Australia will now process all asylum seekers onshore, despite both the government and opposition supporting offshore processing for those that come by boat.
It’s an incredible win for those — mainly on the Left — who support onshore processing. Due to the limited room available in detention centres (and budgetary constraints) people arriving by boat would be processed quickly and given bridging visas to live in the community, which allow a small pension and the right to work.
National MP Tony Crook refused to support the government’s bill yesterday which would change the Migration Act to allow offshore processing, after the High Court deemed it unlawful. But even with Crook’s support, it’s unlikely the bill would have passed the Senate where the Greens hold the balance of power.
The opposition refused to support the bill as it would allow the government’s Malaysia Solution policy. Instead it demanded the government only send asylum seekers to countries which are a signee to the United Nations convention on refugees. The Labor caucus voted yesterday to keep the Malaysia Solution as official policy, even though it cannot implement it.
Gillard was quick to put the blame on opposition leader Tony Abbott and warn the public to expect more boats to arrive. “There is only one reason that we are not in the circumstances to have offshore processing and that’s because of Mr Abbott and his determination to trash the national interest,” said Gillard. “Mr Abbott’s conduct leads us to circumstances where we are at real risk of seeing more boats.”
The Sydney Morning Herald‘s Phillip Coorey is dubbing it the “Australia Solution”, noting: “The decision was announced last night after a day of crisis meetings which tested the authority of the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, strained the backbench and took the shine off the policy victory of the day before when the carbon price legislation passed the lower house.”
Yes, it is confusing how we can have both major parties agree on offshore processing and yet not get support for it. “So many aspects of this sorry story fall into the stupid category, it is worthy of a chapter in a political primer on how not to do things,” declares Dennis Atkins in The Courier-Mail.
This is a great day for people smugglers and both parties are responsible, says Greg Sheridan in The Australian:
“It is a defeat in which the Gillard government and the Abbott opposition share equally.”
Labor has no one to blame for this but themselves, says human rights lecturer Angus Francis in The Age:
“The choice that confronted the Labor Party after the election defeat of 2001 was the same that confronts it now: continue to support offshore processing, as Prime Minister Julia Gillard wants, or begin the slow and painstaking process of rebuilding a principled asylum-seeker policy.”
Peter van Onselen is elated that onshore processing is happening, even if it’s only happened because of Gillard and Abbott’s stubbornness. Problem is, detention centres will quickly fill up and other onshore options should be examined, he writes in The Australian:
“Why not simply speed up the processing for all asylum-seekers? Or start community living for those already in detention? Or make arrangements for more processing centres? Again, stubbornness is getting in the way of workable policy outcomes.”
Susie O’Brien in the Herald Sun also supports this change to onshore processing:
“We can well afford to be generous, and to care for those who seek asylum on our shores. Given that most of them are found to be legitimate refugees, and go on to be well-respected members of our society, let’s give them a go.”
39 thoughts on “Govt flips and supports onshore
processing”
oggy
October 14, 2011 at 11:37 amAmber I do not see this as a back flip,this has been about highlighting the hypocrisy of the Conservatives and their wish to be seen as the only one strong on borders that certain sectors of the community wish for,to my mind the Conservatives never really cared about the boat people they were primarily concerned about a gatekeeper at the Border first and foremost.If you came here with a visa and then overstayed it was not a big issue for them,at least the game as they say was played just how they wanted it.
Labor on the other hand has a much more diverse following perhaps the Greens also, with many divergent views on Refugees and Human Rights.At the moment many are overjoyed at this result and it may work out really well,thus appeasing those that feared for people taking dangerous journeys.
If the opposite occurs and there are many deaths as a result, then Labor can say they had Malaysia as an alternative that most likely would lessen the boat trips and yet allow many in the camps to come here via the Inter-Government Arrangement.
Labor will not go Nauru because of all the suffering that occurred there previously, that as they say, is how I see it,not being privy to the machinations of any Party.
skink
October 14, 2011 at 11:41 amI have noticed that the Troofer’s posts have ramped up exponentially this week.
Much more use of random capitals
Two defeats in two days must be painful.
I guess the truth really does hurt.
TheTruthHurts
October 14, 2011 at 11:41 am[“Truthie, did you start warning about drownings before or after Abbott and the ALP did?”]
Drownings, blowing up of boats, riots and cost blow outs were always going to happen as boats arrive.
