The Malaysia deal. Let’s separate the policy from the politics.
The policy — Bernard Keane writes in Crikey today, “having spent so long insisting ‘push’ factors were the key to the rise in asylum seekers heading for Australia, the deal with Malaysia finally announced yesterday looks awfully like an acknowledgement that “pull” factors are critical. The test will only really come when there’s another surge in asylum seekers in our region…”
The politics — it’s still stop the boats. Air arrivals never have, and never will it seems, lodge in the public consciousness the way leaky boats do. And so, we have a discussion about border protection policy that focuses on a small slice of the picture and collectively ignores the wider context, and the wider problem.
There is no doubting Immigration Minister Chris Bowen’s conviction that he never ever wants to take a phone call like the one he picked up from Christmas Island back in December. There is a genuine need to stop people risking their lives on the sea. But the push v pull factor is still up for debate. It is very difficult to ascertain how “the message” to smugglers and their potential clients filters back.
Prime Minister Gillard put the pledge to crack down on the boats front and centre of her election campaign, right in line with Tony Abbott. She made it an election issue. Make no mistake, this is why we are talking about the Malaysia deal. The commentary today focuses on the political capital that Gillard and Bowen will earn if they pull this thing off, not the safety of asylum seekers.
Australia is accepting an additional 4000 refugees from Malaysia. This is to be applauded. However, UNHCR has not signed its support on the dotted line. It has agreed to monitor the process, but stated “UNHCR’s preference has always been an arrangement which would enable all asylum seekers arriving by boat into Australian territory to be processed in Australia. This would be consistent with general practice.” It does, however, note that “the potential to work towards safe and humane options for people other than to use dangerous sea journeys are also positive features of this Arrangement.”
As Immigration Policy Minister Chris Bowen acknowledged in an interview with The Australian Financial Review over the weekend:
“Handling the asylum seeker issue should occupy about 5 per cent of my time…Clearly, it is taking a lot more than that.”
If only we had leaders who would genuinely seek to re-educate the public so that the problem occupied about 5% of their fears.
14 thoughts on “Policy meets politics”
drmick
July 26, 2011 at 1:53 pmGet the media to focus on it 5% of the time
The Government was wedged into this. non stop headlines line like “stop the boats” and “More illegals”
Abbot taking the high moral ground las tnight and today is no less a disgrace that the redneck Australian and Daily Terror have waged non stop since knucklehead lost the election.
How do you educate the public regarding the number who come by air outnumber the onces who come by boat 10:1?
How do you tell the great unwashed that the boat people are not illegal arrivals?
wtf could the government do? Same problem different day. Damned if they do and damned if they dont.
michael crook
July 26, 2011 at 2:28 pmThe government could go back to its obligations under international law and treat asylum seekers as they are meant to be treated by those laws.
Or it could follow Abbott/Howard/shockjocks to the depths.
Those are the two choices, we can see which one it has chosen.
CML
July 26, 2011 at 3:31 pmI continue to be puzzled by the extreme concentration on the fate of “boat people” by those who support the refugee arrivals. Every type of media has been in a frenzy about all this since yesterday morning, with total concentration on those who will be sent back to Malaysia if they try to reach Australia.
The first thing to say is – given we are constantly being told that the people who come on boats know exactly what to expect when they get here, the best thing they can do is not come in the first place. Now before you all jump up and down about that, consider the fact that there are Burmese people (and others) in Malaysia who have been waiting 20+ years for permanent settlement in a country who takes refugees. Why do we have to take Tamils, Iraqis, Afghanis, etc. ahead of refugees from our own region (Asia), simply because the former have enough money to get on a boat? That is grossly unfair, and makes me wonder about some of the people who noisily support those asylum seekers who have money, but don’t seem to care at all about those who will never have the resources to even contemplate getting on a boat and coming to Australia.
Secondly – for all these reasons, I support the government’s approach, but mainly because I don’t like asylum seekers who self select their own country of refuge (Australia), and think they should just be allowed in because they have the money to get here. As a doctor said on Q&A a few weeks ago, of course everyone wants to come here because “its like winning refugee Lotto” – best country in the world to seek refuge, and these people know it.
