The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Howard's legacy, Julia's new spin > Comments

Howard's legacy, Julia's new spin : Comments

By Bruce Haigh, published 7/7/2010

How little John Howard learnt or understood from his time as PM. And Gillard, like Rudd, takes us for fools.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All
Bruce, what has Howard’s history or your interpretation of it got to do with Gillard?

Gillard is doing her best to implement a very difficult and urgently needed policy shift on border protection and other matters. Any resemblance to Howard’s policy really is just incidental.

Gillard has done well so far. Howard did well with border protection. Rudd’s unbelievably stupid dilution of Howard’s policy is what has caused all the strife. So OF COURSE Gillard was going to go back to a policy something akin the Howard’s.

<< Wooden, self-focused and unimaginative >>

I think that you are giving Gillard far too much of a bum rap and far too early into her prime ministership. Lay off for goodness sake. Give her a fair go!
Posted by Ludwig, Wednesday, 7 July 2010 8:26:02 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I'm surprised Julia can walk with such a huge wedgie.

After her frequent and vociferous condemnation of the pacific solution and off shore processing, she is proposing a similar solution.

She is truly a politician for the people, and will alter her views and policies on a regular basis to reflect their needs as reflected in the polls.

To get an advance copy simply read the Nielson or Newspoll ratings.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Wednesday, 7 July 2010 9:49:52 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ludwig - "Any resemblance to Howard's policy is just incidental."

Don't think so - It's called "grab the parcel" - Howard grabbed it from Hanson, and now Gillard has grabbed it from Howard. Every time another layer of wrapping is removed it exposes exactly the same contents.
Posted by Poirot, Wednesday, 7 July 2010 10:19:57 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ludwig,
What Gillard said yesterday, about stopping the boats coming, was all lies and spin. The same as Rudd said prior to the last election, that he would 'turn the boats around'. Remember Rudd said nothing about his massive increase in immigration prior to the election

Gillard lied about her support for Rudd. She hides the fact that she was part of the decissions that she now rejects. Her involvement in the BER scandal, where billions have been wasted, and now disclosers that her 'deal' with the miners has cost us many times more than what she first said. It currently is spin until the election.

I do not believe the government has any intention of a Timor solution as if elected she will do a reversal and put out the welcome mat again and get back on track for a 'big Australia'.
Posted by Banjo, Wednesday, 7 July 2010 10:24:15 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
@Ludwig:

The policy isn't urgently needed. There is not a major problem. It is being whipped up as such by the Opposition for political purposes, and now embraced by the Gillard government.

Yes there has been an increase in boat arrivals, but let's keep it in proportion shall we. The actual number of refugees arriving in this manner is miniscule compared to overall immigration. We do not have a problem, we have a dangerous political game now being played by both major parties in this country, to the detriment of both our social fabric and our standing in the international community. I believe that's the point of this article, and it is a poignant one.
Posted by Grayzie, Wednesday, 7 July 2010 10:33:24 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
When recently asked in an interview "What skills would you bring to the job [of ICC V-P as a lead-up to President]?" Howard's glib response was

"Well, every one knows what I have been doing [since deposed as PM]" - implying he has been immersed in cricket.

That supercilious answer is why he should not have the job, and sums up his prime minister-ship. Muppet-supreme.
Posted by McReal, Wednesday, 7 July 2010 11:02:17 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bruce Haigh's hatred for one of Australia's most successful Prime Ministers is undeniable. It must irk Bruce incredibly that even Ms Gillard has had to concede that Mr Howard was right. She has copied his policies. Oh that's right it is with more 'compassion' as only the left is compassionate despite being responsible for more people drowning of late than the whole of the Howard era.
Posted by runner, Wednesday, 7 July 2010 11:09:07 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
<< After her frequent and vociferous condemnation of the pacific solution and off shore processing, she is proposing a similar solution. >>

Yes Shadow Minister, there certainly is a big question over her credibility and integrity. All I can say is that she’s not looking too bad so far... after a very short time and in comparison to a couple of leading pollies that have looked pretty awful in recent times, being Rudd and Abbott.

