Some facts about the people on the boats
Given all the speculation and commentary about the two boats with Tamil asylum seekers aboard currently in Indonesia, I thought it would be helpful to publish some basic facts about the people. This information comes from Pamela Curr from the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre in Melbourne, a person I’ve found to very reliable on these sorts of things – certainly far more so than anonymous, speculative or presumptive comments in the media.
———————–
*Two boats*
“Merak” is anchored off the Indonesian port of Merak and has 255 people on board including “Alex”. These people came recently from Sri Lanka- we are trying to get exact numbers but we believe that over 90% have come out of the camps including Menik Farm.
They are deeply traumatised and fear being returned to camps if they hand them selves over to the Indonesian government. Three people from this boat have been hospitalised and 5 people with little children have left the boat because of the children. Last week water was restricted and no medical care given for conjunctivitis which was sweeping through the boat. Over 30 cases reported on Friday.
The good news is that on Saturday Doctors arrived and provided treatment and the water restrictions were lifted. IOM and Indonesian officers are pressuring the people to disembark. However after living in camps in SL these people are not ready to commit to camps in Indonesia.
This boat has dropped out of the media gaze- please watch carefully as they need us to ensure that their rights are respected. -
* the people on the boat are calling it the “Merak”
–
“Ocean Viking” has 78 people on board. 37 of these people hold UNHCR refugee cards and most have been in Indonesia for years waiting for a place to call home.
They are recognised as refugees but this is no guarantee of resettlement. Refugees have been warehoused in Indonesia since 2001 by first the Howard and then the Rudd Government. Eventually people realise that they must help themselves as no one else will help them. This is why the boats will continue to come from Indonesia where there are currently 2,107 people registered with UNHCR who are going nowhere. There are 50 people in Christmas island detention centres who hold UNHCR refugee cards.
RESETTLEMENT FACTS
Australian resettlement from Indonesia
2008-2009 35 people
2007-2008 89 people
2006-2007 32 people
Total resettlement 2001 – 2009 was 460 people an average of 50 per year. You do not need to be a mathematical genius to work out the odds of resettlement.
Life is Indonesia for these people means no work, no school even for primary school children and no future. People are fed and watered and sheltered by IOM at Australia’s expense. However people are not cattle and need more in life than this which is why they take matters into their own hands – wouldn’t we?
ADDENDUM: Some very useful information contained in this article by Matt Wade in the Sydney Morning Herald. It gives some good background to a question frequently being asked in Australia at the moment, which is why don’t Tamils fleeing Sri Lanka just go to the Tamil Nadu region in India.
Some in Australia have asked why Tamils fleeing Sri Lanka don’t just go the south Indian state of Tamil Nadu, home to 60 million Tamil speakers. The answer is that more than 100,000 have done just that. About 73,000 of them live in special refugee camps funded and run by the Indian Government. Another 31,000 live in the community, mostly in cities such as Chennai.
India – where 800 million people live on less than $2 a day – does not encourage the flow of refugees from its small island neighbour. Even so they have been arriving in waves since the Tamil Tigers took up arms to fight for a separate homeland in north and east of Sri Lanka in the early 1980s. The war ended in May but refugees continue to arrive……
The public reaction [in India] is in stark contrast to the recent frenzy over boat people in Australia. The media have taken little notice of the boat arrivals and national politicians have been allowed to concentrate on other challenges……
There is sympathy for the refugees. In September the ruling party in Tamil Nadu passed a resolution calling on the national government to grant citizenship to all Sri Lankan Tamil refugees in India. So far, New Delhi has shown no interest in the idea.
Not only Tamils seek sanctuary in India. The World Refugee Survey 2009, published by the US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants, found 456,000 refugees and asylum seekers in India. That includes about 110,000 Tibetans including the spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama. India also tolerates a huge number of Bangladeshis within its borders – many millions, by some estimates – although they are officially deemed illegal immigrants.
30 Comments, Comment or Ping
paul walter
Hmmm…Should have read it straightaway.
In theinterim , have been jumped on by a refugee advocate, along with some of the nations journos, as to “Alex”.
(sigh).
Nov 3rd, 2009
Anita Muecke
Thanks Andrew. It’s refreshing to get some facts from named sources to form an informed opinion. Anita Muecke
Nov 3rd, 2009
maree whitton
Andrew Bartlett, I think you are repeating what most Australians already know.
That is Tamils were saved from drowning and are now living on an Australian ship refusing to leave unless they are allowed to come and live in what they see as the “lucky country”. If they can’t come to Australia they will jump into the water and drown themselves- blackmail of a democratically elected government and its people.
These Tamils got tired of waiting and decided to pay their way into Australia – illegal immigrants.
Andrew Bartlett, several questions – How many refugees/illegals should we take? Who is going to pay for these people? Should the Taxpayer be expected to pay welfare to illegal immigrants who could afford to pay their own way into Australia? Bearing in mind our Government has just announced they have to stop Medicare payments to our citizens, (Injections into arthritic joints and Cateracts).
Where are these people to be settled, most immigrants come to this country want to settle in the main cities? How big should our cities get before they reach the size and condition of the cities that a lot of these people come from?.
How long should Australians pay for these people who put themeselves and families at risk by trying to come here in unworthy vessels? Who is actually responsible?
Australia gives millions of dollars in aid every year – will this stop if we take the responsibility for these people from the governments from where they came from?
Why doesn’t the UN request Sri Lanka to look after their people properly and equally?
No body seems to ask these questions.
