, its staples like rice and sago only.
The point being hundreds and millions in this world live in far far worse conditions and i think its safe to say most locals on Manus would also live in far worse conditions.
I think its safe to say most refugees in the world especially in refugee camps live in far worst conditions (although have to say after watching a docco the UNHCR run camps are much much better than you would expect)
Really Manus and Nauru are exactly that refugee camps, with refugees waiting for a new life, and some of best conditions in the world for refugee in limbo.
BTW. Just another interesting fact, Indonesia also has detention centres about 13 overflowing with refugees, that are as you expect, overcrowded, dirty, and third world basic, no mod cons like AC.
LNP illegal imigrants simply swiped perimeter plans from Super Ministry for mass breakout.
The Canberra Correctional Compound detainee's boat is half across the ditch nearing asylum.
The Bar is tipped to sue Super Ministry over loss of sacred cash cows.
Oz dollar seems to have vanished along with coalition of aliens. Dissolve Parliament already!
yes Donald Indo , it's all fake news , believe out Government , and using Indo as a comparison to how we treat refugees , well they are 3rd world country doing their best , we as Australians have made the point that we will treat refugees like criminals , and all that shit about treating them equally , ahhhhh
Fake news is different to failing to report the facts or just leaving important facts out, the reality is certain things sell stories better or create more clicks and even ABC and SBS are part of this landscape now.
To be honest until the other week i had no idea there was refugees at Manus living in the community and this option was open to all, and i bet you only learnt that from my post or link.
Many people don't even realise Manus has been an open centre and that everyday for over 18 months hundreds of refugee everyday have been moving freely in the community.
Oh yes "all the shit about treating people equally"....sorry how right wing of me to want people to be treated equally and fairly.
Anyway speaking of Donald the real irony here is those that have refused to leave the old centre have probably just greatly reduced their chances of getting to the USA, i think chances are they just went right to the bottom of the resettlement list, I'm sure we will see Nauru refugees get resettled next and even the 77 who have moved to new facility's and i think we can agree its unlikely Donald will stick to his word and resettle over 1,000 so if you are not near the top of the list they really do risk missing out, Cambodia could be looking better and better everyday.
A very good friend of mine has actually visited the Manus facility , one of the top journalists in the country , so I have a bit of first hand knowledge , and what the LNP is telling the world is just not true , as if any of us would ever believe a politician !
Would you like your family members to have to go into a Lotto draw ?
It really shows how much more right wing Australia is than Trump's USA , when we have to rely on him to clean up our mess!!
Speaking of "The Donald", two election results in the US this week were resounding kicks in the arse for the creten or is the cretin? ok both equally apply here. Mid term elections next year will most certainly be interesting.
Name a single tangible way that your day today is any different for Trump having been elected.
I'll name one, my day now has a little hope, as saudi arabia is finally doing something about terrorism, but we don't hear about that either
Not so much fake news, more so filtered news. And the orders are coming from the top, the very very top. The very very very top
It's no wonder the minions are freaking . Their echo chamber isn't totally self inposed
Been moving that way for at least three years, since the new Prince whatever-his-name is starting assuming power from his old man King whatever-his-name is. Long before Trump was on the scene.
Speaking of cretins I saw Malcolm Roberts on TV last night campaigning for the seat he is contesting for the Qld state election. The pea brain was asked about One Nation's energy policy. He gleefully stated they want the clean energy target and fund abolished and a new coal fired power station built. When asked who should build the coal fire power plant he stumbled out that "he wasn't across the detail of the policy" but "wanted the state government to build and owe it".
That is, I'm too lazy or stupid to know my party's policy but I willing to guess that the state should build and owe a new multi billion coal power plant .... yep, that should really send a powerful message to the two major parties about the apparent 3rd force in Australia politics. Spare us but then again I guess people are stupid enough to vote for the fucktards ....
If only LNP and Labor were as lazy .....then we wouldn't be looking at committing $1000,000,000.00 of borrowed money to provide welfare for a family of Indian coal mining magnates and a labour opportunity for 2000 Chinese ....at the expense of the GBR of course.
PS Drove through Ipswich today and saw three women with flaming red hair ala Pauline .
It's a thing !
Off course he has Sharkman and journalist are a great reliable source of information also that never have agendas and bias.
I have more chance of believing this guy
"Name a single tangible way that your day today is any different for Trump having been elected."
To be honest i thought it was funny Trump got elected until North Koreas started doing crazy shit lately.
Then i felt a little fear knowing he has to deal with the situation, there was one day where it hit me, and my heart sunk.
I Had a bit to do with a detention centre for a while and had the same experience,
One of the detainees crushed in the skull of a guard with a large lump of concrete he'd painstakingly broken up for that very purpose.
