However, Australian’s are clearly hungry for a new political perspective that goes beyond the soap opera theatrics that we witness daily coming out of the two party politicking in Canberra. At stake is not who governs, but rather our national sense of democracy. Whoever wins the next federal election should be talking about restoring Australia’s confidence in its democratic and civil society order. What say you?

Rainier,
I say let's start with the introduction of National Service. Get a sense of purpose back into our society. Get started on weaning people off the gimme, gimme mentality.
Let's get accountability back on the streets. For all.

Dear Rainier,

As long as we continue to maintain our current political
system - I very much doubt if there will or can be any
major changes. Perhaps we should again examine -
the Republic question - before
we can seriously look to the future and making appropriate
changes to the current system . Maybe, just maybe - we've
matured enough by now as a Nation - and are ready for change
because what we currently have appears to be antiquated to
many people and doesn't really work in the interests of the
majority.

cont'd ...

As for Thomson and Slipper, Mr Abbott is determined
to become Prime Minister and he will pick at anything
to destroy the current government. It would be commendable
to hear some positive policies to judge the merit of the man,
who so far doesn't seem to have any credit. If it wasn't
for Thomson and Slipper - Mr Abbott would find other weapons
with which to bludgeon not only the government but the
character of the PM.

Lexi Foxy

how can we consider being mature enough for a republic when most of our politicians are immature? Have you any idea of the complete shambles they would lead us into - even worse than your labour icons have done so far.

As for Abbott having no credit, you can't defend Slipper or Thomson and don't even think of blaming their stupidity on Abbott. The PM's character is already rock-bottom so what further harm could Abbott do to her?

You are right about the system not working for the majority. The majority does not want 'gay marriage', countless boat-loads of detritus and hidden terrorists, carbon tax (another stealth tactic by Juliar). The list goes on.

It's time you saw both sides for what they are and abandon your blind faith in the Gillard government, blind faith just like you expressed for the Rudd government.

Your having a go at Abbott is typical of Gillard and her followers. Every time she stuffs up, she blames Abbott. Makes you wonder if she really believes she is in control, especially when the shadow PM, Bob the Brown one, has fled the scene.

Lexi,

Abbott hasn't done anything. Juliar is destroying the party all by herself.

This is a Xmas present for the coalition, Labor has shot themselves in the foot so many times that they haven't a leg to stand on. Even the back benchers are starting to think that KRudd is the least of two weevils.

Lexi writes
'As for Thomson and Slipper, Mr Abbott is determined
to become Prime Minister and he will pick at anything
to destroy the current government.'

Lexi your Abbottphobia erases the memory that Abbott has not yet slid to the level of stabbing a sitting PM in the back to gain the top job. Your phobia knows no bounds.

btw he does not need to destroy the Government. Their lying, deceit, scandals, broken promises, sleazy deals and trashing of democracy has done that much better than Abbott could. You credit him with to much. Even Michelle Grattan another with Abbottphobia has had to concede that.

Austin Powerless,

Slipper's cabcharge problems happened under Abbott's watch when he was in the Liberal Party and with their full knowledge.

His party continued to support him through 9 preselections but only made noises when Mal Brough started sniffing around looking for a safe seat in the Lower House.

The media did their FOI investigation on this last year in response to the Thomson scandal, but instead of releasing it then (when it would have hurt Abbott), they waited until now when Labor could take the blame and just before he Budget session.

With their historical penchant for using forged documentation (Judge Kikby, Laurie Brereton, Godwin Grech etc) and lies (people overboard, WMDs and the rest) the other side of politics is not exactly squeaky clean on this either.

Maybe it's you who is not looking at both sides for what they are.

wobbles, in case you haven't noticed, although Slipper's antics occurred while he was with the Liberals, who is supporting him now? Labour or Liberal?
As for not looking at both sides, I had a lot of criticism for the Howard government. It's just that the Rudd and Gillard circuses (or is that circi?) have made so many monumental stuff-ups that any Liberal fiascoes are well overshadowed.

Wobbles write

'but instead of releasing it then (when it would have hurt Abbott), they waited until now when Labor could take the blame and just before he Budget session.'

yes Wobbles the tax funded ABC/SBS love Abbott. Whether it is the sarcastic Tony Jones or the snide Abbott hating Marrs you can be sure you will get balance. Congratulations however should go to Chris Ulman who at least tries to add a little balance to the leftist propaganda arm. Take your blinkers off. The feminist atheist trial has failed and left us with moral bankruptcy.

ABC News: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-04-30/too-many-distractions-for-the-gillard-government/3980464

Too many distractions for the Gillard Government

Updated April 30, 2012 12:43:00

The Prime Minister has tried to neutralise two political scandals and now her deputy is facing a political battle with one of the country's richest men. Professor John Wanna from the School of Politics and International Relations at the Australian National University says the PM is facing a political predicament unlike anything experienced by her predecessors.

snip -

However you look at it, we have a dysfuctional federal system of government whereby the right and mandate to govern is splintered at the cross benches. This is a ship trying to sail with all its achors thrown overboard.

