I’ll take it. It’s pretty far reaching though not as far many of us on the right side of this issue would have liked, but the compromise brokered by both sides of the refugee and detention issue within the government is a good step forward, yet, it’s only the first step.
The next step is to sack the Minister really responsible for this culture of inhumanity, Philip Ruddock. It was under his administration that much of the machinery of this culture was established and eventually fostered by Amanda Vanstone. Then, with extreme prejudice, Vanstone and the hand that signed the papers, DIMIA Secretary Bill Farmer should also be sacked for their culpability in this travesty of human rights and policy.
I would then demote junior minister Peter McGauran to his natural position as dogcatcher for his role in not approving a single refugee claim handed over to him for consideration by Vanstone, a badge he no doubt wears with pride. The rest of the department will be punished by being given the task of running NSW State Rail, no one will notice the difference.
So far these are the changes mooted, so let’s have a look at them and what they may mean given the trustworthiness of this government.
Mandatory immigration detention to remain but be made more flexible. We’ll still keep you in detention, but now you get to close your eyes and pretend you’re not behind the razor wire.
Immigration minister to be given discretion to release children and their families, and long-term detainees, into community care. We’re not going to sack Amanda despite clear incompetence, instead, similar to our approach on DIMIA Secretary Bill Farmer, we’re going to reward her for her hard work by giving her even more power because the awards season is now over.
Three-month deadline for immigration department to make initial visa decisions. We’ll figure out a way to extend this, don’t you worry about that.
Three-month deadline for Refugee Review Tribunal to review cases. We’ll figure out a way around this, don’t you worry about that.
Regular reports to parliament on cases which are not met within the time limit. Only at the request of a dorothy dixer from Petro Georgiou. It was part of the deal we arranged, we don’t challenge him on pre-selection he gets to ask a few questions so he feels better about himself.
The department must provide six-monthly reports to the Ombudsman on people in detention for two years or more. Double spaced, twelve point Verdana and nicely perfumed to cover up the smell.
The Ombudsman’s report must be tabled in parliament, but recommendations will not be binding. We can still do what the hell we like. Once we take control of the Senate we’re the kings of the world.
Faster processing of temporary protection visa holders, with all outstanding cases to be completed by October 31 this year. From now on October will only have 30 days.
Inter-departmental Committee, to be chaired by Prime Minister and Cabinet department secretary, to oversee the changes. Because I no longer trust my ministers or backbenchers on this issue, I will decide who comes here and under what circumstances.
At least we now know where the buck stops.
I agree Mark - plenty of scope for legitimate cynicism here… no rights have been provided, though the shortening of the time frames may have some teeth. If anyhting, its a widening of executive power, when what was needed was more independent review and accountability mechansims.
The true significance may be for the TPVs - maybe DIMIA will stop forcing them them through the RRT charade - where they invariably get their stupid DIMIA assessments reversed - and will step up the number of positive primary decsions. There’s been a strong trend in thi diretion of late anyway. Howard hasant changed much here - except, critically perhaps, expectations and the nature of the public discourse.
And yes, Panopolous looks a right tool. But then again, are there any high profile const. monarchists who arent complete ‘tards? Flint, Panopolous…. this is a movement with no future….
Lefty E, this is Phil Gomes’ post - first of many to come while I’m on sabbatical! Nice work, Phil!
Ahhh. Then I agree, Phil …[apply same rant!]
I’m with Phil and Lefty E - Andrew Bartlett’s take:
And giving more discretion to Vanstone can’t be a good thing. Anyone who’s watched her interviews on Lateline could see that she doesn’t have much of a grasp of what’s actually going on (particularly striking with Qasim) and I think she probably makes decisions based on a combination of DIMIA advice and sniffing the political wind. See also the time a few weeks ago when Howard contradicted her in Parliament.
Paul Kelly in today’ Oz gives a good summation of the establishment’s view on the deal. Nothing has really changed, the rebels have been contained with some deft feints and to hell with the advocates.
He goes on to note that there is nothing in the new processes that prevents an asylum seeker from still being locked up for two years. For Howard this has nothing to do with asylum seekers, it’s only about the preservation - through a different set of tools - of a weapon that is very useful in wedging the community. and dog whistling certain sectors of the community into his paddock.
And this beauty.
This will be the talking point to come for the next few days by the usual sock puppets. The skeptics will be described as Infuriated, enraged and unappeased.
I think that’s right, Phil. The first thing that occurred to me on reading Paul Kelly was that we’d seen the last media coverage of a lot of these issues - problem declared solved by Murdoch.
Right on Mark, and further to the media group theme, did anyone else compare the tone of initial ABC online and Age reports last night?
Essentially: the ABC were upbeat, craven, cowed, fearful & favourful, glass half full on the changes.
