Under the gum trees, the Greens declare fightback on refugees
|
“It’s tremendously disappointing that we’re here again today fighting the same old battles that we thought that we’d won following a change of government,” said Victorian Senate shoo-in Dr Richard Di Natale as the Greens launched their refugee policy this morning at the tastefully rebuilt Flagstaff Gardens Bowls Club on the fringes of the Melbourne CBD. Against the odds, Di Natale said, Australia has been dragged through another unedifying and internationally embarrassing debate that was meant to have been put to bed with Pauline Hanson’s move to Britain. But all was not lost. “The good news is the Greens are here,” he declared, in the amiable bedside manner he had greeted scores of patients over his medical career.”The good news is we are the antidote to all this discussion.” Indeed, if Julia Gillard has been accused of self-consciously checking off a list of prickly issues to clear the decks for an imminent election, then the Greens in Melbourne have been gifted a similar checklist in reverse. Every recent Labor announcement on the RSPT (political economy), the ETS (ecology), the boats (humanity) and gay marriage (identity) has played directly into the party’s hands. While the federal duopoly has used persecuted boat people as a “political football”, chimed in Senator Sarah Hanson-Young, the Greens were issuing a policy that was committed to a “long-term, practical and humane approach”. “Unlike both the major parties we’re not interested in a race to the bottom on this issue,” she said. Still, the marble floor, the Greens-branded plasma screens and delicious optics of the party’s two leading local lights will no doubt get the circulation pumping through the tofu-clogged arteries of Melbourne’s bleeding hearts. For the Greens, and especially Melbourne hopeful Adam Bandt, the issue is an slingshot to the top of the polls. Not that they were letting on. Boats were “not an issue”, Hanson-Young said, and the Greens were simply channelling Thomas Paine by employing their own Bob Brown-approved version of common sense. Bandt attributed the benefits of boat people in Melbourne to the dining benefits provided by Lygon Street, Carlton (pizzas) and Victoria Street, Richmond (pho) that would have been lost to Nandos forever were it not for WWII and Vietnam. But the media triumph complete, what was in the policy? This would have been one of the easiest documents for the party’s strategists to craft, given that the answers on the non-issue have been apparent for 10 years. The party would reprise its “community-based approach” for on-shore reception centres, the document declared, that are nothing at all like razor-wire jails. An $8 million asylum-seeker support fund would help community organisations and the party would take the lead of the Refugee Council in increasing the nation’s annual intake to 20,000, with an extra 8,000 plucked from Indonesian camps. Children would never be held in detention, which would require the release of the current 498 minors currently in camps, and a judicial review process would let asylum seekers call in the courts to rule against their detention. The party would abolish the Christmas Island and Curtin detention centres, with asylum seekers perhaps allowed to reside in those welcoming Carlton terraces with “refugees welcome here” signs in the windows. Some execrable questions from a journo holding an MTR microphone about the possibilities of the Greens’ very reasonable policies “opening the floodgates”, and another from someone in a brown jumper curious as to just how many “less boats” would set sail under the Greens’ policies, underlines just how ugly things could become in the ‘burbs. But the urbane trio didn’t appear concerned. As the mostly broadcast media pack broke up to file their soundbites, Bandt, Hanson-Young and Di Natale decamped for photo ops beside the mandatory green gum trees. |
|
|
|
19 Comments
“Bandt attributed the benefits of boat people in Melbourne to the dining benefits provided by Lygon Street, Carlton (pizzas) and Victoria Street, Richmond (pho) that would have been lost to Nandos forever if it were not for WWII and Vietnam.”
It would be eminently more sensible for our government to continue the past tradition of only invading countries with great cuisine. FFS let’s pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan pronto and launch a strike on Morocco!
Wobbly I would add that maybe we should accept people from countries that are really good at sports we aren’t. Open the doors to our football playing South American friends. Ethopian and Kenyan runners. Maybe some more eastern european tennis players. Even some chinese gymnasts or divers.
Not sure where that leaves the Iraqi’s and Afghans.
Any Sri Lankans should be taken to the nets to see if they can bowl a decent doosra.
I’ll vote for anyone who’ll poach some Argentinian Props for the Wallabies starting XV.
New Zealand “Americas Cup” boat people anyone?
What we are all still whinging about is 6378 people in two years at an average of 8.6 people per day that we have wasted $300 million locking up and then letting out.