Clive Palmer (like Donal Trump) is just a distraction from the real problem and that is for Abbott to show that the Coalition is ready to govern in its own right if it were elected. Whilst the confidence levels in the Gillard government are decisively low, the support for a swing over to conservative side of politics is not apparent. The eye of this political storm is unprecendented, and perhaps hedges on the electorate asking the question 'what is worse, 11 years of Howard or 4 and a half years of a dysfuctional Labor government? There isn't much to choose from in the 'centre'.

Labor are finished.It is time for a Ron Paul Style Libertarian Party.We need a Constitution to protect the people from their oppressive,greedy Govts.

The Coalition are not the answer either.They are aligned with the old Oligarchs of the British Empire.

On the contrary Austin Powerless, the whole T/S episode, is a storm in a teacup.

Abbott talking up the down side , (using words like crisis), to describe the Govt's position in relation to this matter, will only see the Gov'ts actual position re the balance of power unchanged.

Abbott on the other hand is the worst thing that ever happened to Australian politics. Anything the Gov't has done is to be reversed according to him, leaving the voters in a sort of forwards backward land. Institutions like the NBN will be sold off too big business, just as Telstra was before it. Miners will be encouraged to consider the assets they mine as belonging to them instead of the Australian taxpayer. "There will be no tax on mining profits". Workers will be taught to consider themselves lucky to have a job , "any job" under new industrial laws. And so on and so forth. The environment at the behest of State Govt's. Campbell Newman getting his wish, to be the sole decider when it comes to the future of the Great Barrier Reef, the C/wealth wiping its hands responsibility for the outcomes.

Abbott has taken premeditated deception to new lows already, by taking a completely bogus set of economic figures to the electors at the last election (claiming falsely that they were audited), after refusing to allow Treasury access to them because he knew they were bogus.

Only Campbell Newman (the new cowboy from Qld) has surpassed this behaviour, by appointing Peter Costello to audit Qld's finances his primary job being to confirm that the previous Labor regime did not manage the economy very well. At least he (Costello) has got a job now.

Gillard makes the mistake of allowing Abbott to set the political agenda, and equally failing to get her own point across, her own agenda up. I can only put it down to an over reliance on focus groups or something that would already be focussed on Abbott's continual down talking of everything including the Australian economy, that is actually bouncing along quite well in truth.

Dear runner,

I really can't take you or Mr Abbott seriously.
You both -
seem to be suffering from Epistemophobia. Therefore its
not wonder you see eye-to-eye.

"Gillard makes the mistake of allowing Abbott to set the political agenda, and equally failing to get her own point across, her own agenda up. I can only put it down to an over reliance on focus groups or something that would already be focussed on Abbott's continual down talking of everything including the Australian economy, that is actually bouncing along quite well in truth"

Agree with Arjay / Thinker on alternative/Abbott/Libs not being up to the job; but we are stuck with a dichotomous division of the political spectrum, which for many years has served us well when clear lines of ideology were recognisable. But they are so intent of fighting for the radical centre that its very difficult now to distinguish these ideological lines. Nor are we well served by third parties (as blocks[greens] or independents) who have traditionally tempered this dichotomy with a voice of reason. Increasingly we are asked to decide who not to vote for [on the basis of superficiality] rather who we should we support on the basis of clearly stated policy. I see no change to this coming over the next 18 months.

Lexi

You may rightfully accuse me of a lack of knowledge but your sickening pride in claiming the high ground over a Rhodes scholar shows your desperation and blind link to the sisterhood.

Lexi,
The # factor that Labor can not govern competently is because it is so heavily academic.
That is an indisputable fact.
No matter how good/bad Abbott turns out to be he can not ever be as bad as Labor has been since big Goaf got in.

Rhodes scholar, Well it doesn't say much for the teachings of that institution does it, if Abbott is any example.
Foot in mouth disease, Verbal diarrhea,
An unprecedented situation is now in motion, any trumped up allegation can rob parliament, at any time.
Gillard is the most productive leader ever, and Tony has yet to win a round.

Thinker, I suppose that you could call the Slippery Thomson affairs 'storms in teacups' if you take into account that we have a blatant liar for PM and stupid lackeys who publicly support what she will say before she's even said it. The whole labour government is a disgrace - is that what you were leading to?
As for your Abbottphobia, it's typically labourite to paint him as Mr. Negative because he wants to reverse all the stupid, destructive policies introduced by this government. Labour is acting like Hitler, as he saw all was lost, he decided to take the country with him. Gotterdammerung Aussie stlye.

579, isn't it great that you think Abbott has 'Foot in mouth disease, Verbal diarrhea'? So, no-one in Labour suffers from these afflictions?
'Gillard is the most productive leader ever'? I nearly wet myself when I read that. 579, you just don't add up.
By productive, do you include Building the Education Revolution - The school halls fiasco, Home Insulation Plan (Pink Batts) - Dumped after several deaths and no accountability, Digital set-top boxes - Cheaper at Harvey Norman, $900 Stimulus cheques - Sent to dead people and overseas residents - to name but the tip of the iceberg.

@ individual,

you stated that : The # factor that Labor can not govern competently is because it is so heavily academic.