Did you really Blowin?
Or are you just taking the piss with the "i did" or " I have a friend comment" ?
To be honest i hate these type of comments that either paint them as all great nice people or all pricks
Im sure just like any group of people you have nice people, bad people, cool people, complete F wits.
Like the 77 that originally moved to the new centre, are probably really good people that may not agree with the others causing trouble, and then you are just going to have those who follow the pack, and then there is obviously a few that are just complete trouble makers.
BTW. PNG has given them 48 hours to move or will be physically removed.
If i could, id be putting money on it that a few will refuse to move on and will physically need to be removed, then refugee advocates etc will report that they were abused and violence was used etc.
It's all been scripted and getting physically removed would be exactly what they want.
True story , Indo.
Contrary to what some clowns would have you believe , everything i put on Swellnet is true.
Was at Port Hedland.
Fuckers planned a disturbance, spent a while breaking up the end of a footpath then passed the pieces up onto the roof of the common room and started raining them down amongst the general furniture throwing bullshit.
Old mate waited till a guard was straight below him and cracked him.
If an Aussie did that society would disown them.
is this tangible enough blowin?
im sure Mr Pruitt will find lots in common with some of our backbenchers.
Fair enough Happy , you got me.
The cheezel president trod that all over the living room carpet didn't he.
"Name a single tangible way that your day today is any different for Trump having been elected".
Your point? Do we all need to be personally affected before we can have a view on anything? If so, some of you must have a shit of a life daily/weekly tormented by Islam, refugees and Aborigines. But to answer your question I have had a very healthy distrust of American foreign policy since Vietnam, a war that sadly touched my broader family and their friends. If you want to worry about war between America and North Korea and if American foreign policy history is any guide put the mortgage on Trump starting it.
Finally, I may have missed it but did you address @sheepdog's point from last week that highlighted you want Labor to be more like Sally McManus yet you say you vote One Nation.
Keep voting Labor , Guy .
$ 5000,000,000 .00 thrown away by the Gillard government .How many schools and hospitals does that equate to ?
But....they speak so eloquently and their website is fabulous , they couldn't possibly be a collective of talentless career sops gaming the system could they ?
Actually , they're worse than that .
They're useless bastards that took the only political party that ordinary Australians could rally around and drove it to ruination , leaving natural allies ....such as you and I Guysmiley, ....divided and confrontational.
Worse than useless.
he was actually the editor and political editor for the Age , has won every real Journalist award in Australia , so for once , as it was first hand stories , I believe him and as for that guard story , well that's way more reliable !
You've read that incorrectly Blowin. Julia Gillard had a minority government with an opposition leader blocking every move who rejected any consensus that may have advanced the nation for his own political gain. Part of that was energy policy.
It doesn't matter where you sit on the climate change spectrum, Blind Freddy can see which direction coal is heading and there is little that can be done. Our politicians should've anticipated those changes, as many astute scientists/economists did, and prepared an enrgy mix for the transformation. To our great loss, just when we needed bipartisanship we had a deeply ideological politician in opposition and unstable government in power.
The Liberals were being opportunistic criticising compensation, because those fall backs were only in place to placate Abbot and Greg Hunt who were prepared to do anything to stymie Gillard. Note that Turnbull as opposition leader supported Kevin Rudd's ETS. Note also Peta Credlin's recent admission that Gillard's 'carbon tax' wasn't a tax at all. "That was brutal retail politics" she said blithely.
The worst thing isn't the $5bn gone up in smoke but that we still don't have a coherent energy policy and as long as Tony Abbott has a voice in parliament I don't think we ever will.
Coal isnt trendy anymore but blind freddy should check our biggest exports. Itll be around for a hundred years to come. We have no issue banning uranium but coal is all fine. A government with vision and a spine would address this and plan for the jobs crisis of killing off the coal mines if its allegedly dying. It wont though. Not much point trying to develop a credible energy policy with that white elephant standing in the corner.
Abbott was a ruthlessly negative opposition leader but bitching shorten isnt any better. This citizenship saga is just time wasting bullshit.
Guy - It's much easier if I just repost this from earlier in this thread. It's my wish list for Australian politics . As I've said many times , I have no love for One Nation. But I will say that I have great appreciation of their stance on limiting immigration and reinstating nationalisation of infrastructure and maintaining sovereignty over Australian soil.
They are my primary beliefs and Labor has shown no interest in any of these until very recently. The main one is immigration though.
I'm not for a big Australia at all.
Blowin wrote: Halt foreign ownership of real estate...all forms .
Limit population growth through restricted immigration .
Halt or extremely limit the use of imported labour in Australia .
Prioritise spending on Health, welfare , education.
Subsidise tertiary education.
Discontinue the privatisation of government functions - transport, ports, education, health and welfare.