Whereas Fairfax were tearing the ‘changes’ a fresh one by about 5 pm.
(Jeez, isnt a pity Ziggy didnt get to buy Fairfax, then the govt could have had a 51% stake and really sorted out the line down there on Bourke St.)
There was an interesting difference in the SBS report and the ABC report on the Iranian election, as well.
Closer to the theme, I well remember the night when the Kosovars were to be sent back. On the 5pm ch. 10 bulletin, they were “refugees”. By the late news they were “illegal overstayers”. Ch. 10 on this occasion led the pack but it’s astonishing to watch the media spin and frames change so quickly. Same thing will be at work on this one - we’re all irredentists now.
Irredentist? I knew there was a good reason for doing this, I now get a word of the day, I’ll try to squeeze it in whilst selling a Taiwanese made bicycle to a Chinese national tomorrow.
An irredental appointment, Phil?
“…Peter McGauran…for his role in not approving a single refugee claim handed over to him for consideration by Vanstone, a badge he no doubt wears with pride.”
A record similar to a certain Indonesian judge, eh? I do love symmetry.
Actually for the sake of accuracy the shadow minister Laurie Ferguson has stated that McGauran’s record of approving claims he’s handled stands at 4%.
Mean & Tricky has used his mirrors again,to keep his backbenchers quite (how they rolled over).By giving more power to his minister(s)and not to the judiciary, at the next election he can thump his chest and declare I choose who does and does’nt come into Australia while again wedgeing the ALP, while the populace cheer ‘Heil Howard,We want Howard, Heil Howard.’
Meanwhile, the refugees can rot in detention, because that is what the populace beleive should happen,because Howard told them so.
People should be enraged, but they shouldn’t direct their rage at John Howard (which only helps him anyway usually). They should direct it at any journos that are so lame as to believe this is anything other than the smoke and mirrors trick it obviously is.
And clearly this is how the new decisions may have been read by the Chinese asylum seekers at Villawood. Their despair is a shocking reminder of this.
It’ll be interesting to see if the Refugee support groups read the Villawood incident in this context. However, as I’ve briefly mentioned, the framing and wedging of these groups and others in their camps has already begun with some of the terms referenced by Paul Kelly in today’s Oz.
Agreed that attacking Howard is a zero sum game, I’ve said as much in a recent post, he only gains strength from it. There is no question that his position in Australian public life is a conundrum for many of his detractors.
I think it’s best to simply hold him accountable (because he is) and move on in keeping the pressure up on those around him, which is what the Georgiou ginger group appeared to respond to.
I dont know Phil - the illusory TPV ‘changes’ last August fooled the sector for about a day. They’re a well oiled machine now, and have good grass roots networks, not only in the usual places, but critically, in rural and regional Australia. They wont get fooled here much past this weekend. And as for baiting & wedging, Its pretty easy to sell a critiqe: what would these changes have done for cases Rau or Qasim? Maybe they would have got looked at in two years. People who give a damn will see this isnt solving anything. I agree with Andrew Bartlett - this is Howard- as -usual. No surprises. But where’s the media scrutiny?
Having made that point…. one of the issues with the Migration Act IS the lack of discretion. Its like clockwork: no visa / visa lapses = unlawful non-citizen = mandatorily detained. No ifs or butts. There is no flexibilty, and this is a problem. Alas, as noted earlier - addressing this through the expansion of Minisiterial discretion, rather than indepedndent review, means ‘flexibiity’ can go either way (And probably will….)
I wonder when Georgiou will realise he’s been shopped. Probably has already - but he’s certainly wedged now.
What are the odds Howard’s flexibility and “compassion” on this are a pre-emptive strike to head off the report of the Palmer Enquiry?
As a matter of fact he did receive the report somewhat before his press conference on this matter. Although I’m sure that much of his thinking was influenced by some advance knowledge of it’s contents. And there are reports of ministers being horrified by some advanced copies of the findings of the Palmer report.
Either way he’ll now have a wonderful media op with the Woods that should go a long way in deflecting the media’s gaze from the failings of the new changes, and I’m sure we’ll all be too preoccupied with Douglas Wood to notice as the issue disappears from the news cycle.
I cant help but feel we have been severely duped by the whole thing. I dont even know if this is a start, because Howard will feel his position is stronger and more reforms will not be easily forthcoming. An opportunity wasted?
That’s about the strength of it, Nic, though it’s hard to see how it could have played out any differently. Personally I think the criticisms of Labor for not taking a stronger stand are tactically misguided - to do so would have pushed Liberals closer to party unity and enabled Howard to crush the rebels more easily.
I was hoping theyd have said damn Howard and launched the bills, which had a shot at making it through the senate if everyone other than the libs and FFP supported it.