Dino - a motherhood statement made by Don Chipp, of all people, more than 30 years ago is hardly a firm base for policy, particularly as the statement itself is just hot air.
Although it would be nice to have a refugee policy based on logic and Australia's moral obligations - which seems to be what the article is saying - this just isn't going to happen. Immigration is too hot a topic in the marginal electorates. Julie has to be seen to be firm. In particular, the boats have to stop coming. Admittedly the plan to base a camp in East Timor was madness. The East Timorese government would have turned it into a political nightmare. But it made Julia look good for a moment, and that's all that really matters for Labor.

Nauru , currently is the only country putting up it's hand for a regional processing centre. Watch Julia jump at that opportunity.

After an initial reading of this article (I wasn’t able to access it all day!), it seems quite contorted.

<< A globally based solution is one which includes and ensures Australia, in conjunction with nations that form part of the United Nations, increases its intensity and commitment to:… >> [followed by seven dot points]

YES!

So we should be striving to shut down onshore asylum seeking / people trafficking and undertake a much-improved input into refugee issues through formal channels, including a considerably increased intake.

Why then does Dino Cesta brand Abbott’s objective << to discourage people smugglers and asylum seekers arriving by boat >> as << morally bankrupt and inhumane >> ?

Aren’t Abbott’s efforts in line with the second dot point:

<<pursuing strategies which attempt to interrupt and breakdown smuggling networks and which inhibit asylum seekers from embarking on their perilous journey across dangerous waters and land >> ?

Yes they are.

The great flaw in Abbott’s and Gillard’s approach to this issue is that there is just nothing about increasing Australia’s international aid effort in dealing with the causal factors of refugeeism or in helping refugees in their home countries or in resettling a considerably increased number per annum in our country.

Given that Australia’s effort really is below par – well below the UN recommended 0.7% of GDP being put into international aid, and a quite small intake of 13 700 or thereabouts refugees per annum, within a vastly bigger immigration intake, this is what our leaders should be competing with each other to improve.

Wouldn’t it be great that, in conjunction with the Liberal / Labor struggle to be tougher on asylum seekers they also battled to show more compassion than each other on refugee issues within our formal refugee and international aid programs?

Alright, I’ll now awake from my silly dream and regain a sense of reality ( :>/

Ludwig

A bi-partisan effort from the Libs and Labor to assist with refugees with other countries? ? ? ?

What are you thinking?

Har, har, har, har, har, bloody har.

Yeah, that'll happen when there is a bi-partisan effort to transition to sustainable energy.

<< A bi-partisan effort from the Libs and Labor to assist with refugees with other countries? >>

You've misinterpreted my post Severin.

But, yes it would be just as laughable... unfortunately... for the libs and labs to actually play off of each other in an effort be the most compassionate party in the broader arena of refugee issues.

The only really significant thing the libs and labs are likely to be truly bipartisan in is the worship of the dinosaur-era continuous growth paradigm!!

Ludwig

I was just running with your idea - did get you.

Isn't it a shame that not either party has the cojones (ovaries or balls) to really differentiate itself from the other party and get us out of this cycle of mediocrity.

I do believe that it is 0.0001% more likely for Labor than the Libs to offer a rue alternative into a sustainable economy. Particularly while the Liberal Party retains its Howard era pollies like Abbott.

Meanwhile we have no cohesive policy on refugees (visa'ed or non visa'ed - whether they arrive by plane or boat), skill shortage, future infrastructure strategy, equitable taxation and so on.

This had better be the lucky country 'cos we're gonna need it.