Personally, I’m looking forward to the arrival of our 4,000 Burmese and other Asian refugees, and hope there will be many more in future years.
michael crook
July 26, 2011 at 3:54 pmCML, refugee advocates are quite capable of making their own statements and do not need you to tell them (us) what we think or do not think. Your given “that they know what to expect etc…..” is not accepted by us as a given .It is not us saying that “we dont seem to care……..” So stop putting words in our mouth or telling us what we think.
Further, most of us have actively questioned the actions of our own government who have tacitly supported, or in some cases actually been, the creators of the particular refugee problem. eg Iraq.
Should we stop joining the USA in her stupid wars, and should we stop supporting regimes like those in Burma and Sri lanka, then you may have some sort of point, but until then you dont.
You are to be commended, however, in saying that you welcome the 4000. My view is that of course Australia could and should take ten times that every year.
david
July 26, 2011 at 4:01 pm[DrMick….How do you educate the public regarding the number who come by air outnumber the onces who come by boat 10:1?
How do you tell the great unwashed that the boat people are not illegal arrivals?
wtf could the government do? Same problem different day. Damned if they do and damned if they dont.]
Well said Dr M and as long as Abbott and Morrison are spewing their falsehoods, their lies and phoney concern for these people, when it is nothing but a political beatup from lines Abbott learned well when being tutored by the rat Howard. Abbott knows every dirty trick in the book and uses them regardless of who gets in his way.
This Malaysian agreement will see another of his thought bubbles pricked The time is coming slowly but surely when he has used up all the avenues of misinformation and lies he has been pedaling around the country these last 14 months, the unraveling of Mr Rabbott gathers momentum.
CML
July 26, 2011 at 4:26 pm@ MICHEAL CROOK – At no time did I tell you what to think. I am simply asking why those who have money and can get on boats are more deserving than those who languish in refugee camps for 20+ years. Especially as many of the latter come from our own region.
Even blind Freddy would have to acknowledge that refugee advocates appear to concentrate all their efforts on a few thousand boat people to the exclusion of the hundreds of thousands of Asian and African refugees in camps. If this is not correct, then perhaps you could explain why we never hear anything about the latter group, who in my opinion, at least deserve a fair go.
For your information – I have never supported the invasion of Iraq, and marched in the streets in protest at our involvement. Afghanistan is also a disaster and the war there will change nothing. On the question of supporting dictators, there is very little Australia can do without the agreement of the rest of the world. However, I do believe that the UN works behind the scenes to improve things, but it’s rules do not allow interference in the sovereign governance of any member country, those run by dictators or otherwise.
In the meantime, the refugees from somewhere like Burma are fleeing from extremely repressive regimes and war zones. They deserve just as much assistance as the other countries mentioned, regardless of who started which war. All refugees are the innocent victims of someone else’s agression.
Mark from Melbourne
July 26, 2011 at 4:26 pmOne has to ask if the acknowledgement that the boat arrivals is far more to the front of the general populations thinking is actually an indictment of the Australian media’s absolute failure to report this in a balanced and non hysterical manner.
michael crook
July 26, 2011 at 4:43 pmHi again CML, the refugee advocates generally get little media unless there is an issue at the forefront of the medias collective consciousness. Try attending some of the RAC meetings, or the Greens and Socialists have a lot of public information stuff out there and show movies and things, Green Left Weekly newspaper is very important in this regard. These groups realise that the asylum seeker/refugee issue has causes and their social and humanitarian thrust is to make the general public aware of all the issues, but sadly their reach is limited by lack of numbers and money.
I personally do stuff like demos and highway banners as well as letter box drops, just to try and get some of these issues into the public awareness.Next sunday we have a street stall at the local Sandgate festival, our Oxfam Trailwalk team was “planet before profits” which says it all really.
drsmithy
July 26, 2011 at 7:04 pmAre these “air arrivals” people who have overstayed their visas ? Because it seems rather disingenuous to equate such people to the “boat arrivals”.
Harvey Tarvydas
July 26, 2011 at 8:03 pmDr Harvey M Tarvydas
Crikey “……………If only we had leaders who would genuinely seek to re-educate the public so that the problem occupied about 5% of their fears……….”
Great stuff, good on you.
I do share the sympathy your readers/commenters have for the (wedged) Government but I have to say that faced with, for example, 2 to 3 thousand boat people arriving at one spot on the Italian coast on one day of one weekend, all out political leaders would have filled their pants.
Their pants will be grateful when they evolve up to some higher standards.