To Indymedia readers
The problem both the government and the opposition have is they cannot agree what to do about stopping the boats thereby saving lives, as well as the millions of taxpayer’s dollars this costs every taxpayer.
I believed I had the solution to stopping the boats, which meant no offshore processing was needed and a huge saving to the Australian taxpayer.
This led me to send an email to the Immigration Minister Mr. Chris Bowen suggesting how this could all be achieved, and a copy of this email I have pasted to this page I sent Mr. Abbott a copy of, and to this day neither have replied and it is obvious that at the recent meeting held in Sydney my suggestion was not discussed.
From: Robert Lee
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 8:13 AM
To: chris.bowen.mp@aph.gov.au
Subject: to stop the boats and the deaths
Mr. Chris Bowen
Minister for Immigration.
Dear Sir,
On the matter of offshore processing I really do not care who is right, but there is one way that you can stop the boats tomorrow, and potential future deaths, and that is to amend the Act to change the law in respect of people smugglers irrespective of age, any person found assisting and convicted the smuggling of refugees to Australia will receive a life sentence.
I am positive for no amount of money will anyone assist in bringing refugees to Australia, who are in fact jumping the queue in front of other refugees who have been processed and waiting to go to another country.
Drastic times require drastic measures.
Yours faithfully
Robert Lee.
Just recently I heard on ABC Radio that a Skipper and two crew who smuggled to Australia 76 refugees at a cost of $12,000.00 per person. That adds up to $921, 000.000 dollars, and during the three years the person responsible would ensure that their families would not suffer financially.
As I see it to stop the boats you have to make it so unattractive to the person paid to smuggle people to Australia, and all it would take is an amendment to the law, raising the sentence for such a crime to life imprisonment regardless of age.
I would very much like to know why my suggestion is being overlooked? Is if because a person outside of federal politics can find a solution when members of the federal parliament cannot see the trees for the forest.
What do others think of my suggestion?
Yours Faithfully
Robert Lee
Comments
Robert this is a cruel response
Robert, Australian governments have been trying the "Law and Order" approach to this issue for well over a decade now and it just results in more boat tragedies and more people being locked up in gulags/detention centres. Are you seriously suggesting the poor fisherman, including children, who are sent out on these boats (its not the organisers who go on the boats) be locked up in gaol for life! That is unbelievably cruel response. Why stop at life imprisonment - why not have them shot on sight by the navy.
Instead of this approach why dont we emphasize that under International Law, people have the right to seek asylum, it is not a crime. Nor should it be a crime to help desperate people to seek asylum. If the trips could be organised in the open, legally then it would help ensure they were safer.
If you are worried about "the queue", then I suggest you take you and your family and go and wait in Malaysia or Indoenesia or any of the other nearby countries which have not signed the UN convention on refugees are wait there with your family, withour work rights, education rights etc and wait - oh I dont know - 10-15 years.
I would personally go further and question why people do not have complete freedom of movement between all countries. Capital is free to move around but people who are fleeing conflict or seeking a better life must risk their lives in treacherous journeys often met with fences or worse from the rich countries of the world.
Robert - your "original" response is worthy of a Herald Sun editorial - "lock em up for ever". Its not original nor is it humane.
Cover for racist and xenophobic attitudes in Australia
So the solution is to deny asylum to those that need and deserve it?
The truth is that all this rhetoric about stopping boats to save people's lives is merely cover for racist and xenophobic attitudes in Australia.
We don't need to stop boats, we need to stop the need for boats.
Australia could easily resettle enough refugees from transit countries so that nobody would get on a boat in the first place. Ask yourselves this. The death rate for people trying to get to Australia by boat over the last 10 years or so is currently running at about 5-7% and could be double that because there are some boats that are suspected to have departed for Australia, but never arrived. Who would get on a boat with at least a 5-7% chance of drowning at sea? Only the most desperate. That is exactly why the success rate for refugee applications from boat arrivals has been running at about 80-90% over the last 10 to 15 years. Only those with the greatest need take the risk.
In contrast the succes rate for applicants who arrive by air, with a visa, is far far lower, and the number of air arrivlas is far higher. Something of the order of 10 times higher over the last 10-15 years.
