Oy! That last one is enough to make you cry.
Yes.
Horrible situation, isn't it?
Refugees to be processed offshore
April 13, 2006 - 1:17PM/the AGE
..... Under a hardline new immigration processing regime, the Government will send all asylum seekers that arrive in Australia illegally to offshore facilities.
But even if they are found to be refugees, they will remain there until a third country can take them, Immigration Minister Amanda Vanstone said.
............ The changes will apply from today, to all unauthorised boat arrivals, with legislation to be introduced and passed by parliament as soon as possible.
The changes will apply to all asylum seekers heading to Australia by boat and trying to gain entry illegally, regardless of whether or not they make it to the mainland.
...............The government will also increase patrols in Australia's northern waters, with details of this to be announced later.
......
Federal cabinet's national security committee yesterday signed off on the plan following weeks of tension between Australia and Indonesia over 42 successful Papuan claims for protection.
Indonesia has temporarily recalled its ambassador, its companies are threatening to boycott Australian goods, and a host of prominent Australians have been named on a blacklist of Papuan separatist supporters.
The government was widely criticised in 2001 when it introduced the so-called Pacific Solution.
The system allowed Australia to send asylum seekers to offshore detention facilities outside its migration zone, like Nauru.
But today's announcement takes that policy one step further by committing to send genuine refugees to other countries.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/refugees-to-be-processed-offshore/2006/04/13/1144521438814.html
Can they be taken to court re violating human rights treaties they have signed, I wonder?
What will the UN have to say?
Meanwhile, back at the Cole inquiry:
Thursday, 13 April, 2006 ... published every weekday in good faith
Dear Sole Subscriber,
We've decided to start the holiday break with a typical Australian Easter egg hunt. Actually, an Easter egghead hunt.
Here in the Crikey bunker we have been furiously hunting the Cole Commission transcripts for a tally of how many times the memories of our government ministers, officials and AWB executives have lapsed. How many times the key witnesses at the Cole inquiry have answered questions with phrases like: “I can't recall”, “not to my knowledge”, “I don't know”, “I'm not across that detail”, “I'm not sure”, “I'm not certain” and “not that I'm aware of”.
So here it is – the 2006 Australian Leadership & Competence Index:
John Howard, Prime Minister of Australia – 2 times at least (subject to transcript)
Mark Vaile, Deputy PM and Trade Minister – 44 times
Alexander Downer, Minister for Foreign Affairs – 62 times
Andrew Lindberg, Managing Director of AWB – 733 times
Trevor Flugge, Chairman AWB – 201 times
Michael Long, General Manager, AWB International Sales and Marketing Division – 138 times
Peter Geary, Domestic and Global Trading International Sales and Marketing, Risk Management – 275 times
Paul Ingleby, CFO AWB – 30 times
Charles Stott, Marketing Chief AWB – 24 times
Ian Donges, International Chairman AWB – 74 times
Richard Fuller, Company Secretary and Director AWB – 37 times
Jim Cooper, Counsel and Company Secretary AWB – 94 times
Brendan Stewart, Chairman AWB – 43 times
That comes to 1757 expressions of ignorance, denial, obfuscation, memory lapse, vagueness and incompetence we can find by a range of people in influential leadership positions in Australian government and business. Bet you don't find that many eggs in your Easter hunt.
Crikey!
And...jellyfishgate:
"9. How the Govt is putting Indonesia ahead of asylum seekers
Crikey reporter Sophie Black writes:
The federal government's changes to the asylum-seeker processing system, to be announced today, are an "alarming overreaction" according to Head of the Refugee and Immigration Legal Centre, David Manne, who says the tough new rules will usher in a new era of "extremity and cruelty in our treatment of refugees."
The changes "represent a clear cut incontrovertible breach of our obligations," Manne told Crikey this morning. "It effectively defines the whole Australian territory as an excised or dehumanized zone, where basic fundamental human rights do not apply".
The new changes have been made in an effort to patch up relations with Jakarta and stem the 'flow' of Papuan asylum seekers after the Department of Immigration issued temporary protection visas to 42 Papuan boat people last month.