<< She is truly a politician for the people, and will alter her views and policies on a regular basis to reflect their needs as reflected in the polls. >>

Yes, but is that necessarily bad? Rudd undertook a number of major policy initiatives (or damn stupid changes more like it) that were not indicated as being warranted by the polls and look where it got him.
Posted by Ludwig, Wednesday, 7 July 2010 11:33:20 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
<< It's called "grab the parcel" - Howard grabbed it from Hanson, and now Gillard has grabbed it from Howard. >>

Poirot, I don’t think Gillard has grabbed anything from Howard. There is only a small set of possibilities for policy development in any particular area. So it is no wonder that Gillard’s border protection policy happens to be similar to Howard’s. When you stop and think about, what other realistic options are there, that would be totally different to Howard’s approach?

Howard’s policy worked. So it is no wonder that Gillard has moved in that direction. Whether it is intentional or inadvertent or somewhere in between is really quite irrelevant. What is important is that the boats need to be stopped and those people caught in the middle need to be as fairly and decently dealt with as possible, but in a manner that upholds a strong deterrence factor to further arrivals.
Posted by Ludwig, Wednesday, 7 July 2010 11:35:06 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
<< What Gillard said yesterday, about stopping the boats coming, was all lies and spin. >>

You might be proven right Banjo. I think that every PM in my era of political awareness has turned out to be a lesser being than what first appeared to be the case. So I expect Gillard will be the same. But surely not to the same extent as Rudd.

At this stage I’m not willing to think of her in the same sort of negative manner that you apparently do.

----
<< The policy isn't urgently needed. There is not a major problem. >>

I beg to differ Grayzie. Please see further comments here:
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10633#176021
Posted by Ludwig, Wednesday, 7 July 2010 1:13:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Don't you just love it.

The incompetent left cannot produce policy to save themselves so they recycle John Howards Pacific Solution.

Oh the Honeymoon is going to be over sooner than she thinks...

better rush to the polls whilst the gullible among the voters are still enamoured (for some of us we recognised her and the government she leads for what they really are a long time ago) and that is no better than the one she replaced.

Just full of spin and an insatiable lust for power.
Posted by Stern, Wednesday, 7 July 2010 2:01:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
@Ludwig

Quoting you from the other thread:

"Why don’t they put their efforts into lobbying for a doubling of our formal refugee intake, an increase in our international aid to the UN recommended 0.7% of GDP and related matters?"

Absolutely, I couldn't agree more. But this still doesn't mean that the current arrival of boats is an "urgent problem" that requires immediate policy initatives. It's simply not, by any objective assessment of the figures.

The fact that Gillard and Co haven't done exactly what you suggested above shows precisely that this issue is being used as an inflammatory cynical election ploy, playing on fears and xenophobia within our community. When you take into consideration that almost ALL of the arrivals are later found to be legitimate refugees it becomes clear that those coming on boats are risking their lives precisely because the official channels are not working.

Yes increase our intake. Yes speed up official processing. I am not even necessarily opposed to offshore processing for the boats, as long as it is done in a compassionate and humane way. But don't pedal this crap about this being an "URGENT" issue that we simply MUST address immediately lest our nation face great peril. It's sensationalist rubbish and incredibly dangerous and damaging sensationalist rubbish at that. And that is not so much directed at you as it is directed at both major parties.
Posted by Grayzie, Wednesday, 7 July 2010 2:22:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
We can only wait to see if Gillard does what she says, but at the moment she is at least listening to the electrorate; something that Rudd never did.

Whatever either Gillard or Rudd does, it must be in the best interests of Australia - nothing else.
Posted by Leigh, Wednesday, 7 July 2010 2:36:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
For once I agree with Shadow Minister. Even more than her predecessor, Gillard is entirely poll-driven. Her government's only objective at this time is to get re-elected, and they'll abandon any semblance of principle to do it.

I agree even more with Grayzie - any "urgency" with respect to finding a "solution" to boat arrivals is confected, and both the Government and Opposition are to be condemned for playing to the lowest common denominator of the electorate.

As I've said before, I really hope this ill-conceived stunt backfires on the Gillard government.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Wednesday, 7 July 2010 2:47:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Bruce,

Thank You for giving us another perspective
to a complex topic.

I'm not going to make any judgements at this
stage, as I believe it's still too early.
I'm going to wait and see what develops.
All I can do is hope that out of all this
decency will prevail.
Posted by Foxy, Wednesday, 7 July 2010 2:52:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Have a look at Andrew Bolt's blog today.

An Afghan who was accepted as a refugee, and now has Australian citizenship, RETURNS TO AFGHANISTAN ON HOLIDAYS AND TO VISIT HIS FAMILY 3 TIMES A YEAR.
Posted by Leigh, Wednesday, 7 July 2010 3:50:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"" they recycle John Howards Pacific Solution."

