In this article ALP Socialist Left member, Tristan Ewins calls on other Labor members to write to Left MPs and their local Labor MPs to demand a better deal on refugees - with a much larger increase in the humanitarian intake, and sustained aid for PNG - to make it the kind of economically developed country that refugees would WANT to live in.
Tristan Ewins
Kevin Rudd’s decision on refugee boat
arrivals has many people on the Australian Left as well as human rights and
civil liberties advocates angry.
Rudd, Tony Burke (Immigration Minister) and Mark Dreyfus (Attorney General) produced a joint media release from which the following are some selected excerpts:
“As of today asylum
seekers who come here by boat without a visa will never be settled in
Australia.
Under the new
arrangement signed with Papua New Guinea today – the Regional Settlement
Arrangement – unauthorised arrivals will be sent to Papua New Guinea for
assessment and if found to be a refugee will be settled there….
Our country has had
enough of people smugglers exploiting asylum seekers and seeing them drown on
the high seas.
We are sick of watching
our servicemen and women risking their lives in rescues in dangerous conditions
on the high seas...
Our governments will
expand existing facilities on Manus Island, as well as establishing further
facilities in Papua New Guinea…
There is no cap on the
number of people who can be transferred to Papua New Guinea…
We are a compassionate
nation and we will continue to deliver a strong humanitarian program.
If the measure
announced today and the international meeting on the Convention that has been
flagged lead to a significant change in the number of people arriving by boat,
then the government stands ready to consider progressively increasing our
humanitarian intake towards 27 000 as recommended by the Houston Panel…
Access to our
humanitarian program must be through the international organisations which
resettle people around the world, not through criminal operators who have
pushed people onto unseaworthy vessels with tragic consequences….”
(an interesting aside
is that it looks like people arriving by boat WITH visas are excluded
from the policy…)
In this author’s opinion Rudd and the ALP ‘inner circle’ have
decided on this course because ALP private polling must be showing that a
decisive marginal seat/swinging voter demographic would switch their votes on
this issue. As far as the ALP leadership
are concerned they need to 'neutralise' this issue, along with the carbon tax -
for similar reasons. Without addressing these issues in such a way as to win
over those swinging, marginal seat voters Abbott would stand a much better
chance of victory.
Personally, I
want the polling to be made public so that at least we all know what's driving
the decision - and so we know where we have to focus our efforts to turn the
situation around.
Rudd’s decision
on refugee boat arrivals “will stuff the people smugglers' model.”
It may even save lives.
Nonetheless I
am uncomfortable with any decision to deny confirmed refugees asylum.
We know that
a potentially decisive electoral demographic -whether through fear or prejudice
– have hardened their attitude towards these human beings. But Abbott was the
first to capitalise upon a perceived
‘Labor point of vulnerability’; and for years he has hounded an
increasingly desperate Labor government towards increasingly ‘hard-line’
positions. We can be certain, at least,
that Abbott’s main concern in outlining these issues has NOT been simply to
save lives…
The election
could turn on the basis of Rudd’s decision. The Greens may increase their vote
significantly from the broad progressive community and liberal Left who will be
appalled that it has come to this. It
could help the Greens maintain the balance of power in the Senate; and quite
likely now hold on to Melbourne. Katter might also hold his seat...Another hung
parliament is possible. And then there is the basis for progressive compromises
again... Strategically that's a matter of fact. Therefore Labor needs to
position itself in a way which leaves open prospects for future (electorally
sustainable) compromises.
Rudd’s
decision will understandably meet resistance from the Left within and outside
of the ALP. But we should also be
seeking to extract the best compromises we can given the
alternative of an open Labor split precipitating an Abbott government.
So far Rudd has done this independently of the Caucus;
He will know there's opposition within the Party- and that in itself is a ‘point
of vulnerability’ (For Rudd) that the Labor Left could highlight over the
coming week without an open split ‘paving
the way’ for an Abbott victory...
For all reading
this: On the Left we need to be emailing
Left members of Cabinet, applying the pressure between now and including Monday July 22nd. I have been informed that there is a special meeting of the parliamentary caucus Monday
July 22nd. So for instance,
we should be writing to: Kim Carr, Albanese, Macklin, Plibersek, Wong, Butler,
Griffin. – and press them to pursue this issue with Rudd at the meeting, and over
the next week or so... Writing to Doug
Cameron also makes sense given his senior position in the Left and his past
role as ‘the conscience of the Party’.
We need to do this NOW if we hope to influence the parliamentary caucus.
A complete turnaround won't happen - that would
finish Rudd and with it Labor... It
would certainly mean victory to Abbott given the context.
But Rudd WILL be wanting to prevent open opposition
on the Left dividing the party coming up to the election.... Hence he's already
mentioned increasing the humanitarian intake by 7,000.
If the real issue is stopping drownings then why
not accept more refugees through the official humanitarian intake - equal
to what likely would have occurred anyway?
My position
therefore is thus: The Left should demand that PM Rudd consent
to an increase in the humanitarian intake by 25,000; and recommit again to a
(quicker) doubling of the Foreign Aid budget to 0.50 of GDP; directing that new
money to PNG. We mightn’t get this exactly – but at the least we need a strong
compromise. The figure of a 7,000 increase in the humanitarian intake simply
isn’t anywhere near enough.
Some readers may think my position too moderate. (in
conversation a Greens member argued we should lift our intake to 100,000) Others may think it too radical. But if we are to secure a good compromise we
should be writing to our local members and Left MPs before the caucus meeting
on this Monday.
At the very
least we need to secure a compromise involving a big increase in our humanitarian
intake and a massive aid commitment to PNG - not only to provide health and
education - but to modernise PNG's infrastructure comprehensively. And to encourage
modern industry and jobs there.
If Australia
and Labor are to send any confirmed refugees to Papua New Guinea at the very
least we need to commit to making PNG a place where people would WANT to live;
with refugees enjoying a full regime of citizenship rights.
The Left needs to act decisively and
together on Monday Jully 22nd and the remainder of this week to
secure the best compromise we can – Because that is the way of securing the
best possible outcome for refugees, and for our impoverished neighbour of 7
million people, Papua New Guinea.
