 Political Corrections
with Margo Kingston
Coalition Wins on Both Sides of Politics
It's a question of national honour.
Many Australians think Howard's actions over the Tampa have defended our national honour. Many others think they have seriously stained it. Howard is a danger to himself and his country for creating such a bitter split.
After the weekend's 'final solution', what stands out for me is that Howard is now flirting with direct inhumane activities, as distinct from washing his hands of the boat people.
Before now, he just wanted the refugees out of our waters and for the world to save them. The world said no. Thus, he relies on the region he so routinely snubs, the Pacific, to pull him out of his hole.
New Zealand Labour Prime Minister Helen Clark gets him off the hook - she will process them on her territory. Howard buys Nauru's support - give us some land, he said, and we will pay for everything.
Outsourcing refugee processing, that's what that is. The refugees lose the protection of our laws.
As I write, there are no answers on who will process, and under what laws on Nauru. Nauru is not a signatory to the United Nations convention on refugees. I think Howard is leaving the way open for our warships to intercept the boats outside our territory, and pick them up provided they go to Nauru. This is Howard's f#*@ you to the lawyers and the Courts who have insisted that refugees are people too, with the same human and legal rights as the rest of us.
The other aspect of this pushing the boundaries of our humanitarian and legal standards is what on earth our warships will do if they find a boat outside our waters. What do they do if the boat disobeys orders to turn round? Even more frighteningly, what do they - and even Australian search and rescue, which asked the Tampa to pick up passengers on the sinking vessel - do if a ship is sinking?
The possible depths to which our government could sink were hinted at during Sunday night's Sixty Minutes interview with the Prime Minister. Here's an extract.
Charles Wooley: There is a paradox worth noting and that is, almost certainly, some of the asylum seekers will eventually wind up in their preferred destination - Australia. What happens next time? What happens with the next vessel that approaches Australia with the illegal refugees?
John Howard: Charles, I can't guarantee that there won't be boats in the future that will come and come through. I can't guarantee that and I'm not promising that, but what I can promise is as a result of what has happened regarding the 'Tampa' and as a result of the increased surveillance and the greater world focus, it is going to be less attractive. I hope there will be fewer. I can't guarantee that. But within the limits of the law and our national decency, I hope we've made a difference and will make a difference in the future.
CW: A natural decency, as you say, does dictate that our naval skippers will still stop and pick people up?
JH: Of course we are Australians. We don't behave barbarically. We don't sink ships. But our generosity should not be abused.
CW: But you can't tell me they would try and turn them back?
JH: They would encourage them within those constraints to go back, yes.
CW: If they refuse?
JH: That creates challenges and that's why I can't give blanket guarantees and I didn't think people would expect me to because, on the one hand, they don't want the boats to come. They want us to do everything we can to deter them. But they don't want us to behave other than in a decent, Australian fashion.
Note that when Wooley asks if we'd stop and pick them up, Howard replies only that we won't sink ships. Does this mean we'd leave a distressed ship to sink or swim?
He won't he tell us the rules of engagement on the high seas with his new defence shield in place. Note that he won't say what our ships will do if boats disobey orders to turn round. The only he limit he places on what we could so is what the Australian people want. He makes no reference to ethics or morality as determinants. This is truly scary.
Now that Howard is on his limb and climbing further and further out on it, the contradictions don't bother him. This operation will cost more than processing the boat people on Christmas Island.
Refugees processed in New Zealand will become full citizens, and can them come to live in Australia. If they'd gone the Christmas Islands route, they would get only Ruddock's temporary three year visa, with little welfare support. Similarly, those processed in Nauru will become full citizens when they come here.
Nothing matters to Howard in this bizarre matter except electoral appeal.
What will the electoral wash up be?
Geoff Barker, writing in the Australian Financial Review on Saturday, said Howard has now tied up the second preference votes of One Nation supporters.
That could well be true, but I predict that in the wake of the Tampa, One Nation's primary support will also drop. Howard is their man.
For the Coalition, they have bolstered support at one end, while crushing it at the other.
Email: mkingston@mail.fairfax.com.au
Margo's web diary - www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/webdiary/
|