Manne told Crikey that the government's plan to expand the current regulations that allow islands to be excised from Australia's migration zone to include asylum-seekers who make it undetected to the mainland, thereby denying them the review process under Australian law, is about "exporting our basic obligations to protect vulnerable people from gross abuse."
"It would appear that another country's pressure has resulted in the Australian government agreeing to rewrite our own laws and to downgrade our commitment to the fundamental principles of protecting vulnerable people from persecution," says Manne. "This is an extremely dangerous development."
The new rules mean that any claim for asylum will be processed as if the applicant were in an overseas UN refugee camp. Under the current system, "if someone arrives in Australia on excised territory on the mainland, and are found to be a refugee... they are granted protection in Australia and can start to rebuild a life in safety," says Manne.
"But the implication of this new rule is that even if you're found to be a refugee, your fate and your future will be completely uncertain ... completely at the discretion and the whim of the government. There will be no legal requirement that you must be allowed to live in Australia ... you could be stuck on a Pacific island indefinitely."
Asylum seekers will also be deprived of legal assistance in putting their case forward for protection. "Offshore processing under the Pacific Solution has deprived asylum seekers of the opportunity for legal assistance and there will be no proper review mechanisms available... and in a system where a significant amount of cases are overturned on review, there will be no proper system of reviews."
"People will be subject to a system outside the normal Australian due legal process," says Manne. The changes will mean that "the spirit and the intent of the UN Refugee Convention will clearly be violated," says Manne. "If other countries were to do this it would be such a radical undermining of the convention that the whole system would break down and be rendered meaningless – it would collapse."
Meanwhile, the federal government is launching a massive new surveillance effort in which submarines, warships, spy planes and top-secret radars and satellites will be employed to stop West Papuan refugees from reaching Australia."
Just how much lower can we go, I wonder? This is
so shameful!
Just watched Lateline. Amnesty International is now joining in the chorus of criticism of "the offshore solution". As is (former prime minister) Malcolm Fraser:
"We lose our sense of decency if we allow another country or relations with another country to determine policies which would be totally against our normal basic decent instincts," he said.
"The Government is really behaving as though certain people are outside the law, do not deserve the benefit of any humane or compassionate treatment.
"It's really suggesting that they're prepared to sacrifice any individual or group of individuals to suit Indonesian policy."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200604/s1615363.htm
Wondering: Could the timing of this new "offshore solution" be a ploy to distract us all from the woeful performances in the Cole enquiry by Howard, Downer & Vaile? The government is not looking good after the past few days, to put it politely!
More flack for the government over the new "offshore solution":
Hardline asylum stand under fire
April 14, 2006 - 3:16PM/SMH
.............
As Australians begin the Easter long weekend, church groups have denounced the new hardline policy.
The Uniting Church today described it as an act of moral abandonment.
"It is a sad day for Australia when its government shelves our commitment to uphold the basic human rights of all people," Uniting Church president Reverend Dr Dean Drayton said.
A Melbourne Catholic church made its Good Friday pulpit available to Papuan man Herman Wainggai to recall the trauma he endured before escaping to Australia.
The congregation of St Ignatius Church in Richmond heard his story because it fit with the day's theme of persecution and oppression, the local priest said.
Meanwhile, Amnesty International said Australia could be in breach of its international obligations if it had one policy for asylum seekers arriving by boat, and another for those who arrived by plane.
"All asylum seekers must be treated equally," the human rights group said.
"Australia's commitment under the international refugee convention ... is that it will not penalise refugees based on their method of arrival."
Labor, refugee groups, and the minor parties say the new policy is aimed squarely at Papuans.
Opposition immigration spokesman Tony Burke said the announcement was deliberately timed to coincide with Prime Minister John Howard's appearance at an inquiry into kickbacks paid by an Australian company to Saddam Hussein's regime.
"To leave it right up until the day John Howard fronts the AWB inquiry is a long way from a coincidence," he said.
Australia was allowing Jakarta to dictate its immigration policy, Mr Burke said.