It’s all a complete disgrace and absurdity.
How about we just let the boats come and then deal with it, like every other country pretty much.
Split the $200M of the $300m quoted above among enough swinging voters in marginal seats to shut them up, plus a nice earner to the shock jocks and we save $100m and Bobs your uncle!
Like your thinking, Kevrenor. You could set up a television station which only broadcast to the rewarded swinging voters’ plasmas, convincing them that we’d stopped the boats, just like we did before.
Uh-oh, someone seems to have had that idea already.
It ain’t funny, Andrew. For the men and women who lead and aspire to lead this nation to tell the masses (the voters) that the arrival of a few thousand asylum seekers in boats is a threat to our border security is shameful. This episode is a disgraceful commentary on the character and status of this nation. There are some whacky guys and gals among the Greensm okay, but by Christ they’re correct on this issue and anyone who cares about Australia’s future should support them.
@SHEPHERDMARILYN - As usual, I agree with you. I watched the East Timose President last night on Lateline, and once again thought, what a compassionate man he is. After what we’ve done to them and almost as bad or worse, allowed to happen to them, he is a beacon of what true compassion and commitment is. I don’t think any rep in our govt could conduct any meaningful discussions with the PM of Timor Leste - they just don’t have a clue - not on the ‘same page’ as the saying goes!
The Prime Minister of that country has also spent time in jail, fighting for the freedom and dignity of his people - while we’re such a cossetted and spoilt bunch of brats, bellyaching over some strangers who are traumatised. No wonder you swear! You must just get so dispirited and disgusted with the excuse for positive discussion in this country! I despair too, but there are people more important and in need than my emotions? Perhaps one day, we’ll have a govt run by human beings, rather than for the big bucks and selfish personal goals - at the expense of others?
In the meantime, please use your links with these poor people to pass on my best wishes and support! Those I’ve been privileged to meet via my friend are such a wonderful and brave group of young people - I’ve been honoured to meet them! I feel very sad and despondent by the bigots and racists! One day????
I oft wonder if the average Australian lives in as much fear for their wellbeing and life as does the average resident of Afghanistan, Sierra Leone, Iraq or Sri Lankans?
Perhaps a few of the tabloid journo’s and shock jocks should embark on an exchange program (few weeks should do it) to these countries? If the shoe was on the other foot?
@VINCENT MATTHEWS - I’ll assume that by “wacky” you mean compassionate, caring, intelligent, future-thinking?
We demonise boat people first, then we try to ‘do something about it’. The damage has been done.
People would rather agree for a new detention centre than for spending money on resettlement programs.
I strongly suspect we are up to a new detention centre to be built.
Who is responsible for the money mismanagement in this country? How many detention centres can we afford? Shall we have a public debate on this one?
While I love a positive article about the Greens and I also like one that is well written, Andrew Crook demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding about the Greens. “This would have been one of the easiest documents for the party’s strategists to craft” suggests that for the Greens, this is just another issue to be gained or lost from, just another political point. That isn’t how the Greens work, they don’t craft policy for political advantage and it isn’t written by faceless and nameless back-office staffers. Policy is the work of the members, is discussed and fought over in party meetings around the country. Unlike the ALP and the Libs, the Greens not only know what their principals are, they also write their policies in-line with them and stand by them.
Good God almighty, the Greens policy is sheer lunacy!
@Sharon Hutchings
“you mean compassionate, caring, intelligent, future-thinking”? Yes but still very much naïve and most definitely “wacky” (eg the Hanson comparison by daft uncle Bob).
Don’t get me wrong, on this single issue I fully support the Greens general position and am ashamed to be a Labor supporter and an Australian (the ‘race to the bottom’ between both primary parties is sickening beyond belief). This said, the Greens are still a fringe eccentric party of ‘eco-mentalists’ that while having a few good ideas would bring the nation to a standstill if they ever got to a position to actually do anything.
“future thinking” yes but I suspect not the kind of future the majority would vote for!
@TOM - ” This said, the Greens are still a fringe eccentric party of ‘eco-mentalists’ that while having a few good ideas would bring the nation to a standstill if they ever got to a position to actually do anything.”