I think you confuse academia with intellectual rigor. The total absence of an intellectual picture is what I see, Gillard is unable to portray wisdom in policy let alone an intellectually sound explanation of how policy is formulated and rolled out. Instead, we get declarations about "policy intentions" fixing things (working families, NBN, climate change) along with some convenient reference to Labor party platforms. Gillard attempts to tap into the 'mood' of the nation are often clunky,limp and superficial. I once believed that it was the selective bias of the Murdoch press that unfairly portrayed her as such. But after personally meeting and listening to her speak, it became apparent that she is not a conviction politician but rather a very good reader of preordained policy lines,scripts and spin. How ironic that we have one of the best economies in the world at the same time as having an increasingly gutted national sense of our democracy. Democracy means government by the uneducated, while aristocracy means government by the badly educated. We have the latter.

The fed govt is not a BDM.
Your fiascoes don't add up.
Your bers are propaganda. There was no b difference in house fires before the BIRs.
300 parliamentary bills passed, which is an all-time high.
Julia's ability to get legislation through is a remarkable achievement.
Voters will see through B/S.
The public are not stupid.
The desperado has not won a round.

300 bills of what? name at least 10 significant and original pieces please? And repealing/ reforming Howard era bills is not progess.
This is about quality of govenment, not a contest on passing bills.

Abbott has been challenged to move a no confidence motion, but has declined.
That goes to show you this man is full of sh??
The only bill backed out was work choices. Howards only mistake.
Tony says this govt ; is really terrible. The record will stand for itself.
The legislative assembly, is moving along nicely. Something Tony won't mention.
He is convinced the public are stupid. There is more to govt; than rhetoric

Dear runner,

What sisterhood? I am an only girl in my family.

As for claiming anything over Mr Abbott?
He's the one who wants to be Prime Minister not me -
and as a voter - I am fully entitled to judge the
man by his actions or lack of appropriate ones, and words.

As for his being a Rhodes Scholar? So was Bob Hawke
Kim Beazley, Malcolm Turnbull and many others. It's
on what merit the scholarship was granted that needs
to be looked at - and of course - how it was used -
and what was accomplished that matters.

Oh Lexi

'Dear runner,

'What sisterhood? I am an only girl in my family.'

and you accuse me of seem 'Epistemophobia'

Surely you can do better than that.

Rainier,
don't hold your breath. I've asked 579 some time ago to name just two bills passed to our benefit. Nothing to-date.

individual, oh, i quietly suspected that, lots of useless hair splitting legislating is what happens when industrial lawyers become politicians..oh dear.

Howard predicts Rudd will roll Gillard
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news-old/howard-predicts-rudd-will-roll-gillard/story-fn3dxity-1226344032077

Great rant Austin, but all based upon the myth perpetrated by all the LNP commentariat, that their parties possess economic credibility.

As I was driving home only moments ago, an independent economist (Steven Large ?) was explaining (on the radio ABC drive) about how a $25 b, hole was created in the budget during the last years of the Howard Costello Govt and inherited by Rudd, still remains unresolved. Created by baby bonus's and tax relief for the wealthier people etc (middle class welfare), pork barreling, advertising, etc. Todays bottom line is affected by the economic measures of the Howard years.

The Victorian LP Govt for example, has pinched money from Peter's inheritance, to pay Paul, so Paul can show a budget surplus. Meanwhile, a sound Victorian economy inherited from Brumby continues to contract under Bailleau, and the State Govt decides to sack another 600 public servants for good measure in it's budget. A Gov't elected on a wave of cows running through Victoria's Alpine National Parkland, I feel so represented (not) by the model for Govt we have, here in Victoria. They cant even find someone willing to head their anti corruption body, because the job is a crock, a sham.

You have not addressed at all the point I make Austin Powerless, with regard too Abbott's wilful planned budgetary deceptions during the last election. Abbott is the first politician in Australian political history to introduce the concept of designer lying.

Allow me to explain, first of all you plant a seed based on a a misleading concept, and then you keep saying it over and over. After a while it becomes mantra , people start believing it, viola, favourable opinion polls.

And finally, do you even really know yourself , what it is that an incoming Abbott Govt has in store for you Austin. I certainly don't.

Dear runner,

I'm trying to simplify things for your understanding.
But if it's too difficult for you.
I'll certainly try to better clarify things for you
next time.

Lexi

'I'm trying to simplify things for your understanding.'

Maybe you better do that for the vast majority of the electorate who are not blinded by the sisterhood.

Dear runner,

You keep referring to some sort of - "sisterhood," which is
simply stirring on your part and I tried politely
not to fall for your attempts at divergence off topic.
A technique that Mr Abbott uses constantly.

When it comes to winning in politics - it's real policy
debate over economic issues that matter not nonsensical
political debates.

So if Mr Abbott is elected as Australia's next Prime Minister
he will have a complex economy to oversee. He'll face issues
of productivity, labour force adaptability, an over-regulated
business sector, the issue of middle-class welfare,
taxation distribution between states, core roles of government
and so on. Nothing new there - except for the fact
that the world is moving so fast and is so interlinked that
he's going to need the best brains around him if Australia
is to measure up.

