As a chartered aircraft carries Tony Abbott into Nauru this weekend he will have asylum seekers on his mind, but his first glimpse of the island should remind him of another type of refugee.
It could be that in 20 to 30 years the 10,000 folk of Nauru (maximum height above sea level: 65 m) will be climate change refugees looking for somewhere dry to live.
As the Opposition Leader lands seeking a pledge that under an Abbott government Nauru would again be available as a processing centre for boat people detained on the western flank of the Australian continent, the locals might be preparing a few demands of their own.
Would Australia accept the population of the 21 sqkm island should it be inundated by rising sea levels? That might be one.
But there should be other questions on other issues which the leaders of Nauru might ask. They will be keen for a renewed Australian presence there, but who exactly would that be?
Between 2001 and 2007, when Nauru was part of the Pacific Solution devised by John Howard’s government, the detention centre was overseen by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, and managed by the International Organisation for Migration, plus the Australian military.
Services were basic. One visitor in 2005 tells men certain bodily functions could only be conducted in the morning because that was when water was available for flushing. That might not have been standard operating procedure, but it was then.
However, there were other issues bothering the authorities.
“The Pacific Solution, including the use of Nauru, was a deeply problematic policy, both as a matter of principle and for those refugees and asylum-seekers affected by it,” a Canberra spokesman for the UNHCR told news.com.au last week.
“UNHCR is not aware of any proposal by Australia for processing on Nauru and as such we will not be speculating on this matter.”
A Bangkok spokesman for IOM said: ``I’m afraid that I can’t speculate on something that, as far as I know, has not been discussed by Australia and Nauru, let alone been proposed to IOM.’‘
So who would run a detention centre under an Abbott government? (It seems pretty certain the Julia Gillard Government won’t take up the option.)
“The UNHCR and IOM would be welcome. We have confidence in Australia’s ability to uphold our own human rights standards,” replied Liberal immigration spokesman Scott Morrison—another passenger of that plane - to an email inquiry.
Mr Morrison also said: “We have total confidence in the ability of Australians, working with the Nauruan Government to ensure that services, facilities, conditions and processes at Nauru would satisfy Australian human rights standards and the expectations of the Australian community.
“No one will need to be tagged to avoid getting caned in Nauru. If the IOM or UNHCR wish to be part of the arrangements on Nauru, they would be welcome, as they were last time we operated the centre.”
The Abbott aircraft passenger, who will include reporters, might also ask what Australia would have to pay to get the former detention centre functioning again. It might be a considerable amount.
Paul Maley of The Australian accompanied Mr Morrison on a similar trip during the August election campaign last year.
His report began: “About 20 broken-down dongas are all that remains of Nauru’s main refugee detention camp.”
Mr Maley further reported “lurid green scrub” had overgrown much of the area not taken up by demountables with boarded-up or broken windows. There were no power or water supplies.
“A staggering 90 per cent of the population is unemployed, making Nauru dependent on foreign aid, fishing licences and the dregs of its phosphate industry. The evidence of Nauru’s dilapidation is everywhere,” he wrote.
“Rusted car hulks festoon the roadside; many of the houses seem empty. Some lack windows, or even doors.”
That gives a pointer as to why the Nauruans might welcome a return of the asylum-seeker business, but it is unlikely they will not have conditions.
Last August, Nauru’s Foreign Minister Kieren Keke said the country would not tolerate indefinite detention, and would not forcibly repatriate failed asylum-seekers.
Meanwhile, the Government’s deal with Malaysia to take asylum seekers, which we first heard about on May 8, still hasn’t been concluded.
Despite Julia Gillard’s confidence earlier last month, there is no accruement for a swap of asylum seekers for processed refugees now in Malaysia. She spoke too soon.
That is why Mr Abbott and Mr Morrison and the reporters are flying into Nauru—to underline that the Coalition has a deal and the Government doesn’t.
Don’t think the Government wouldn’t be keen to upset the tourists by producing a pact with Malaysia just before Mr Abbott touches down on Nauru.
Facebook Recommendations
Read all about it
Punch live
Up to the minute Twitter chatter
@MickNeven the game is called rugby league not rugby. Just like it's cricket not croquet! Sorry I can't catch ya show.
Recent posts
The latest and greatest
Schapelle has done her time
Schapelle Corby has served more than seven years in Kerobokan prison for attempting to import 4.2 kilos…
Do women need to know when to walk away?
Opposition Leader Isobel Redmond has sparked controversy over her advice that young women should sometimes…
Who murdered the Arts degree?
Have we murdered the liberal arts education? That was the final question on Monday night’s Q&A…
Nosebleed Section
choice ringside rantings
From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments
Michael S says:
"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone
Change Up! says:
I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]Gentle jabs to the ribs
They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments
A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more
Most commented