Tom, the damage done around the world by the GFC came about through the ‘policies’ and beliefs of those who espouse what the major political parties here and in the US, UK etc keep on insisting are superior? For whom, one must ask? Those near or at the bottom of the ladder? I don’t think so! We keep on insisting on following the same policies that favour the rich, and make them and others richer, and wonder why there’s so much want, poverty, homelessness and despair? I don’t call that smart, I call that “eccentric” and greedy beyond belief!
We delude ourselves, that by following the same path that leads to a collapse of capitalism every few/ten? years, that we’ll eventually get better results for the planet and its people! I call it destructive, selfish and evil! It kills people and causes despair! I suppose it’s OK if you can bully impoverished countries to take care of ‘uncomfortable’ and ‘nuisance’ issues like asylum seekers! We’re bullying other poor or budding capitalist countries like China and India, into starting to clean up the mess and damage done to the planet by those who are living like kings in comparison. Yes, the US, UK, Australia etc!
The US spent $7 TRILLION getting capitalism out of the shit, and yet claims it can’t afford to feed their own starving, look after the health of its citizens, let alone contribute to eliminate poverty in the third world! Guess who’s going to pay for this socialisation of corporate wealth’s debt? Those who are earning wages! The wealthy almost have a seizure if someone suggests that a dignified and just country should look after the health and education of its citizens!
In Italy, Greece, Spain and the UK - those who are going to suffer because of the ‘cut backs’ aren’t going to be the bastards who caused the problem - corporate wealth, but those who are working hard for a meagre or moderate income! We support that thinking too! Those of us who think it’s at best unfair, are treated like we caused this plague on peoples’ lives! Not one politician/leader in any of the countries I mentioned, has even hinted that they may/should take a pay cut! Shock - Horror!
It is possible to be self sustained, care for the people, contribute to looking after the traumatised and homeless, but it takes an unselfish attitude and the will to do it! I don’t see any evidence of that in the policies of the Coalition or Labor! The Greens have many ideas; they just don’t get the chance to put them into practice - the rest of us are too damned selfish!
the thing is the Greens are not a party of government. They seek to hold the balance of power in the Senate only. As such it is very easy for them to always take the high moral ground in the sure and certain knowledge they will never be in the position of having to iplement their policies. Whilst I concur with many of them they remain an irrelevance while there is no hope of these ever being brought into practice. Whether one likes it o not, Labor and Liberal are the only parties of government and the only one’s who have to deal with real politik.
@DAVIDK - I’m sure if The Greens had the money, they’d have more candidates for the House of Reps. As for implememting”their policies”? If they have the balance of power in the Senate, they may not have sufficient numbers to “implement their policies”, but they’d certainly be in a position to force some better outcome, say re climate change, than we have now, which is NONE! Lke it or not, having more people in the Senate would be a breath of fresh air in my view, and a start! Only a start I realise, but a positive outcome nevertheless. Of course, if there were also a couple of similar minded Independents, they could have a real impact,
Of course, we could all advocate for proportional representation, and then perhaps Lib and Labor would lose more seats, and govt wouldn’t be a certainty like it is now. I’d like nothing more than to remove the arrogant sneers off some ‘elected’ members faces on both sides. Who knows, we might even adopt some real democratic principles, like engaging the electorate re decision making. With the technology via computers, and how it’s going to be utilised in years to come(particularly after NBN) there could be plebiscites etc via computer? Wow! That would be a good beginning to put politicians lame comments re democracy wouldn’t it? Democracy is more than fronting up to the ballot box every 3 or 4 years - or it should be!
Don’t mind a bit of good political satire and healthy criticism but Andrew’s sarcasm goes beyond this. ‘Open the floodgates’, indeed! And he supports this kind of crap from fellow journos yet infers the Greens are spoiled brats. Admittedly, as a strong supporter and spasmodic member of the Greens, I flinch whenever another urban-based, middle-class (usually too young) candidate full of non-organic wine and cheese tries to represent my mature, rural-based organic values without ever coming out of the city to experience how we live. However, I’m more than impressed with how the present Green incumbents conduct themselves. They understand human rights - mine and those of others in minority groups here and globally. This makes them more compassionate, caring, intelligent and future-thinking. What they lacked in commonsense as candidates, they certainly came of age as they experienced the cold elitism of political life. Greens membership and active support, Tom, varies across demographics - and our contributions are part of Greens policy. That makes it a real democratic party. My past experience as an ALP supporter stopped when my ALP ‘representative’ stopped representing member, supporter and constituent views.