[cont]

I agree that Australia can't take all refugees who may wish to come here in the future, but I believe strongly that we should take our fair share. Certainly, given our disproportionate per capita contribution to greenhouse gases domestically and our reliance on exporting coal, it can be argued that we have a greater responsibility than other developed countries to shoulder our share of the environmental burden elsewhere that we have helped create, and from which we continue to benefit.

As I've said, I also agree that we need to increase significantly Australia's provision of foreign aid that is targeted specifically at addressing the problems that cause people to become refugees in the first place. I don't see any easy answers to this, and neither do the Greens in my experience - but at least they have policies that begin to address the looming problems that we face in this area, unlike the other political parties.

Given Australia's active particpation in, and reliance upon, a globalised world economy, it is just not morally or politically possible for us to try and avoid facing up to our responsibilities in the event of the hypothetical environmental cataclysm that Yabby imagines. Although we're a relatively small nation, we have certainly contributed disproportionately to the anthropogenic aspects of climate change.

"it can be
argued that we have a greater responsibility than other developed countries to shoulder our share of
the environmental burden "

CJ, I have a problem with that, as I feel that some of us are going
on some huge guilt trip here.

Yes we mine coal, yes we smelt aluminium for others use, yes we
grow crops to feed others. All those things are for the benefit
of others, their electricity etc, yet is held against us when
it comes to CO2.

Surely its the users of the final energy, for whatever purpose,
that should be taken into account. Now if you go to central Europe,
NE USA, and other cold climates, enormous amounts of diesel and
gas are burnt, just for heating houses. In Europe now you have
discount airlines everywhere. People will fly from London to
Paris for lunch!

In the third world, if I have 11 kids and they all chop down trees
to live, thats fine and nobody says boo. I'm told that Indonesia
alone through logging, is adding another 2 billion tonnes a year
of CO2, with an ever rising population. Yet I should go on some
guilt trip over my average household use of 5-6 tonnes or whatever.

I just think that the whole debate is out of balance right now.

Fact is if we add another 2-3 billion people to the global population,
our problems will be far larger then they are now.

Everyone fusses over their feelgood exercises of peddling to work
to change the planet, but the real mega issues are being ignored
and an extra 80 million people a year sure is one of them. Yet
no political party even mentions this as an issue, just about
our supposed Aussie guilt trip that we should be on.

Thanks CJ.

Our views are not too far apart now. Just a few comments:

I think your term ‘unjust incarceration’ is a bit emotive. I’d call it well-justified confinement.

Given the difficulty in processing some of these people, I don’t think we’ve done too badly. Many asylum seekers had their claims dealt with pretty quickly. Others were more difficult, due to people destroying their documentation and refusing to cooperate.

Australia took a very liberal interpretation of the criteria for determining refugees when it came to processing asylum seekers, compared to the processing of refugees accepted through our immigration program. If a uniform interpretation had been upheld, the vast majority of asylum seekers would not have been accepted.

Of course there were some problems, but all-told I think the whole business was/is handled pretty well. This balance between border protection and a reasonable manner of dealing with asylum seekers is just about the only think that Howard has done that I strongly support.

I’m not so sure that we should feel obligated to take our ‘fair share’ of refugees. What we should feel obligated to do is contribute our fair share to global refugee issues. To this end we should immediately boost foreign aid to more than double its current amount; to at least 0.7% of our GDP, in line with Bob Geldof’s push and the long-standing UN recommendation.

I agree with Yabby that this should primarily be directed towards population stabilisation/reduction.

Ludwig: "Our views are not too far apart now."

Agreed - and not just on this issue. All that separates us here is the issue of detention. You think that your imagined end justifies the means, while I think that the demonstratedly harsh treatment of detainees is unwarranted, given that most of them are proven to be genuine refugees.

Maybe we need to have arguments from both perspectives. However, I have to say that another point of difference between us is your apparent faith in the State to provide solutions to social problems, and particularly via enforcement - which seems to pervade many of your arguments. Maybe it's because you work for them :)

Anyway, on this issue I reckon Ludwig and I could probably go a long way to resolving some of these differences - and no doubt many of the world's other problems - over a beer or three in the pleasant possibility that our paths should ever cross :)

“I have to say that another point of difference between us is your apparent faith in the State to provide solutions to social problems, and particularly via enforcement - which seems to pervade many of your arguments.”

Yes CJ I do have faith that the State can provide solutions to social problems, environmental issues, etc. Yes I do believe in strong governance, a strong rule of law and hence, effective enforcement. I can’t imagine what alternative there is! What do you believe in?

I have worked for the Qld Government for 20 years. I can see that in some ways it has been strong and effective and in other ways, downright appalling. Both of these apply as they relate to my job and field of expertise.

Don’t you think that strong governance with the right policies is all-important in all manner of issues, as they relate to the subject of this thread and far beyond?

You’ve now got me very curious to know just how we differ on this.

Ludwig, of course I agree with effective governance - good, achievable policy, and fair and reasonable enforcement are part of that.

What I meant was that you tend to advocate the 'big stick' approach by government as the first remedy to most problems, where I tend to see it as a last resort.