If Australia was resettling even only 10000 people per year out of Indonesia and Malaysia, the boats would dramatically decrease overngiht. If Australia funded refugee support programs in these countries so that people could wait safely to be resettled and spend their time waiting productively then boats would stop altogether. This is a far cheaper option for Australia, saves lives, and means that refugees who are resettled do so more successfully, with less trauma.
This approach was taken by Fraser with the Vietnamese in the 70s. There were far larger numbers then, relative to our population now, who had to be resettled in a far less diverse society. After 10 years the rates of negative social and mental health indicators among Vietnamese refugees resettled was in line with the general community. It can work and work well.
No mandatory detention, Free the Refugees. Resettlement not Racsim.
I object to those who come through the back door
I object to those who come through the back door ahead of others more deserving than those who can pay a people sumuggler $12,000.00 for that dangerous privilege.
Only those with the greatest amount of money take that risk. I am sure if queuing at a supermarket checkout and several shoppers jumped ahead of you that you would not remain silent, or turn the other cheek.
Who would you if asked give preference too, a queue jumper, or a person whose status was confirmed years ago, and is still waiting for any country including australia to take them, and could not afford to pay a people suuggler?
My suggestion would see those people who can well afford it to stay in their own country; go to the back of the queue and wait as thousands of others have, and are still waiting.
Clever play on petty resentments of Australians who want more
Well this comment is predicated on two lies, lies that have been carefully perpetrated for many years in order to justify Australia’s human rights abuses with respect to boat arrivals and Australia's abrogation of its responsibilities under the refugee convention.
Coming by boat is not coming by the back door. It's explicitly permitted by the refugee convention. That convention also explicitly prohibits discriminating against asylum seekers on the basis of how they arrive, which is exactly what Australia does.
There is no queue, and there never has been. Australia, as do all refugee convention resettlement countries, picks and chooses who they resettle in the rather modest agreed quota, approximately 1300, which has hardly increased in more than ten years. Australia selects refugees for resettlement in the offshore humanitarian program mainly on the basis of "resettlement potential". A small proportion of the offshore humanitarian quota is based on humanitarian considerations. But the fact is that most people resettled in this program from the UN pool of registered refugees get selected ahead of people who have waited longer or have more need.
"I object to those who come through the back door ahead of others more deserving." And who are you to judge who is most deserving? And what makes you think you have any right to be offended? This offence and these attitudes do nothing to address the real problem, which is that not enough refugees are getting resettled. This dishonest offence at people arriving on boats is just cover, blaming the victims, for the fact that greedy selfish shits in wealthy countries like Australia are more concerned with their own petty desires and aspirations than they are about people suffering in other countries.
It's no more fair for a person who could potentially afford to pay a smuggler to have to wait years and years for resettlement than it is for a person who can’t afford it to have to wait.
This resentment against people who have enough money to pay a smuggler is a very clever play and exploitation on the petty resentments of Australians who want more and resent people who they think are getting something for nothing. Well I think you'd be better at directing your discontent at those who run this country and continue to support an economic and social system that lets billionaires pay no tax while simultaneously letting homeless people live years without a place to sleep at night. Refugees are not the enemy, nor are they the source of any problem that you face. They are just a very convenient scapegoat to take the heat off the powerful who maintain and support an unjust society.
Brilliant, thank you! Nail on the head!
x
Australia leads in circumventing convention obligations
I dropped a "0" off the figure for the offshore humanitarian programm. It has of course bee about 13000 for the last 10 years or so, not 1300.
Also, unique among resettlement countires, for evey visa that Austrlaia grants onshore, they take one from the offshore quota. No other country does this.
The truth is that among refugee convention countries, and among resettlement countries in particular, Australia is leading the way in circumventing convention obligations and undermining the international system for refugee protection.
Inhumane and pretty much murder.
Fizick is correct. Robert and Anonymous you are wrong and your response is cruel - what you are saying is that seeking asylum should be made unlawful, well that is inhumane and pretty much murder.
Read what Gerry put together:
http://www.indymedia.org.au/2011/12/24/why-people-get-on-boats-and-why-w...
All three major political parties caused the drownings off Java
http://www.indymedia.org.au/2011/12/20/hra-media-release-all-three-major...
Free the Indonesian children from Australian prisons
http://www.indymedia.org.au/2011/10/16/free-the-indonesian-children-from...