And that's the worry. Mr Abbott doesn't appear
to have the team or the structures - he'll need.
All he seems to have is -
sound bites, slogans ("scrap the tax," "stop the boats"), and
"look at me" TV pictures on track, but not any underlying
sense of economic competence.

His frontbench economic team is threadbare at best.
Frequently offering confusing, contradictory, and
nonsensical sounding messages. They lack a sense of purpose.

Malcolm Turnbull on the other hand is widely respected in
the business and wider community for his economic nous, his
experience and acumen.

You talk about the "sisterhood." I presume that's because
our PM is a female. However it may come as a surprise to
you that your attitude is just that - YOUR attitude.
Most people don't judge their politicians
by gender but by competence. In any case - Mr Abbott comes
across as an ideological throwback to the 1950s, depended and
manipulated by a catalogue of conservative male mentors
("brotherhood?"), from Cardinal Pell, Christopher Pearson,
to name just a few.

The once great Liberal Party of Robert Menzies, as imperfect as it
was in many ways by contemporary standards was a political
nirvana - compared to what people fear Mr Abbott will dream up.

thinker, pity you resorted to calling my post a 'rant' instead of actually addressing its content.
Your blind faith will be shattered at the next election (soon I hope) and your Abbottphobia will come to fruit.

You wrote 'Allow me to explain, first of all you plant a seed based on a a misleading concept, and then you keep saying it over and over. After a while it becomes mantra , people start believing it, viola, favourable opinion polls'. Is that a seed like the 'global warming' scare or that the majority of Australians support gay marriage?

You are right about 'And finally, do you even really know yourself , what it is that an incoming Abbott Govt has in store for you Austin. I certainly don't' - but can it possibly be worse than now? At least the number of boatloads of detritus will be reduced to the amount under Howard.

Lexi

The sisterhood includes Roxon, Wong, Gillard, Plibersek and other favourite ABC bunnies. Compare that to the brotherhood (as you put it) of Howard, Costello, Abbott and you have incompetence versus competence. You have a lot more integrity on the male side as most voters now agree.

You also write

'And that's the worry. Mr Abbott doesn't appear
to have the team or the structures - he'll need.

Well he would have the same team as Turnbull would (whom you seem to admire).

btw you never did answer whether you would vote for Turnbull ahead of Gillard. I think your answer would say alot.

Can anyone see Abbott as a statesman figure. The man is a disgrace.
Turnbull would be a more likable opposition leader.
Work-choices was the downfall of Howard. Abbott will reinstate;
Opposition policies will be the divider.
You can't run an economy on No, Crap, Pledges in blood.
Desperate men do desperate things.
Pyne and Abbott. Kangaroo Court.

Dear runner,

I'm not going to argue with you about -
"sisterhood" versus "brotherhood." It would mean for you
having to reject gendered dichotomies: male versus
female, us versus them, and so on. It would be
pointless - as you're not capable of doing that.

As for competence versus incompetence - suffice to say
that's something we also won't agree on. My preference
in politics doesn't lie with politicians who have a
worrying tolerance for hate speech, or a noisy contempt
for one's political opponents.

As for Malcolm Turnbull - and whether I would vote for him?
Of course I would vote for him. He would make an incredible
Prime Minister. He's a man who held his climate change
position even though it cost him the Liberal leadership.
Turnbull stuck by his belief that there should be a
penalty on carbon emissions and that a market-based system
was the most effective way to do this. He has stayed true
to his beliefs. He does have economic nous and experience,
and he's a man of substance - not hot air.

Lexi
'He has stayed true to his beliefs' Yes even though his belief was a fairytale. Abbott also is sticking by his belief that man made gw is c-ap although he is a touch hypocritical by agreeing to the same targets. As for Gillard who advised Rudd to delay action and then promised no action and then did a filthy deal with the Greens and self centred independants ( that is as sleazy as it gets).

Lexi,

"My preference in politics doesn't lie with politicians who have a worrying tolerance for hate speech, or a noisy contempt for one's political opponents."

I guess that rules out Juliar and Swan for starters.

SM,

Thanks for proving my point.

As constant target of a double smear campaign, Swan and Gillard are entitled to a few disdainful words, in my view SM.

Particularly Wayne Swan, whom has already been recognised as having done a fine job as Australian Treasurer in International Forums, despite the bleatings of the LNP whom possess an economic plan that is nothing more than a wish list.

Harking back too my ascertains that Costello himself in the end left an un-funded black hole in the Federal Budget, I see still remains un-addressed by anyone on the conservative side of the discussion.

Frankly, I think that discussing the historical effect of LNP Govt's on Australia's economy would prove to be embarrassing for LNP supporters. If you looking for 3 things you would remember about the Howard Govt, (1) the GST, (2) children overboard, the drawing of the political race card), and (3) Workchoices. None of these things have enhanced our lives for mine.

As for your rabid view of boat people Austin, the defining factor as to the question of numbers arriving on our shores is dependent on the push, not the pull. Policy has far less to do with it than TA would have us think, supply and demand is determined by the level of conflict out there in the world.