Well, it is better to have such a solution closer to the last-port-of-call-before-Australia than Nauru. It would be interesting to know how prospective-asylum-seekers get to Indonesia, though.
Posted by McReal, Wednesday, 7 July 2010 5:04:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
yes, I think you're right Bruce - but they all take us for fools, not just Rudd and Gillard.

Trouble is, so many of us really are fools - even political commentators who've been round the block a few times fell for the Red Queen's rhetoric.

And even Andrew Bolt thought she was warm and direct!!

Though I understand he's got over it since she outlined the East Timor solution, mostly because he's miffed that she's plagiarised it from Howard.

Which just goes to prove that Gillard's particular brand of velveteen spin is even more insidious than her predecessor's.

I don't know where all this is taking us, but it can't be good.

Off with their heads!
Posted by briar rose, Wednesday, 7 July 2010 5:55:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
'An Afghan who was accepted as a refugee, and now has Australian citizenship, RETURNS TO AFGHANISTAN ON HOLIDAYS AND TO VISIT HIS FAMILY 3 TIMES A YEAR.'

Thanks Leigh. That would be so funny of the idiotic left did not make our country look so stupid. I wonder how the genuine refugees feel having been pushed further back in the queue.
Posted by runner, Wednesday, 7 July 2010 5:58:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I feel sad.

Australia's fair go seems to be a myth.

"Fair Go" sure does not apply for boat people and asylum seekers. And don't tell me that immigration laws apply the same way for all!
I had it easy coming from Europe having the skills to fill the shortage. But being citizen now I can't feel proud of the actual governments policy.

I had hoped that the disgraceful policies of John, Philip and Amanda would be a thing of the past, but I was wrong. If Labor moves now into the same direction as an answer to Tony's immigration fear campaign it only proves that too many Australian's support racist tendencies.

Not only is the asylum process very slow here, the visa application process is discriminating people based on origin and race as well. No problems for Europeans, North Americans though, but if you are by chance Asian you are collectively punished with a much tougher process even existing laws officially apply for all the same way. I still hear Amanda stating that the boat people should go the official way - forget it - the official way is blocked!

DIMIA is even lying to block simple visitors visa for Asians. I have it in writing - black on white - confirmed by Fran Bailey's lawyer.

No wonder that Australia's reputation in regards of human rights is dented worldwide.

Liberals or Labor? The two party system is busted.
Liberals adore neo-conservatism, following Tony into the dark ages.
Labor fears that the Liberals win too many votes, if they do not give in to cooperates and participate in the asylum fear campaign.
Guess what - next time I'll vote for the greens.

Australia's fair go
doesn't exist!

ChrisH
Posted by chris_ho, Wednesday, 7 July 2010 10:24:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
<< …don't pedal this crap about this being an "URGENT" issue that we simply MUST address immediately lest our nation face great peril. >>

Grayzie, who has said that our nation faced great peril if the asylum-seeker issue wasn’t quickly dealt with? The issue needed urgent attention, but not to that extent.

The processing facilities were just about chockers, the boats were coming more frequently than ever, there was every sign that the rate of arrivals would only increase unless something decisive was done, the whole business was incurring a huge monetary cost and causing a whole lot of concern across Australian society, inasmuch as any political issue can amongst our generally very apathetic populace. The matter WAS urgently in need of attention and remains so!

Yes an election looms. The Libs certainly had a strong lead in the polls regarding this particular issue. Gillard would have been highly remiss to not have addressed this imbalance and quickly. There’s nothing cynical about that. It is just plain commonsense!

Next, she should do the other things that I suggested and that you agree with, regarding visa overstayers, boosting our formal refugee intake and increasing our international aid.

But she’s not likely to, largely because there is just about no push in the electorate for her to do so, not even from the most vehement onshore asylum seeker supporters, so it seems!
Posted by Ludwig, Thursday, 8 July 2010 9:24:29 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The simple facts are firstly the voters in the recent NSW state bye-election turned in a 25% swing against Labor and a large part of that protest was identified as a concern among voters about the increasing numbers of illegal immigrants. It isn't anything Abbott or the Liberals stirred up. It is the electorate doing the stirring. Secondly the Liberals will stop the boats, for that's their record and people will vote accordingly, for that's their record too.

