Those Refugees Again

Just as Christmas approaches Australia is preparing to accept as few as possible of the Refugees it resuced in Indonesian waters. But even this does not sem to satisfy the Sri Lankans who obviously believe that it is completely safe for the Tamil minority, defeated recently in the final onslaught of their civil war, to stay put in Sri Lanka.

Their bitter experience would suggest otherwise and the fact that all have met the criteria to be regarded as Refugees suggests that the Official line in Sri Lanka is at best a distortion of the truth.

I wrote to the Editor of the Australian:

The views expressed in Paul Maley's report by the Sri Lankan High Commissioner, Senaka Walgampaya, that Australia's decision to take in the refugees it rescued with the Oceanic Viking "send a bad message" demonstrates the obvious truth that the losers in the recently concluded civil war in Sri Lanka cannot safely stay there.

Since all those rescued were bona fide refugees it is clear that life for them in Sri Lanka is impossible because of the perscution etc that they are subjected to, yet Mr Walgampaya believes they should stay and not be given any comfort or encouragement to leave.

He seems to prefer that those who leave Sri Lanka be left to wallow in impoverishment in refugee camps anywhere else in the world rather than be given safe haven in a safe country.

Australia has been the beneficiary of migration from Sri Lanka for more than 50 years. Providing safe haven for these refugees is not going to change the balance of things in our place.

We shall see if it is published.

Tough on Crime

The State Government in Western Australia has really gone for the simplistic and populist approach to law and order. The Police Minister, Rob Johnson said they were elected to take a firm stand against anti-social behaviour.

And so they have proposed variable no-go zones where police can stop and search without having to justify the decision. They have extended some of the move-on provisions that generally exclude young people from gathering places that are pulic space. And ... and ...

And they have argued with both the judiciary and the State Parole Board about their involvement in reducing the impact of sentences for people convicted of criminal offences. As a result judicial discretion is being eliminated in more and more areas of sentencing law and Parole Boards are discouraged - opposed by the DPP - in any attempts to release prisoners on Parole - conditional release - before they have quite finished their sentence.

"Truth in sentencing" provisions actually do society a disservice because they mean that when a prisoner is finally released the state has no power to supervise them during the reintergration in society.

Add to all this a complete lack of planning about the building of new prisons and it is not surprising that the 20% increase in prison populations over the past 12 months can only be supported by double-bunking - putting two people in a cell that was designed for one.

It is not hard to imagine what might happen in cells where two men are "locked in" for 12 hours or more a day.

So why is the Attorney General so quick to dismiss a report just released that has gathered evidence of widespread rape and violence in prison. If it is criminal to rape someone outside of prison, why do we tolerate it in prison? The Attorney General's response seems to be based on a view that it doesn't realy exist, or if it does the prisoners are simply getting something they deserve.

To change or not to change, that is the question.

I have been quiet on this blog for too long, and I think the reason is largely utter amazement at the goings on with the Liberal Party and the ultimate election of Tony Abbott as their new leader.

There will certainly now be a distinction between the Liberal Party and the Labor Party on many issues because under Tony Abbott's leadership the policy-shift will be to the extreme right - it will all be about distinction. He said in the hours after his appointment that the job of the oppostion is to oppose - "We will oppose." One commentator suggested that he might just forget that the real job of the Opposition is to offer the electorate a credible alternative for government.

I remember the carping about the Labor Party approach to the last election. Many, but not all, of their policies were close imitations of the policy of the then Liberal government, so much so that Kevin Rudd was sometimes described as "Me-too-Kevin"

So, the Liberal Party has opted for change, but they have done so in a context in which they are wanting to proclaim a no-change policy - Climate Change.

"No new taxes" is a golden rule for Liberal politicians, and at the suggestion that a "Cap and Trade" aproach to carbon pollution reduction was another name for a TAX, the whole party came out in unison, opposed to any such thing. In fact, Tony Abbott when a step further proclaiming that their policies would be able to reduce Carbon Pollution (if indeed that was necessary) without imposing any taxes or extra costs on people in particular and the economy in general.

Two little words will save the whole world - DIRECT ACTION. Now some of you will say that those two words imply change and I said the policy is about no change. Well, yes, you and I will have to change our ways, and some of them might cost us a bit here and there, but the government will not have to change - no direct action by them because that would involve TAXES.

So we have a proposal that the absolute laissez faire approach is what will save us. It is interesting because the Cap and Trade system was one predicated on the idea that market forces would anable the changes in behaviour to be achieved voluntarily.

The irony in it for me is that the Global Finacial Crisis hasn't much dented some people's belief in the capacity of the free market to get it right.

So, as the Copenhagen conference draws to a close over the next few days we wait with baited breath to see whether the concensus is for CHANGE or BUSINESS AS USUAL. The cynic in me is half expecting proclamations of words that we all want to hear followed by targets and action that reflect very much an attitude - I will if you will - very much like the Wild West gunfighters facing each other, guns at the ready, neither willing to lower their weapon first.