Julia's going: it's a matter of time: by Dennis Shanahan

www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/julias-going-its-a-matter-of-time/story-e6frg75f-1226344120623

"The Labor leadership is now an empty shell. Gillard has lost public support and internal party support, and her agreement with Peter Slipper and Craig Thomson in the parliament faces months of uncertainty as the federal police investigate allegations of Cabcharge fraud against the Speaker.

Despite the leadership vacuum, no challenges are planned, nor are challengers prepared to come forward."

Dear Rainier,

I wouldn't pay too much attention to the media hype -
especially from newspapers that have a very conservative
leaning - such as the paper you've cited from. It's all
too easy to speculate about leadership changes.
Especially when the Prime Minister is passing legislation
that is proving not to be popular. But that's what a
Prime Minister is supposed to do - to govern and legislate.
And not to seek the voter's approval on every piece of
legislation. That would be horrendous - and nonsense.

Talking about leadership changes - it is time
that the Liberal Party realised that Mr Abbott is a
millstone around the Liberal Party's neck. And that
the better alternative would be Malcolm Turnbull -
or any other competent front-bencher the Liberals have
to offer. Mr Abbott is simply too polarising and
unacceptable to 70 per cent of the population.

Newman says he can't afford public servants, and Abbott is agreeing with WA, they need more of the GST than the eastern states.
All of the east states will not be very popular by the time of an election.
When the chips are down people vote labor.
All eastern states are crying broke, they can't handle economics.
Give more to the miners and see how fat they can get, that is the noalitions only solution.

good avoidance, Thinker. Do you "Think" you could answer my question about planting the seed.

Apologies Austin for not addressing that. I do believe an Abbott Gov't would be worse. And I don't believe boat people are the massive problem they are made out to be.

I heard an LNP spokesperson trying to align our defence capability with boat people today Austin. I think that is an absolute disgrace, considering it is our humanitarian capability we should be showing when it comes to asylum seekers.

Pretending that you plan to surround Australia's coastline with surface to air missiles (reading between the lines) to blow boatloads of fleeing refugee family's out of the water for votes, is not one of my favourite political pastimes, figuratively speaking.

Internationally such policy renders us pariahs in our region and beyond, as discovered by Julia (death stare) Bishop during her current visit to Indonesia where she is being told politely that her parties policies aren't acceptable. The inward thinking of the LNP and it's ideology has always been a thorn in our history.

Our Gov't, particularly the Gillard Gov't (to their shame) have been complicit by allowing the issue of boat people to bubble along on the local political landscape, allowing the LNP to set the agenda, inflame and talk up the situation, and then failing to be decisive in finding a solution that meets the conditions set out in our International Humanitarian Agreements.

Thereby putting the issue to bed and getting on with allowing/helping people to understand, that the number of people arriving seeking asylum here, is practically entirely dependent on the level of international conflict and its proximity to Australia. Supply and demand, push factors, as I have already said.

the hidden danger of allowing boat people in is that, with so many 'refugees' arriving with no ID papers, we don't know who is actaually coming here. How many terrorists are passing under the radar while do-gooders are tripping over each other to allow them in?
Also, why is it proportionately more male adults than everyone else who are on these boats? True refugees would have their women and children with them, not leave them behind to some perceived danger in the 'homeland'.
Also, true refugees wouldn't be agitating to have similar conditions, laws etc from their 'homelands' to be introduced to Australia.

Then you would have to hark back to the numbers Austin, and also realise that the numbers arriving by boat here are small compared to other nations offering and providing safe asylum.

In addition the numbers of illegal immigrants arriving by plane and overstaying their visa, massively outweigh those arriving by boat in this country. No one it seems is doing anything about that.

As to the issue of formal identification, it is fair to say that if you were fleeing a war zone in a country that provides little in the way of citizenship papers anyway, that you are not likely to be able to provide paper work.

Conversely if you knew that having papers will speed up your entry in advance of the journey you would do your level best to have some.

It is definitely a hard one (the matter of processing) and security is part of the mix, I agree Austin. As for terrorists making Australia a target, that would probably be most likely because, we run around the world fighting America's battles now, instead of focussing on our own defence. A little less of that might help.

As for both sides of politics today, the one thing they share is their place in a bi-partisan conga line to the Whitehouse.

T2,

If the numbers of asylum seekers is dependent on push factors, then there must have been a sudden 30 fold increase in conflicts world wide after 2008 that we didn't notice.

The voters remember that the coalition had the problem solved and that what we have now is a Labor creation.

Dear Shadow Minister,

The greatest number of refugees come from the following
countries - Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Democratic
Republic of Congo, Myanmar, Columbia, Sudan, Vietnam,
Eritrea, China, just a name a few.

Trust in our political system has started to ebb away.
Finger-pointing achieves nothing constructive.

@ Thinker2,

Maybe you need to give some thought to changing your name Thinker2, because all you appear to be doing is regurgitating what the advocacy groups have spoon fed you.