Nationalised infrastructure spending that produces exportable products - Oil/ Gas , mining etc. Achieved through a commited and non politicised sovereign wealth fund that is accumulated as a result of an annual flat rate tax payable by every Australian citizen.
An Australian constitution guaranteeing freedom of access for individuals to natural resources eg fishing, hunting.
Complete transparency, limitation and curtailment of political donations / lobbying.
Political sphere should consist of - true democracy : continuous referendum style establishment of the desires of the Australian people. People often denigrate policies as being " populist " - isn't that the hallmark of democracy , to reflect the will of the majority ? Constitution / laws established through plebiscite .
Removal of the relevance of individual politicians from consideration - political parties should be faceless, though not unaccountable . Same as every other government department. Make people vote for policy, not projected personality. This could be achieved by a regularly scheduled release of each parties / independents stance on a range of issues displayed in a matrix format for the easy comparison / contrast with each other. Political sanctions as deterrence towards failure to follow the nature of the stated policies .
Dedicated sovereign partnerships with all approved foreign investment in Australia.
An opposition to the acceptance of free trade agreements particularly those containing an ISDS clause.
A focus on the unity of Australians - ie the sustenance of the common language .
Removal of dual citizenship options.
Tightening of tax loopholes for transnational companies . Limited deferral of tax obligations as a result of capital deduction.
Flat rate of tax commencing and ceasing at minimal and maximum earnings respectively for individuals.
Removal of state governments and bodies.
Foreign aid to be concentrated on directly neighbouring nationalities.
Increased antitrust legislation.
All the above is of course conditional on approval by the constant plebiscite process that I advocate.
How the tide of political corruption would be prevented from being spread from the individual power of the current politicians to the diluted, though accumulatory power of the plebiscite approach is beyond me.
Though you can guarantee that if there is political power it will be purchased by those with power , one way or another.
Australia should resist all efforts by non -representational ,transnational bodies to subvert the democratic prerogative of Its citizens as a primary concern .
PS Heals - duly noted and well said.
Politics is dirty and our system of democracy flawed. Whoever we vote for we are in the shit, only the depth changes. The way I see the world voting for a Hanson or a Trump is putting you up the very deep end, lets say up to your neck in it. To continue the analogy voting for Labor or Liberal might see you knee to waist deep, the Nationals chest deep and Greens from calf to chest deep depending on how tolerant you are of some of their policies. Its a messy business.
I voted Labor for years and they're drifting further from the way they were or should be.
Continuing to vote for them is just reassuring them that they're on the right path.
Theyll only pay attention when they're losing votes.
I can understand the frustration but take a look at the context. Labor were victims of their own success following the Hawke-Keating revolutions. They unshackled the working class, allowed upward mobility, greater opportunities etc...in effect dissolving the very consituency that supported upon. Theoretically the great Labor project was over.
Exept it wasn't, Labor simply lost the means to organise their voters - the unions - and Howard rebadged the lower classes 'Howard's Battlers'.
Takes time for a party to acquire new values and Labor adopted some from it's newly prosperous supporters and some traditional ones - and ill-fit that was bound to fail.
I have no understanding of politics through the 90,s i was young and couldn't give a rats.
But I'm always surprised when people speak positively politically of that era especially Keating era?
I mean for me and those around me it was hard times, i didn't care that much as wanted to just surf on the dole, but unemployment was ridiculously high, the building industry was dead, and interest rates were ridiculously high, where i live people where virtually giving away blocks of lands because it just wasn't worth paying the rates and i remember even a big auction of at least twenty properties from bank foreclosures or whatever there called.
So what am i missing?
indo, the Hawke-Keating government made numerous essential economic reforms. The previous coalition government, particularly Howard as treasurer, had had their heads in the sand. The resulting economic boom resulted in inflation hitting 9%. The reserve bank were too slow in raising interest rates so when they did, they had to do so fiercely to have any impact. Hence "the recession we had to have". Keating has always maintained that had the reserve bank acted earlier the recession could have been avoided.
Another interesting read from yesterday,
"A Manus Island refugee was arrested for allegedly trying to strangle a female doctor with a plastic bag and punching her in the face after receiving treatment at a medical centre run by the Australian government."
Its an interesting scenario because right now the reserve bank is arguing if the government doesnt act on the housing bubble there will be a bust and a recession will follow. No doubt if it does pop future governmemts will blame the reserve bank again. Government policy dictates spending and inflation and the rba only moves the interest rate to address inflation. Horse before cart or cart before horse?
Gaz the reserve bank now has a clearly defined inflation target range. If inflation rises out of that range they will lift interest rates. The real problem in recent years has been that they struggle to keep it above the lower boundary, so deflation has been more of a concern.