Look at the way the media has manipulated to not mention the boats over the past year yet the electorate has still monotered the upsurge and is clearly angry at Labor's deceipt.
Fact the electorate won't listen to spin on this issue and that's Labor's problem.

Bruce what figue will you put on the number of illegal boat arrivals before you say enough is enough? And what policies would you implement to regulate that number?

You are right about one thing when you say 'it is about what sort of Australia we want to live in' but I think you are out of step with what Australians will decide about that... at the next election.
Posted by keith, Thursday, 8 July 2010 10:25:04 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"The processing facilities were just about chockers, the boats were coming more frequently than ever, there was every sign that the rate of arrivals would only increase unless something decisive was done..."

Ludwig, again we need to keep some perspective about this. "Increase" does not necessarily mean problem. If I have one mouse in my roof, and then I have two, that is not an epidemic, despite being a 100 per cent increase. Of course the Pacific Solution decreased dramatically the number of boats that arrived - it was a cruel policy designed to do exactly that. And yes, removing it saw a rise in the numbers of arrivals. Again, that doesn't make it a problem. It is being turned into such for political purposes.

The numbers of asylum seekers arriving by boat is still very low, both in relation to our overall immigration intake (below 4 per cent) and in comparison to the rest of the world. They are also overwhelmingly found to be legitimate refugees. Let's try and keep in mind the reason why we have a refugee intake at all.

>>But she’s not likely to, largely because there is just about no push in the electorate for her to do so...

Of course there is, it's just not as emotive a political weapon as playing to underlying xenophobia and fear. Australia's racial undercurrents are deeply entrenched and it's an easy - if morally reprehensible - target for politicians. Howard shows us that. Now both parties are using it as an election strategy.
Posted by Grayzie, Friday, 9 July 2010 9:12:38 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Leigh,

"An Afghan who was accepted as a refugee, and now has Australian citizenship, RETURNS TO AFGHANISTAN ON HOLIDAYS AND TO VISIT HIS FAMILY 3 TIMES A YEAR."

As ususal Andrew Bolt deliberately creates mischief...he lifted the idea from an article by Sally Pryor.

The person in question has returned 3 times since 2001 NOT 3 times a year AND he did not go on holidays as Bolt implies. He has returned each time to see his family who are in great peril..I would think he should be admired for his bravery not vilified by OLO contributors stirred to a frenzy by hacks such as Bolt.

I bet Leigh you stand up at the footie and proudly beat your chest at the National Anthem taking great pride in what a wonderful Australian you are and all that implies...never has "Poor Fella My Country" been more true!
Posted by Peter King, Saturday, 10 July 2010 9:30:47 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
<< The numbers of asylum seekers arriving by boat is still very low >>

Yes Grayzie, with the key word being ‘still’.

The rate of arrivals has increased considerably recently. What do you think will happen if asylum seekers start being placed around the country in centres where they can leave for certain periods and move in mainstream society as is apparently going to be the case in Leonora?

It’ll achieve one thing; to send a powerful message across the world that Australia really is a soft touch and is actually getting softer. Then the number of boats will skyrocket!

This issue could so easily become twice, or ten or hundred times as big. Common sense suggests that it should be dealt with decisively sooner rather than later.

The more boats that arrive, the harder the resolve will become to stop them and the harsher will be the treatment of those caught in the middle. If action is taken now, the small number of arrivals can be dealt with in a very reasonable manner. If the whole caboodle blows out to a boat arriving every day, then those people are not going to be anywhere near as well accommodated, and the interpretation of refugee status is likely to be very much less in the favour of asylum seekers.

continued
Posted by Ludwig, Saturday, 10 July 2010 10:03:10 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
<< Of course there is, it's just not as emotive a political weapon… >>

I’ve got to disagree. I don’t think that there is much of a push for an increased formal refugee intake at all. Those that are strongly in favour of letting boats arrive and of accommodating onshore asylum seekers for ever more, no matter how many, as Bob Brown and Sarah Hanson-Young appear to be, aren’t coming out and pushing for this, or at least nowhere near as strongly as they are denouncing Gillard’s and Abbott’s asylum seeker policies.

The general community is saying; ‘stop the boats’. They aren’t saying; ‘stop the boats and boost our formal refugee program instead’.

It is not the media biasing the story. It is a real and most unfortunate bias within the Greens and the general community.