"Yesterday, we had one of the most radical changes imaginable to our immigration policy where the government seriously proposed effectively excising, not one more island, but the entirety of Australia from the immigration zone.
"Our immigration policy is not being run by Canberra. It's being run by Jakarta." ......................
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/hardline-asylum-stand-under-fire/2006/04/14/1144521487389.html
Last Update: Thursday, April 13, 2006. 6:42pm (AEST)
Indonesia cautious on ambassador's return to Canberra
Indonesia says it will wait until it has face-to-face discussions with a special envoy from the Australian Government before deciding on when to send its ambassador back to Canberra.
Indonesia withdrew its ambassador in response to Australia's decision to grant temporary protection visas to 42 Papuans whose outrigger canoe reached the Australian mainland in January this year.
Today, Australia proposed changes to immigration laws that will see all future asylum seekers arriving by boat processed offshore.
Indonesian Foreign Ministry spokesman Desra Percaya said while his country appreciated Australia's latest statement, it wanted to hear more, especially about what will happen to the existing Papuans who have been given protection visas.
He said Indonesian Foreign Minister Hassan Wirayuda wanted to listen directly to the special envoy to get more details before deciding how to proceed.
Mr Percaya said only then would a decision be made about sending Indonesia's ambassador back to Canberra.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200604/s1616197.htm
..... "The Government claims to be acting in the national interest to preserve good relations with Indonesia, while complying with the 1951 Refugee Convention. In fact, it utterly undermines the convention by denying the practical obligation for countries, not offshore processing centres, to give refuge to the persecuted. Indonesia will be happy, but there is a name for this kind of legally and morally bankrupt policy: appeasement. History will judge Australia's conduct harshly."
http://www.theage.com.au/news/editorial/victims-pay-to-appease-the-persecutors/2006/04/14/1144521501926.html
The sad thing is that I see no chance whatsoever that there will be a change of government next year.
I suppose the best we can hope for is that we get rid of their majority in the senate?
Yup, Deb. Very sad & distressing.
And <sigh> of course, the Labor Party has to get it's act together, too. Pigs might fly.
Just sharing this morning's newspapers with A2K. It's all too much!
:
Australia leader in trashing refugee rights
Trying to placate Indonesia means ditching decency, writes Mark Baker.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/australia-leader-in-trashing-refugee-rights/2006/04/14/1144521502050.html
In control and in denial
... "We also know now that the Prime Minister believed from early 2002 that Saddam was rorting the oil-for-food program."
The Howard Government has learnt to survive by admitting nothing
about anything, writes Shaun Carney.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/shaun-carney/in-control-and-in-denial/2006/04/14/1144521502044.html
... & if that's not enough, lets not forget the IR nightmare!:
What the Dickens will workers do when the spotlight turns off?
By Richard Glover
April 15, 2006/SMH
EACH day this week we've been treated to another Dickensian tale from Australia's workplaces. Reading the newspaper has been like flipping through the pages of Hard Times or Bleak House. Get Lionel Bart to add music, and the whole thing could give Oliver Twist a run for its money.
......... Take the tale of the Melbourne construction workers who paused in their work to take a collection to help a family in need. Christos Binos, a fellow construction worker, was killed last month when he was crushed by a concrete slab, leaving a wife and three children. The workers, in one of the fine traditions of the industry, stopped work for 15 minutes to take a collection to help Binos's widow.
Their employer was quite happy about the stoppage, yet because it was "unauthorised" in terms of the act, the boss has been forced to dock each of the workers four hours' pay. If the firm failed to dock the workers, it faced fines of up to $33,000 under the new workplace rules, and so - reluctantly - the employer acted.
The result was that the employees worked for no pay for 3¾ hours - punished for their act of communality and generosity. For all the good it did them, they might as well have downed tools for the full four hours.
Beat that, Charles Dickens: a storyline in which a government agency steps in to force an employer to be less compassionate. .........
http://smh.com.au/news/opinion/what-the-dickens-will-workers-do-when-the-spotlight-turns-off/2006/04/14/1144521508066.html