The only solution to stop these events occurring is to stop the boats, so Abbott’s plan on stopping the boats would have saved lives on the high seas.
Now that Labor, it’s Green masters and it’s leftwing hacks have their way with onshore processing there will be an armada of boats because of the pull factor. That means more drownings, more boats being blown up, more riots and more cost blow outs.
It also means the left must take FULL responsibility for encouraging the boats and it’s after effects. No more blaming the Navy, no more blaming “the system”, no more blaming Tony Abbott, no more blaming the stars at night(thanks Milli Vanilli for that one), the LEFT SOLELY has to take responsibility.
The lefties love dissing out criticism, now it’s your turn. This ones all of your doing so now YOU take the responsibility for the results.
SBH
October 14, 2011 at 11:44 amyes, yes, but try to focus sweetheart. When did YOU have the epiphany and decide that you were oh so compasionate and concerned about ‘boaties’ drowning. Was it when you realised how morally bankrupt, how inhuman, your position was?
Bazza Smith
October 14, 2011 at 11:46 amTTH -“You must take responsibilities for drownings and deaths.
If the lefties want to play in the big boys world, you have to take adult responsibilities that come with it. No more shirting off blame as everyone but your responsibility.”
Someone’s absorbed a whole lot of talking points today… here’s the thing, you on the right with you suddenly “humanitarian” bent have never and will never take responsibility for all the people your hard line policies killed – far more than the small but tragic number that die during dangerous sea journeys. The whole reason that these people are fleeing their country is because they make a judgement, realizing the dangers, against greater threats at home.
By conspiring to keep these people from their legal right to seek asylum in this country, by sending back legitimate claimants using illegal methods to try to deny court access (the real whole point of the Liberal offshore processing agenda), by enforcing harsh mandatory detention regimes that we are the only developed nation on the planet to have adopted (and are looked down upon for) – a great many vulnerable people have been forced to return to countries in which their lives were endangered or else ended up here in legal limbo waiting and waiting and all the while enduring greater mental and physical hardship. Hell you even managed to get a good few mentally ill Australian’s deported. Never took responsibility for that either I note.
So you take responsibility for the tens of thousands treated in this manner, then we’ll talk about whether you’re ready to judge what’s right and wrong here. You might also try to explain the astounding level of hypocrisy in going from ‘they threw babies overboard and are (probably) all terrorists!’ to ‘oh the humanity, won’t someone think of the poor drowned (illegal) boat (sand) people (never just people, asylum seekers, refugees)’.
On a more general note, nice to see the Left actually achieve something based on actual principles – maybe there is hope for the ALP yet. If they can stick with this line now and people see that the sky won’t fall in because a small number of people seek refuge here then we can move on to areas of actual policy importance for a change rather than both sides seeking to garner the precious redneck vote. Who knows, Tony may run out of things to fear monger on at this rate.
TheTruthHurts
October 14, 2011 at 11:49 amThe song for the lefties when the next boat crashes/sinks killing hundreds:
www .youtube.com/watch?v=NwrL9MV6jSk
GocomSys
October 14, 2011 at 11:50 am“I really don’t give a toss what some of the usual obnoxious simple minded posters have to say”.
MARK LONGHURST posted Friday, 14 October 2011 at 10:46 am
Yes, the shoe fits. Mind-numbing post of yours indeed!
Modus Ponens
October 14, 2011 at 11:58 amUm, then Abbott doesn’t have to take responsibility for allowing this policy to happen. His decision on this bill DIRECTLY relates to this outcome.
Seeing as he got the result that is completely opposite to his 3 word policy, all in the name of jamming the labor party. Or do right wing nutters not have to take responsibility either, due to their logical incapacity?
Son of foro
October 14, 2011 at 11:59 amSpoof monster:
Nauru is illegal. The legislation would have to be changed for it open again. Tony Abbott didn’t support changing the legislation. It’s all quite simple, mein liebling. He only has to make one phone call etc and so on.
Ball. Court. His.
Next.
SBH
October 14, 2011 at 12:17 pmTTH has again demostrated he/she has no interest in truth, discussion debate or adult discourse. He/she ducks any uncomfortable questions and runs an illogical, unreasonable line of rhetoric.
TTH you’ve proved you’re not worth responding to or seeking to engage in a discussion of ideas.