1) <<Then you would have to hark back to the numbers Austin, and also realise that the numbers arriving by boat here are small compared to other nations offering and providing safe asylum>>

Here the key words are: “safe haven”. Many nations offer temporary safe haven but few outside the (gullible) West offer permanent residency with all the trimmings of lifelong social welfare thrown in.


2) <<As to the issue of formal identification, it is fair to say that if you were fleeing a war zone in a country that provides little in the way of citizenship papers anyway, that you are not likely to be able to provide paper work.>>

Funny thing they have NO papers – yet they seem to have a good supply of mobile phones along with a list of emergency contact numbers in OZ

3) << In addition the numbers of illegal immigrants arriving by plane and overstaying their visa, massively outweigh those arriving by boat in this country>>

This one has been answered to death so many times to bring it up again and try and pass it off with the comment:“No one it seems is doing anything about that.” Shows either you have not been listening or not thinking (probably both!) .Please go back to earlier threads on OLO where it was repeatedly answered.



@Lexi,

<<Trust in our political system has started to ebb away...>>

But judging by the number of illegals we attract, trust in our welfare system is going gang busters!

Dear SPQR,

There will always be people who will try to abuse
whatever system exists - be they locals, or others.
However, I believe that our welfare system works
surprisingly efficiently. If you've got evidence
to the contrary - we'd all be interested in your
supplying us with the link.

@Lexi,

My point wasn’t so much that the welfare system was being "abuse[d]" (though that may be the case also).
My point was more that, the benefits (welfare, and others) we generously bestow on "refugees" is a major draw factor.

Can there be any wonder why, so many are trying to pass themselves off as belonging to those groups we regularly (and blindly) rubber stamp as “genuine” refugees –see below:
"Insiders say refugees in Pakistan are going to extreme lengths to be able to come to Australia...while immigration officials often detect the fraud, in many cases they are overruled on appeal. A former employee at the Australian High Commission in Islamabad, who wishes to remain anonymous, says she witnessed visa fraud in her office ‘on a daily basis’.’Definitely, in fact I would say just about daily, a large percentage of my caseload would've been Pakistanis claiming to be Afghan refugees or Afghan asylum seekers,’ she said.”
http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/international/2012-05-02/australian-immigration-workers-claim-widespread-visa-fraud/937278

Add to the benefits, the fact that they can: blow-up boats (endangering life), burn down processing centres and regularly escape lawful detention, and be immune from prosecution.

And you have the reasons why so many illegals are voting with their feet –or, rather, their oars – and coming to Oz.
Oz must be a people smugglers dream location; one of the people smugglers easiest sell locations.

Incidentally Lexi, we're still hanging out waiting,waiting ,waiting for prosecutions on the following incidents –any idea as to when we will see prosecutions and deportations?

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4359#110561
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4618#121354

Lexi,

In none of the countries that you mentioned that we are getting asylum seekers has the situation changed dramatically from 2008, yet the numbers have increased 50x.

The lack in trust in the government is largely due to the corrupt and deceitful way labor is behaving.

Dear SPQR,

There's been a series of allegations in the media
about asylum seekers and refugees. Boat people have
been accused of queue jumping, being criminals, presenting
health risks, attempting to deceive and mislead immigration
officials and so on. Nothing new there.

After the terrorist attacks in the US on 11 September 2001 -
the then Defence Minister even suggested that there could be
terrorists threatening Australia's National Security. This
claim was well publicised at the time.

What was not publicised was an appearance before a Senate
Committee by the Director General of ASIO.

The Director General was asked how many security checks of
boat people ASIO had conducted and what were the results
of those checks. His reply was that ASIO had checked close
to 6,000 ( at that time), of whom not a single one presented
a security risk.

As for the Christmas Island and other riots - the following
link may clarify a few things for you:

http://www.smh.com.au/national/most-asylum-seeker-rioters-turned-out-to-be-refugees-20120306-1uief.html

I feel that as with any complex issue - it's always best to
research and examine the issue from more than one source,
and certainly from more than one perspective - before making
any judgements. Things are very rarely black or white -
and we sometimes need to remove our blinkers to see the
full picture.

Dear Shadow Minister,

You must be fully aware that there was a lull in
world conflict for a time - and therefore less refugees
travelled by boat. Then conflicts once again
escalated. What I don't understand is the time that is
spent arguing about a few thousand "boat people," and
no discussion about the tens of thousands of people that
arrive here by plane - and stay "illegally."

This has been happening under all governments and it's
a problem that will remain no matter which government is
in power.

According to Mr Abbott we have two choices. Sink the boats
before they get here or take them back to Indonesia and
create a major enemy on our door-step.

Forget Nauru - because that cost us a fortune. And I'm sure
it's not in Mr Abbott's budget - for the next election.

Lexi,

What I see is a small decrease in fighting corresponding to a few % drop in the refugees to other countries, whilst this compares to a 96% drop in the people coming to Aus.

Reinstating TPVs will also help stop those coming by air. This is something the government can do NOW.

Dear Shadow Minister,

I'm surprised that you brought up the subject
of TPVs, Former Liberal MP Bruce Baird, speaking
on ABC radio a while back stated - "It's not on
to bring back TPVs. We've moved on as a country.
We've recognised the injustice of the previous
system and that's the way it should be."

The only one suggesting bringing back TPVs, apart
from yourself - is Malcolm Turnbull.

The general consensus seems to be that -
particularly moderates in the party would find it
unacceptable.

@Lexi,

<< There's been a series of allegations in the media…>>

Face it Lexi, the system is full of holes. The only ones who don’t seem to know are a few diehard Labor and Green supporters.

<< As for the Christmas Island and other riots - the following link may clarify a few things for you>>

NOT A WHIT! The article clarifies nothing.
It has now been over 12 months and there have been a number of repeat incidents.Yet Chris Bowen is still making noises about getting tough.
What a joke!

There was a report on Channel Nine’s Current Affair about a month ago.
One of the rioters had thrown a kettle of scalding water over a guard seriously injuring him.The guard identified the culprit –yet the court still saw fit not to convict him. The offender has now been released into the community –that’s us getting tough!

<< ASIO had conducted and what were the results
of those checks. His reply was that ASIO had checked close
to 6,000 ( at that time), of whom not a single one presented
a security risk.>>

Unless the individuals are high profile terrorist operatives ASIO will find little.All of the 911 terrorists entered the US openly and legally.

Likewise, ASIO found no fault with the young Somalis who legal entered OZ. Then went back to Somalis to fight for al-Shabaab!

"Tony Eastley: A religious scholar claims young Somali-Australians, who've gone to Somalia to fight with the terrorist group al-Shebaab, have returned and are living in Australia."
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2009/s2693680.htm

Dear SPQR,

I've really not got much more to add to this
complex issue - except to say that if New Zealand
can process people humanely and quickly -
perhaps we need to look at what they're doing
and try it here.

What I don't like is the politicisation of the
misery of people seeking to escape persecution
and war being exploited by political parties
in the interests of winning government.

See you on another thread.

Lexi,

It has been one of the main planks of the coalition's illegal immigration policy. TPV's give those deemed to need protection asylum, but prevents them from travelling back to their homelands from where they have just fled (as so many do) and from bringing in family members, which encourages parents to put their unaccompanied children on the boats.

Your wildly exaggerated figures don't help the discussion SM. Clearly from SPQR we can see the damage done by ramping up the rhetoric on this subject.

People like Tony Abbott and Scott Morrison are responsible for the hysterical view that some people have over this issue. It is an extension of Howard's drawing of the race card(children overboard) in perpetuity.

In terms of local security we may be best served by having better understandings with local powers such as Indonesia, instead of professing that our incoming LNP Gov't will be shooshing boatloads of exploded boat people back to Indonesian waters, as a foreign policy.

This expression of policy is more of a security risk to Australia than a benefit. In addition is is expressed and performed by all on the LNP front bench purely to lather up the masses.
Over an issue that is (for the most part) massively overstated.

Thank you Lexi for your actual and relevant math.

"The Director General was asked how many security checks of
boat people ASIO had conducted and what were the results
of those checks. His reply was that ASIO had checked close
to 6,000 ( at that time), of whom not a single one presented
a security risk."

T2,

When the pacific solution was introduced, the numbers quickly dropped from 4000 p.a. to less than 100 p.a. When the pacific solution was removed the numbers quickly jumped up to over 6000 p.a.

Given that the number of refugees to other countries showed only a few % change over the same period, it is beyond logic to claim that the pacific solution was not the main driving factor. Joe Bloggs in the street is incredulous when labor tries to claim that it won't work again, especially when they were going to try their own deterrent.

Dear Shadow Minister,

When the sun goes down and the moon comes up there is very
little light. When the sun rises - it is bright again.
In summer it is usually warm, and in winter it is usually
cold. It's called a cycle - influenced by the natural
process.

So too refugee number fluctaute depending on the conflicts
within their region. And if that's difficult to understand
those that are not happy - should perhaps move to the
sinking island of Nauru.

cont'd...

Your logic is flawed. It's like saying -
"When Liberals were in power - there were no major floods!"
But then - it never rained during that period.

Lexi,

If the 96% drop in refugees suddenly happened in Australia, why did it happen no where else in the world. What other country experienced a 5000% increase in 2008%.

Ebb and flow! what bollocks.

Try cause and effect. When the sun rises there is light. When there is light in one place but no other, then someone is doing something different.

Oskar Schindler was a people smuggler. So too was Harriet Tubman.

In 2010, there were an estimated 27.5 million people displaced internally by conflict. The largest populations of internally displaced people are found in:

•Sudan: 4.5 – 5.2 million
•Colombia: 3.6 – 5.2 million
•Iraq: 1.3 – 2.8 million
•DR Congo: 1.7 million
•Somalia: 1.5 million

Dear Shadow Minister,

You obviously aren't seeing the light on this issue.

Dear Rainier,

Thank You for the figures.

I hoping this link may put this subject in perspective SM.

http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/07/06/boat-people-this-is-what-you-are-anxious-about/

And as for democracy (the original subject of this post), I think it would be best preserved for all including boat people.

The only other comment I would make is, that too our detriment the Abbott led LNP have lowered the bar in Australian politics, they simply cannot accept the result of the last election, nor can they countenance that Abbott poorly negotiated his position on that occasion.