A few years ago I could not have imagined that I’d be supporting both the government and the opposition and denouncing the Greens over any policy. Throughout the 30 years of my political awareness, including being a member and state candidate for the Greens, it has very much been the other way around. But there you go.
Posted by Ludwig, Saturday, 10 July 2010 10:04:21 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So how's life on the dark side, Ludwig?

It doesn't seem to have made you happier - you seem inordinately anxious about a few asylum seekers, if your frequent bleats on the issue here are anything to go by.

I guess that's the sort of thing that's left to focus on after you've sold out.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Saturday, 10 July 2010 10:20:31 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
10 percent of asylum seekers arrive in leaky boats, the other 90 percent arrive by plane or legally chartered ships.

Yet we as a nation continue to create a sh^ts-storm over a measly 10% (of whom the overwhelming majority are assessed as genuine refugees).

Why?

Why is our attention being diverted to such a very small issue?

What are we missing while this furphy of a debate continues?

People are arriving daily, disembarking from planes in our major cities, over-staying visas and disappearing into our nation at many times the rate of boat-people who aren't even reaching our shores. Thanks to off-shore processing - for which we pay millions in taxes.

Something stinks, and it is not unwashed boat-people.
Posted by Severin, Saturday, 10 July 2010 10:33:33 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ludwig,

Of course the general public aren't agitating for an increase for an increase in the formal refugee intake - would you really expect them to?
The Fraser government, I believe, decided to boost its formal intake of Vietnamese refugees as a tactic to stem the flow of those arriving by boat and this was successful, ie. we still took in the refugees, but were relieved of the hysteria surrounding boat arrivals. In other words, what went unnoticed by the general public doesn't seem to have hurt them.
Posted by Poirot, Saturday, 10 July 2010 10:34:52 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Peter King
Quite right!
Andrew Bolts up to no good exposing the neat little scam your mates been running – Bolt was always such a spoilsport!

But wait a minute: In your haste to poo poo it, you didn’t really take it in did you--- let's look at it again:
So we have this guy who feels so threatened, frightened, traumatized by all those nasties in Afghanistan he runs all the way to OZ.

And when he gets to OZ he PROVES to our TOUGH assessors that all those threats, fears, traumas are clear and present and gets refugee status.

But, shortly after he secures his meal ticket in OZ , he thinks now I’m safe,I’ll go back and thumb my nose at those nasties. I’ll be safe just as long I say “Hey nasty guys, I’m here on VFR”
Yep, it must kinda work the same way holding garlic up to a vampire makes him powerless.
ROFL

Now we know why so many boat people get accepted as "refugees" –because the processors haven’t got a clue – its Eeni Meeni Mini Mo, stuff. And you know what,there are many more like your mate!
Posted by Horus, Saturday, 10 July 2010 9:31:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Severin,
Gotta great talent there!
When you learn some lines –there aint no way your going to forget em!

“10 percent of asylum seekers arrive in leaky boats, the other 90 percent arrive by plane or legally chartered ships…yada yada yada”

Yes we acknowledge that Severin, but we have already answered it – maybe you weren’t listening
So once again : CLAMP DOWN ON BOTH!

And as for:
“Something stinks, and it is not unwashed boat-people”
Psst! I suspect it’s Peter King – there's something very fishy about the “refugee” alibi he’s been trying to sell – he certainly didn’t pick it up from the fresh food people!

………………………………………….
Poirot,
RE: “The Fraser government, I believe, decided to boost its formal intake of Vietnamese refugees as a tactic to stem the flow of those arriving by boat and this was successful, ie. we still took in the refugees, but were relieved of the hysteria surrounding boat arrivals. In other words, what went unnoticed by the general public doesn't seem to have hurt them”

Too right –Those were the days of bipartisanship : the Henry Ford approach, any colour you like as long as it's black.
Damn the proles! they've got no right sticking their noses into important issues like this.
Border security is best left to the elite , like you... and Severin... and Peter King (quite an appropriate surname, considering…)
Posted by Horus, Saturday, 10 July 2010 9:43:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
<< Of course the general public aren't agitating for an increase in the formal refugee intake - would you really expect them to? >>

No Poirot. The general public by and large agrees with Abbott and Gillard. But I’d expect the Greens and others who denounce Labor and Liberal policies on this matter to be strongly calling for an increase in our refugee quota and an increase in our international aid effort, if they expect to be taken seriously on refugee and humanitarian issues. But they just aren’t, are they.
Posted by Ludwig, Saturday, 10 July 2010 11:53:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy