Malaysia ruling sweet music for some, dirge for others

BobM says:

08:33am | 01/09/11

The Canberra Press gallery is further Left than the Greens. What do you expect - rational thought?

Chris says:

09:06am | 01/09/11

The Canberra press gallery are the only people in Australia eligible to vote, max ?

Every day’s a school day.

RyaN says:

10:37am | 01/09/11

@Chris: because they know so much about the actual real world?

Chris says:

11:20am | 01/09/11

@Ryan

Perhaps so. They may have even already known that they’re the only people in Australia eligible to vote.

Did you, Ryan?

RyaN says:

11:36am | 01/09/11

@Chris: nope, I just thought they were the purveyors of glorious propaganda spouting leftist idealism in support of a commie government in an attempt to brainwash those who don’t pay much attention to politics into voting for our esteemed comrades!

emel says:

12:05pm | 01/09/11

Max Headroom : ‘whos’ you talkin about?
Mark Kenny quite rightly sinks the boot into the Govt. on this issue. Any policy that so obviously denies the rights of children and other vulnerable people is flawed and unsurprisingly now deemed illegal. You and the myriad of hardliners below might now be able to show us the way forward on this problem, yes?Maybe you can resort to Gillard bashing and vitriole from your comfortably wealthy position of being born in Australia instead of elsewhere.
‘your’ within your rights to an opinion, but keep it to yourself next time.
Refugees are people. The earth is a small planet. Flag down a cab to Real St. and accept the inevitable.

Chris says:

12:07pm | 01/09/11

@Ryan

More fool you, then. Luckily max has set you straight now.

RyaN says:

12:37pm | 01/09/11

@Chris: I know, what on earth could have lead me to that conclusion one wonders.

Chris says:

06:56pm | 01/09/11

@Ryan

Pig ignorance, by the sound of it.

RyaN says:

10:20am | 02/09/11

@Chris: I obviously need to tone down my powers of observation and stick my head into the sand, or how did you more eloquently put it, yes “pig ignorance”, obviously what is required to support the Labor party.

Chris says:

04:21pm | 02/09/11

@Ryan

I didn’t say anything about the Labor party. You don’t need to stick your head in the sand; you need to take it out of your arse.

Andrew says:

08:21am | 01/09/11

Don’t let anyone see the truth about our intake, it might increase their guilt.

dovif says:

08:57am | 01/09/11

Tina
Australia is taking in their fair share, we are the 51st in population and taking in the 47th most.

Pakistan takes in 1 mill, but their population is 177mil, while ours is 22mil, they have much better capacity and most of those they take in are Afgans, which shares their religion, language and culture

Why do you lefties always wants people to be miserable?

marley says:

09:10am | 01/09/11

Tina - that report is somewhat misleading.

Countries like Pakistan get far more refugees than Australia - but they don’t give them asylum or allow them to stay permanently.  They don’t generally pay for them either - the UNHCR provides assistance and support to refugees, and donor nations pay.  So you can’t compare the numbers in Pakistan or similar countries with Australia.

It’s much fairer to compare the industrialized countries which do offer protection and residence to asylum seekers - and on that front, Australia, though hardly a big player, does rather better, particularly as, unlike most other western countries, it accepts not only asylum seekers who arrive on its territory, but also takes people out of the camps.  Only a half dozen other countries do that, and Australia’s intake from the camps is actually quite a generous one.

Bottom line:  compared to other western countries Australia gets comparatively few asylum seekers but does more than it’s share with resettlement out of the camps.

Call it a mixed report card.

MarkS says:

09:16am | 01/09/11

Other nations have it worse. So what? Just another version of “but they are doing it too”.

It is not the numbers that worry me, but the fact that Australia, my home cannot control who lives in my home. Even one person, regardless of how nice & worthy they might otherwise be, who forces themselves opon me, is one too many.

Tina says:

09:26am | 01/09/11

Boys I am not saying I am happy about boat people. And I am no lefty either. And I prefer skilled migrants over people rioting on detention centres and queue jumpers. But Australia does have a bit of an obsession with refugees and when its reported there is another boat with another 100 people on it, then people get upset. I was born and raised in Germany and they dont even tell you about the refugees they take on. I think the media frenzy makes Aussies perceive things worse than they are in global comparison.

Andrew says:

09:27am | 01/09/11

“Why do you lefties always wants people to be miserable?”

They are coming here.

acotrel says:

11:29am | 01/09/11

@Marley
‘They don’t generally pay for them either - the UNHCR provides assistance and support to refugees, and donor nations pay.  So you can’t compare the numbers in Pakistan or similar countries with Australia.’
So you believe Australia should bludge on the UNHCR, and donor nations to support the asylum seekers?

chris via Washington DC says:

11:32am | 01/09/11

Tina, I would have no problem taking millions more refugees. Here is the kicker, like my father did when he came here on a boat in the late fifties(albeit “legally”)he was a pom-)),  he got off the boat and made a life for himself. No government help. My father was syrian so he didn’t speak english.

I have no issue with accepting more refugees, just don’t give them any help when they get here and after 5 or so years they can apply for citizenship. Most refugees in Australia’s history have made it on their own two and guess what…Australians love it.

marley says:

11:55am | 01/09/11

@acotrel - oh for god’s sake, can’t you do better than the straw man fallacy?  Geez man, you’re thick as a brick. Really.

What I said is that when you try to assess the relative burden to Australia of asylum seekers and refugees, you have to compare it with those countries which have similar systems to ours.  Surely you understand the principle of comparing like with like?

The countries which have the closest systems/situations to Australia’s are Canada and the US - both have on-shore asylum programs and offshore resettlement programs.  They have protection programs, grant permanent residence to genuine refugees, and pay the social costs of both the assessment process and of integrating the refugees into society.  The next closest countries are the western Europeans, all of which have onshore asylum programs and a few of which have offshore resettlement as well.  They too provide protection and support to genuine refugees. 

The situation in places like Pakistan is very different, and not comparable.  Pakistan doesn’t have a protection system, doesn’t grant permanent residence, and, by and large, doesn’t pay the costs of supporting its refugee population.

So, if you want to talk about where Australia fits in when it comes to asylum seekers and refugees, look at the North Americans and Western Europeans, and their figures will give you a sense of proportion. 

How you managed to take what I said and draw the conclusion you somehow reached, that I think the UNHCR should pay for our asylum seekers, is a complete mystery.  It certainly has nothing to do with logic.

Tina says:

12:19pm | 01/09/11

@ chris

I understand, but there should some balanced support for refugees as these people cant even communicate in English and need some guidance. But of course the should (and I am sure most are) self motivated to learn and integrate, but should have somewhere to turn to for assistance.

Deano says:

04:14pm | 01/09/11

Your right ! We should open the flood gates like England. We to have riots in Australia , oooh wait they have been confined to our detention centres.

chris says:

11:39pm | 01/09/11

@ Tina,
Its the guidance I resent. Why? Why the government interference?
As I mentioned my father was syrian, didn’t speak english and made it both here and in the UK (with no english he started a successful trucking company in both countries). ]

Hell, I moved to China for two years and didn’t speak the language, found hosting accommodation and work….I didn’t get any help and I didn’t speak the language. I simply holidayed there, loved it and applied for a for a work visa…I struck out on my own and made it there….

My point is, everyone will be different, but to ensure everyone is on a level playing field, no government intervention…

acotrel says:

07:47am | 01/09/11

@BarraBob
’ I wonder if they will apolagise to John Howard for his belief that the advice that he was given on the weapons of mass destruction was also sound.’

Might I politely point out that, if offshore processing of asylum seekers in a country with no signatory staus with the UNHCR is illegal in 2011, it was also illegal in 2002 ?  The only thing which has changed is the government.  There is a very good reason that we should never use Nauru again - it was the scene of a crime committed by the most cynical PM in Australia’s history.
Fact #1 John Howard is a solicitor by profession.
Fact #2 Using a writ of habeas corpus for prisoners to access the courts, is a basic human right in all liberal democracies.
Fact #3 In 2010 The rights of asylum seekers was recognised by the HIgh Court, and they were given access to the courts.
Fact #4 The Liberal party recognised the benefits of Pauline Hansons racist minoritty bashing, and used asylum seekers as political footballs.
Fact #5 Asylum seekers are still going to be used as election fodder by Scott Morrison.
Fact #6 In importance based on statistics, asylum seekers are almost a non issue, but Abbott is desperate for the LNP to grab back its birth right.
Fact # 7 The Manus Islanders have been salivating that the outfall of the LNPs politicking might be to their economic benefit.
Fact #6 WE ARE PLAYING WITH THE LIVES OF VULNERABLE PEOPLE !
Fact # 8 The ALP should not respond to Abbott’s devious cynicism ! ! !

marley says:

08:34am | 01/09/11

@acotrel -  court’s decision is a bit more complex than just the fact that Malaysia isn’t a signatory.  You might want to read it.

As for your “facts”, correct me if Im wrong, but Gillard is a solicitor as well.  And if the right of habeas corpus applied in Howard’s time (though that’s arguable in the situation) it applies in Rudd and Gillard’s time as well.  And if asylum seekers had a right to the courts in Howard’s day, certainly they had the same right in Rudd’s day as well.  And yes, asylum seekers have been a political football - ever since Keating implemented mandatory detention.  And if asylum seekers are such a non-issue, pray tell why didn’t the majority Rudd government change the mandatory detention policy and end the fiction of the “migration zone?”  And why, for gods sakes, if we don’t want to play with the lives of vulnerable, cannot you see that the entirely-ALP conceived Malaysian solution did precisely that?

This is a serious issue, and the ALP’s handling, from whichever perspective you look at it, has been atrocious.  And that, my friend, really is a fact.

TimB says:

08:42am | 01/09/11

“Fact #6 ....Fact # 7 ....Fact #6”

Fact: Acotrel has trouble counting.

The rest of the post was the usual anti-LNP drivel.

Heres another fact for you Acotrel. The ALP are a joke.  They are incompetent. They are useless. They are without a doubt, the worst government we ever had. And you still support them blindly. You are a fool of the highest order.

People may disagree with Coalition policies, but at least they got results. They were competent and they got the job done. The ALP can’t get anything right.

The independents need to man up and call for a vote of no confidence. It’s time to end this farce.

Max, of Rocky says:

08:45am | 01/09/11

acotrel

You must be shaken by all this, your facts have a serious flaw.

You have TWO ” Fact #6”

The second, between 7 and 8 - i agree

the first, I think Aussies generally would argue with you on the first part, the second part (after “but”) is pure and unadulterated excrement.

MarkS says:

09:24am | 01/09/11

@acotrel
There is a differnce between fact & opinion. Fairy stories excluded just because you wish something does not make it so. You would have been fair better to separate out your facts from your opinions.

Here is a fact for you, Habeas Corpus was the tool the bleeding hearts attempted to use when Howard sent the Tampa lot to Nauru. It was not Habeas Corpus but the wording of the Migration Act that the High Court used in the latest judgement.

jf says:

09:42am | 01/09/11

acotrel says:07:47am | 01/09/11

Fact #6 WE ARE PLAYING WITH THE LIVES OF VULNERABLE PEOPLE !

So true acotrel. And it is shameful.

When will the ALP do something effective to discourage vulnerable people from getting into decrepit boats and attempting dangerous journeys. How many people have to die for this woman’s blind ambition?

Andrew says:

09:57am | 01/09/11

Offshore processing is long gone. Nauru is spitting chips.

gobsmack says:

08:00am | 01/09/11

Glad to see you’re enjoying having the worst government ever.
No doubt you’ll be voting for them at the next election so you can continue to be amused.

acotrel says:

08:09am | 01/09/11

@ATM
‘Keep the Gillard hate alive and very well, this is the WORST government ever and there is no doubt about that!’

I don’t even feel that way about Tony Abbott, but if you think this government is as bad as they can get, wait until Abbott gets into power !  If he makes it you’ll really see something spectacular ! We should start stockpiling cans of food right now !

Deena says:

08:11am | 01/09/11

I don’t think Gilard cares about the taxpayer.

BTW ATM, I’m surprised the moderators allowed John A Neve to make that inappropriate comment about your niece the other day. The Punch needs to prevent perverts like John from attacking young children.

JT says:

08:45am | 01/09/11

Judging by the idiocy you display here day after day acotrel it would not surprise me at all to find you already are living in a shelter, with canned food, padded walls and the voices in your head.

Michael N says:

09:57am | 01/09/11

@ JT. Brilliant. And that too is a fact.

Against the Man says:

04:56pm | 01/09/11

@ acotrel - I’m pleased with your pathetic response and lack of insight. It shows I’m winning as usual

@ Deena - John A is MIA. Surprised? A coward never changes his spots And the Punch moderators can’t filter everything, but again, John A Seano attacks little kids in his comments, surprised?

Oh well RIP ALP….........

acotrel says:

08:13am | 01/09/11

John Howard is a lawyer, and he denied the a sylum seekers their basic human right of access to the courts through a writ of habeas corpus.  Oh well, we all make mistakes.  I’m glad he’s not a heart surgeon, he’d slice the pulmonary artery !

marley says:

08:46am | 01/09/11

“Immigration is a graveyard of political careers not least because the department consistently dishes up dud advice and leaves its ministers swinging in the breeze.”

Immigration is indeed the graveyard of political careers, and not just in Australia, but I’m not sure you’ve got the right angle on who’s to blame for that one.  Civil servants are there to do the bidding of their political masters, to provide the best advice they can, or the best options.  Unfortunately, immigration is a hot-button topic and politicians respond to situations like the boat-people one with off -the- cuff solutions that they think will track well with the media and the public.  And then they tell the Department to make it happen.

I suspect that is in fact what happened here.  I wouldn’t be surprised if the Malaysia “solution” was a thought bubble dreamt up by political staffers or by the PM and her mates, who then told the Department to “make it happen.”  And the Department, faced with an impossible task, did it’s best, knowing full well it would never stand up.  But they’re civil servants, not politicians, and they do the bidding of their political masters.

In his appearance before the Senate Committee recently, Andrew Metcalfe all but said out loud, look, what we’re doing isn’t working and we have to look at other ways of doing things.  He knows, and so does the Department, I suspect, that the politicians are making on-the-fly decisions that make no legal or fiscal sense, but he can’t get them to stop the politicking and actually try to understand the real issues, the real situation,and the real possibilities.

C1 says:

08:46am | 01/09/11

John Howard was a suburban solicitor (legal version of a GP) and he stopped being one to enter politics. As a result his initmate knowledge of the Law particularly as PM would be a little rusty as best. There is one thing about being qualified and then another about being practised.

I have many friends in the legal profession and all of them say the same thing - they have their relevant specialities and if a case goes outside of their experience, they do the right thing and refer it on to an approriately qualified colleague. That is what good lawyers do. Whilst in the main not short of confidence (arraogance in many cases), they are generally not affected by hubris and at least know when to let something go.

I think many of our elected representatives with egal qualifications need to remember that.

Penny Given says:

08:54am | 01/09/11

It would be very reassuring if the present over promoted career office clerks were to be rendered impotent until the next election. Their best period was during the caretaker mode negotiations with the Greens and Independents.

Aitch B says:

09:21am | 01/09/11

@acotrel

And nobody has given them that right since. So what does that say about Rudd, Gillard, Bowen, etc?

Your constant defence of this rabble Government is to simply prattle on about Howard, the Libs, Abbott, Morrison, etc.

Have you not the balls to actually make comment on or defend Gillard and Co. without your asinine ‘but they…..” rubbish?

Go on…. have a go….. surprise us!!!

Mouse says:

09:32am | 01/09/11

acotrel, gillard is a lawyer too. Obviously not a very good one though as she has had problems with keeping up with all the small details as far back as 1995. Like opening bank accounts for her boyfriend and not bothering to find out what they were for! She was young (35yo?) and naive and in love. She forgot the stupid I think. That’s her admission, so don’t come back at me saying it’s all lies by Abbott. Howard’s solution also never involved human trafficking, the threat of beatings or lack of access to medical treatment. Howard’s solution also stopped the boats coming and putting lives at risk. 
gillard has never stopped using the asylum seekers as a political football. Remember her on the patrol boat guarding our coastline, East Timor, saying Nauru was unworkable, opening old detention centres, building new ones, making deals with Malaysia, PNG, and the list goes on and on.  Why aren’t the asylum seekers that have court rulings go against them, some of them for the second and third time, being deported? Why are we spending $5k per day looking after a family that ASIO consider a security threat to our country?  That family alone has cost $1M, and they are a security threat. $5M a year on phone cards for the asylum seekers to phone home and lawyers?  WTF!!
Now the government wants to change the laws so they can resurrect the Malaysia deal!  OK, if you are the government and you can’t do something legally, get our laws changed to suit your agenda!  Ain’t that a great way to go?
My God acotrel, you give this useless government your unwavering support? You keep making excuses for their endless failures. You keep bringing up John Howard, he hasn’t been PM since 2007 btw, and bagging Abbott.  Is your hatred of him so bad that you wish us to continue with this incompetent, useless government?  The Liberal party could never, ever, be as bad as our current government. I used to believe that governments were voted in for a set term but I am just not sure if Australia can afford to wait for another 2 years if we keep going at this rate.

Brian B says:

01:05pm | 01/09/11

Acotrel, What is your point? Julia Gillard is also a lawyer and has also denied asylum seekers their basic rights by attempting to send them to a dubious and unknown fate is Malaysia. As you point out we all make mistakes, but this Government seems to get everything totally wrong.

By the way, John Howard is long gone. Time to move on old son.

acotrel says:

08:36am | 01/09/11

@thatmosis
’ Its beautiful to watch and really makes my day. ‘

I suppose it also made the asylum seekers’ days too!  It wouldn’t take much to improve it if you are the victim of a cynical racist political party ?

marley says:

09:13am | 01/09/11

@acotrel - “cynical racist party” - I think that’s a bit harsh.  The ALP might be entirely cynical, but it’s only partially racist.

RyaN says:

10:40am | 01/09/11

@marley: well they were the purveyors of the “white Australia” policy.

Andrew says:

11:21am | 01/09/11

@rYan

Do you dislike that policy?

RyaN says:

12:41pm | 01/09/11

@Andrew: unfortunately my reply was censored! In answer to your question,  NO!

RyaN says:

12:42pm | 01/09/11

@Andrew: No I dislike all forms of racism!

Andrew says:

01:46pm | 01/09/11

So you vote greens/donkey vote then Ryan?

RyaN says:

05:22pm | 01/09/11

@Andrew: who I vote for is my business.

marley says:

09:15am | 01/09/11

@Max - well, I think “unceremonious” captures the decision pretty well. The Court obviously decided to have no truck with this farce, and made it very, very clear.

HappyCynic says:

03:28pm | 01/09/11

Now now, pointing out the hypocrisy of political commentators (regardless of their moronic affiliations) isn’t allowed on the Internet.  Neither are facts

I for one am glad we have an independant judiciary that can give the government and the people a little smackdown when they get too big for their boots.  Its a sign that democracy still works in this country in spite of the increasing partisan bullsh*t people are playing these days.

Anna C says:

09:30am | 01/09/11

What do you expect from this government? They stupidly and arrogantly thought that they were on firm ground with this policy according to their legal advice and their own lawyers showed up to court unprepared and missing vital documents according to the judges.  This government has developed a track record for doing everything half-arsed. Everything they touch turns to shit.

Tina says:

09:34am | 01/09/11

It certainly does make you question their qualification for the job. That is generally a good question. What qualification should you have to lead a country?

TimB says:

10:13am | 01/09/11

“What qualification should you have to lead a country? “

Competence. I really didn’t think it was that big an ask. Apparently for the ALP it is.

Tina says:

10:30am | 01/09/11

Sure, competence. But obviously that was not quite what I meant.

Jim says:

11:23am | 01/09/11

I think ALP MP’s are just mouth-pieces for the hidden, murky faceless ones who call all the shots. I doubt any of them actually have any influence in their own portfolios.

Every response is scripted, and every decision comes from a ‘focus group’

AdamC says:

01:18pm | 01/09/11

I don’t think MPs should have to have any particular qualifications before entering parliament. MPs and, especially, Ministers are better when they are smart generalists rather than technical specialists in any particular area. I do agree that it is problematic when being comfortable in the ALP backroom viper pit is the primary qualification for high office in that party.

MadKat of Melbourne says:

02:46pm | 01/09/11

I do think that the Treasurer should have an economics, finance or business related degree though - economics is a very complicated business -

Michael says:

10:22am | 01/09/11

acotrel is a stooge, or a shill if you prefer.

Could be Julia’s dad.

NSW says:

11:47am | 01/09/11

Agreed Lemo. Perfect opportunity but even if they did this non issue would continue to dominate headlines because the people in this country are ignorant, bigoted morons.

Squeeze the Middle says:

12:36pm | 01/09/11

@ NSW

Calling Australians bigoted morons?  Does that make you a bigot?

I disagree.  I think Aussies are little more/less racists than other nationals. We just know we’re on to a good thing. I.e. it’s an issue of equity. Sharing Australia’s abundant wealth. Fact is, Australia is a nation of migrants. More so than many other nations that dare shake their finger at us. And how many Aussies are migrants fleeing nations that dare shake their fingers.

Don’t worry though because many forecasters pedict an Aussie pop pushing 40mil by 2050.  And global population will apparently plateau. Won’t that mean nations will compete for young migrants?  I.e. - we’ll get the migrants. But that’s not good enough for some.  We just want to use any issue to stick it to the man. Why is that? Compensating for something? Directing supressed anger? For an indirect gain like control of Parliament?

Tator says:

08:02pm | 01/09/11

RyaN,
don’t poke the bear with a sore head

RyaN says:

11:44am | 01/09/11

Why would Australia do that? Stopping dangerous boats and people smuggling has absolutely nothing to do with taking genuine refugees.
Sending unprocessed refugees to another country was a bad idea from the start, but that is a hallmark of Labor, bad ideas executed by union thugs.

Mouse says:

12:29pm | 01/09/11

Wouldn’t it be quicker and cheaper to grow a spine and just say “No more, we are going to play by our rules now!”? It would be a better look for this government too.

bemused says:

01:10pm | 01/09/11

@Mouse - We’ve done that, and it worked; Pacific Solution.

Mouse says:

01:36pm | 01/09/11

@bemused, I think Redneck was referring to the UNHCR convention and how we are obliged to follow their processes for refugees/asylum seekers and that’s what I commented on.
Totally agree with you in regards to the Pacific Solution, less boats, less risk to human life. Must have been a success, even gillard was forced to backflip and agree, ergo her Manus Is and PNG “solutions”!Funny about that hey!! :o)

Andrew says:

02:40pm | 01/09/11

I think me means that we can decide on who we classify and then take as refugees.

marley says:

02:59pm | 01/09/11

@mouse - we signed up to the Convention and agreed that we would grant protection to genuine refugees.  The processes for deciding who is a genuine refugee are entirely ours - and they’re frankly not very good.

Mouse says:

03:52pm | 01/09/11

It seems that the convention is used as an excuse sometimes to do nothing. How many times have you heard “but we are signatories to the UNHCR convention!” when there is a demand for some sort of action in regard to illegal entries? I am not saying deport them all, we have to protect people that GENUINELY need protection. Economic refugees do not fall into that category.
Do you know what the process entails and how they find out a person’s history with no ID and no way of knowing if the info that person gives is true? If the person is found by our judicial system not to be a genuine refugee, how many times should they be allowed to got back to court and back to court and back to court at our expense before they are deported? Once it is deemed that they will be deported, how long should they be held in detention centres? I am talking about ALL asylum seekers and illegal refugees and not just one particular group. 
This argument can go on, unresolved, for years as everyone has a different interpretation of the “refugees/asylum seekers/illegal entry” people and our obligation, as a human beings, to the welfare of these people as a nation.
I am sick of the bun fight with this issue from all parties and believe it’s time for them to grown up, sit down and work out a process or policy that is fully bipartisan and in the best interests of everyone. These are people for crying out loud and trying to score points from an issue such as this is abysmal. I just wish they would bloody well get on with it!
Well, have had my rant and feel better now…... :o)

josh says:

03:18pm | 01/09/11

Aboriginal ? Are you proud of yourself ?

josh says:

03:21pm | 01/09/11

We definitely cannot cope with anymore people, anyone in Sydney knows this.

hot tub political machine says:

03:43pm | 01/09/11

Sydney cannot deal with anymore people. As a country we have the most space per capita in the world.

Lloyd says:

04:17pm | 01/09/11

But not everyone lives in Sydney, Josh…we have a lot of desert, too…

RickY says:

04:27pm | 01/09/11

HTP, most of Australia is desert.As in unlivable.Maybe you should leave your inner city cafe & get out past the blue mountains just once & open your eyes.

GB says:

04:46pm | 01/09/11

@Lloyd. That was funny although I’m not sure you meant it to be. Yeah, plonking them in the middle of the desert should do the trick. Should we provide them with a copy of the “Beginners Guide to identifying Bush Tucker” and a mining drill so they can tap into the artesian basin as well? LMAO!!!!!!!!!!

marley says:

08:05pm | 01/09/11

Yeah, but I’ve heard there are places in Australia outside of Sydney.  Someone mentioned a place called Melbourne, and isn’t there a Brisbane here?  And a Perth? 

More to the point, what about places like Bendigo, Townsville, Newcastle, Albury-Wodonga, Albany, and even, god help us, Canberra?  What about all those regional centers that could do with a bit of oomph?

The alternatives aren’t just inner Sydney or a cattle station off the Gibb River Road.

Squeeze the Middle says:

08:02am | 02/09/11

Lloyd. Ever wondered why Australian’s feel cultural cringe when they travel? Because we’re not as good as we think we are and neither are they so backward.

Calling “Malaysia” a “shithole” “boils down to racism”.

hot tub political machine says:

03:39pm | 02/09/11

Ricky Y. Unlivable my ass. I should know – cuz I have spent plenty of time outside the “inner city”

Likes Joining Dots says:

06:27pm | 01/09/11

Adam, perhaps true about the silver lining, but you’ve now got me worried what Gillard has planned next week to get this story off the front page.

GB says:

04:27pm | 01/09/11

So it’s the opposition’s responsibiity to help formulate Australia’s border protection policy now is it Holly? Is that how bad this government is that they need the other side of politics to show them how it’s done? Remember that same opposiiton when it was in government had a border protection policy which was a darned sight better than the complete and utter failure we’re dealing with right now thanks to Rudd’s humungously colossal ego. Blame him, not Morrison & Abbott.

marley says:

04:30pm | 01/09/11

@GB - well, based on the debacle of the Malaysian “solution” I don’t think she can have been a very good lawyer.  Anyone with half a brain could see this coming…

jf says:

05:29pm | 01/09/11

marley says:04:30pm | 01/09/11

“@GB - well, based on the debacle of the Malaysian “solution” I don’t think she can have been a very good lawyer”

You don’t have to be a very good lawyer to work at Slater and Gordon. You just have to be a member of the ALP.

marley says:

08:07pm | 01/09/11

@jf - is that true?

jf says:

09:41pm | 01/09/11

marley says: 08:07pm | 01/09/11

“@jf - is that true?”

I’m sure it is not in the HR manual but Slater and Gordon and Maurice Blackburn have strong links to the ALP. Check out the resumes of some current parliamentarians and labor politicians.

GB says:

07:33pm | 01/09/11

I’ve got no idea of the veracity of your claim that boat arrivals increased in the first few years of the coalition’s policy Holly, but if you can provide some unbiased evidence, not some ALP/Greens/GetUp manifesto, to back up that assertion, it would be welcome. Even then it’s irrelevant as they did stop the boats by the end of it all did they not? Gillard has handled this appallingly but the real culprit in all of this, the megalomaniac, Secretary General of the UN wannabe, is the real person to blame. All in the name of feathering his own nest and currying favour with the UN. I can just imagine him sitting at home laughing his arse off over this. Those clamoring for the return of K Rudd have got to be kidding. He has only ever had the best interests of one person at heart, himself. Treating his Prime Ministership as a job interview/dress rehearsal for his real ambition is what got us into this debacle in the first place.

marley says:

08:15am | 03/09/11

@GB and Holly - boat arrivals increased under the first years of the Coalition.  The imposition of the Pacific Solution, combined with other factors, stopped them cold.  Then the numbers started to climb again.

Here’s the data from the horse’s mouth, so to speak:

http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/bn/sp/boatarrivals.htm