Abbott could not be believed by his Parliamentary colleagues on the cross benches then, nor can he be believed now by the electors.
The true danger to democracy, is electing someone like Abbott whilst not having a clue what it is that he intends to do in Gov't.

At the last election he and Joe Hockey deliberately sought to mislead electors by producing so called audited costings for their policies. Found later to be not an audit, the producers of the document later fined and discredited by their own peers.

This process of avoiding Treasury scrutiny of policy costings of claims featured in political advertising, is a new low introduced by that Abbott led opposition. Being elected on false premise is not good for democracy I would have thought. Seeking to do so, has something to do with ethics, motivated by self interest and not the preservation of democracy.

If there is one thing that our current parliament can claim is that it is indeed democractic.
A good case for re-electing the independent members of parliament, could be made on this very fact, whom I think are performing like the only conviction politicians we have left anyway.

Dear Thinker 2.,

You obviously do see things clearly.
There's obviously no bubbles in your think tank. ;-)

T2,

The portion I am interested in is the roughly 4% of boat people that perish making the trip. with the more "humane labor/green policy, more people have died at sea than came to Australia under the Pacific solution.

Lexi,

You have not provided one jot of anything to show how the 96% drop in refugee arrivals that coincided with the pacific solution could have any other solution. Even Labor admits it worked.

Dear Shadow Minister,

I'm not going to continue to argue with you on this
subject. I could provide you with all the stats in
the world - but it would be pointless. It's not that
I'm being anti-social - it's simply that to you -
it won't make an iota of difference - and frankly - I can't be
bothered any more.

See you on another thread which you will undoubtedly
start soon, let me guess - ah yes - on the budget!

Can't wait!

Lexi,

You claim " I could provide you with all the stats in the world"

But actually you can't and that is the point. All the stats in the world point to the pacific solution working.

Dear Shadow Minister,

The following link may clarify things for you:

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/3886792.html

Again Lexi,

As per your article "So the boats largely stopped arriving, but about 4,000 asylum seekers continued to come by air each year."

The Pacific solution was about stopping the boats which the article you linked acknowledged.

Q.E.D.

Dear Shadow Minister,

What the link actually did was state quite clearly, and I
quote:

"The trend of asylum seekers to Australia in the Howard years
followed world trends. The figures show that war, civil unrest,
and persecution determine refugee outflows rather than any
deterrent policies in destination countries such as Australia."

It went to clarify that:

"In the use and abuse of statistics, there is one very important
lesson - just because two things happen at the same time -
doesn't necessarily mean that the one causes the other.
It is clear that the major reason for the Asylum Seeker numbers
in the early period of the Howard government was NOT its own
policies but a decline in the number of asylum seekers in
the world. When the world refugee numbers rose again after
the mid 2000s, so did the numbers coming to Australia..."

And interestingly the link stressed that - "the UNHCR does not
differentiate by mode of arrival but Tony Abbott deliberately
encourages our obsession with boat people. It's obviously
good politics to focus on boat people only. We never hear him
admit that more asylum seekers come by air than by boat."

"The Sydney Morning Herald reported from Wikileaks that "a
key Liberal Party strategist" told a US Diplomat in Canberra
in November last year - that the issue of asylum seekers was
"fantastic" for the Coalition and "the more boats that come
the better."

"The 'Key Liberal Party Strategist' could not have been more
explicit about the political game being played."

I can see that no matter what I say or do - you shall
continue playing your party's political game. You believe
that the Pacific Solution worked. And you shall continue to
believe it worked.

Luckily, experts and those in the know - don't agree with you
or your party stance on this issue - and in our democracy,
that's something for which - we can all be grateful.

Lexi,

I have noticed frequently that not long after I wash my car - it rains.

I realise there is no scientific explanation that connects these two events, yet it appears (to me) to happen more often than mere coincidence.

My influence on the weather is probably just localised and not particularly widespread but it seems to be real.

Using typical Pacific Solution logic, and thereby ignoring other possible external factors, I can therefore claim a direct causal relationship between my physical act of car-washing and the weather.

Isn't that what politics is really about? It's not "the art of the possible" but the "sale of the improbable".

Lexi,

There are no experts that state that the pacific solution didn't work.

The link you provided was a political one, and not a genuine analysis. Anyone with basic statistics knows that you need specific related data, the link you provided does not. The pacific solution specifically targeted the boats, and you link contains no information on the boats whatsoever. The statistics given are only vaguely related, and useless for the purposes of evaluating the impact of the pacific solution on boat arrivals.

In 2001 boat arrivals dropped from 4000 p.a. to nearly zero. This was not in any way mirrored in any of the OECD countries. The correlation worked mathematically is greater than 90%.

For the plane arrivals the only relevant policy would be the TPVs, and it is notable that for the OECD countries where the arrivals dipped by 45%, in Aus the arrivals dipped by 70%. From 2001 to 2008 The asylum seekers to Aus dropped far far more than anywhere else.

Dear wobbles,

Thanks for making my day.
Great analogy of yours.