Australia has its own problems, we have an underclass of people who live off unemployment and invalid pensions, we have a pretty awful mental health problem. The mental health, general health and living standards of our Aboriginal communities is another story. If we can afford to look after these refugees surely we would be better looking after our own people first or equally
Nov 3rd, 2009
Andrew Bartlett
I’m glad you already know the things in my post Maree. It’s more than I’ve seen in most reports and commentary, but you are obviously well informed.
Seeing you are so well informed, you would also know that it is wrong to call them “illegal immigrants”. I don’t think Australia should take any illegal immigants, but the Tamils have a right to make a claim for asylum and to have it assessed, just as you would want/need if you were fleeing persecution. However, the ones on the Ocean Viking boat don’t have an automatic right to make those claims in Australia. As my post notes, it appears that 37 of them have already ‘done the right thing’ and made claims for asylum whic have been recognised, but the statistics also noted above (which you clearly knew all about) indicate that they would still have a 10-20 year wait whilst having no security or opportunity for settlement – it’s not surprising they would seek another option, and it is legal for them to try.
Despite your well informed state, you are mistaken in your statement that Australia pays “welfare to illegal immigrants”. We do not.
As for your question as to “why doesn’t the UN request Sri Lanka to look after their people properly and equally”, I’ve been asking that question repeatedly. Although it is really more a matter for nations individually and collectively to pressure the Sri Lankan government, something the Australian government doesn’t seem to have been doing much of.
Your questions about how many migrants Australian cities should settle and how big our cities should be allowed to get are not really relevant to this issue. The numbers of asylum seekers who arrive by boats is a minuscule compared to our overall immigration intake. Stopping every refugee boat would make no perceptible difference to our overall population. The cost of doing so would also outweigh the costs of settlement, particularly as research shows that over time refugees provide a net revenue gain to the taxpayer as they integrate and move into the workforce – and that’s with measuring any of the flow economic benefits.
Nov 3rd, 2009
paul walter
Well, the discussion between Maree and Andrew is of a better level than some going on at the moment, but personally I could wring the Opposition’s neck for exploiting this divisive and difficult issue to find a way out of their current doldrums.
Maree, I’d award it marginally to Andrew.
BTW, Andrew and I had similar conversations during the various eternal return reruns of the subject, with myself taking roughly your position, perhaps from a more “laborish” point of view.
As a broad subscriber to ecological concerns and zero population growth didn’t find Andrew’s answer totally satisfactory, as a frank and open “good faith” response to the finite resouces question Maree raised, re neo lib “growth at any costs” nonsense peddled by Rudd last week, for example, when he thought he had solved the current problems and was free to reassure the mortgage belt marginal seat tradies and contractors he is seeking to hold at the upcoming election. As a population reduction supporter and one interested in ecology; NOT amused.
Maree, I would have added to your list in terms of supine compliance of governments within the American alliance over recent decades, particularly during the expensive and corrupt Bush/Cheney effort.
To think Thirty- Trillion- dollars(!!) is wasted bailing out the billionaire shysters responsible the recession; after all the trillions squandered on getting at Iraq’s oil with bloody wars in West Asia in the interests of
to these selfsame US rich, further still on top of mammoth tax cuts earlier for them, funded by cuts to social spending to pay for it all.
Meanwhile, billions of folk across five continents go without in just about everything, because obesity-ridden Western countries who got fat of the wealth of countries like Sri Lanka whilst ruining their capacity to rule themselves effectively
after colonial times, then can’t afford more than a fractile of a percent of GDP , as to “aid” to do right in a Christian “do unto others” sense.
Nov 3rd, 2009
philip travers
As a disability pensioner,I cannot understand why anyone would think, that refugees out in boats are stopping what, I may particularly want for the rest of my life.There are also some very fine treatments of arthritis and cataracts where one isn’t dependent on the medical profession.Rudd and Government are actually more conservative on health issues than Howard,and,whilst it is a repeated statement on my be- half,Australian Doctors are not really that helpful.Rudd has decided the so called Left of the Refugee debate show no internal consistency,and deplores the Right of or being unhelpful,thus enjoying himself as being a middle whipping boy prior to the Melbourne Cup.Whereas Andrew Bartlett here just offering his opinion gets kicked.He is now a Civilian ,for those who cannot handle the former Senator’s Status.
Nov 3rd, 2009
maree whitton
Andrew, How do you know the status of the “refugees”aboard the Oceanic Viking, they have refused all calls to show their identification haven’t they?
Paul Walter, I agree totally with you about the bailout of the rich institutions. Now because Australia is supposedly going great guns the RBA has raised interest rates again. Who does this help? It definitely doesn’t help the poor or average Australian, it helps the rich institutions, its like a merry go round. What about the unemployed in this country, they live off a pittance. What kind of country do we live in where the poor and lower middle classes keep paying to keep the the country going.
Nov 4th, 2009
Dana
Although the Sri Lankan Tamils have lived there since 2 centuries BCE, I wonder why they don’t now migrate to the state of Tamil Nadu in India; surely they would be more at home there.
Nov 4th, 2009
Andrew Bartlett
Maree, you said my post was just “repeating what most Australians already know”, yet now you’re asking me how I know some of the people are refugees?!
My post indicates the source of the information. As I stated, I have this source to be more credible than just about any other on these sorts of matters for 10 or 11 years I’ve been working on these issues. The Asylum Seeker Resource Centre has good contacts amongst asylum seeker communities, which includes good contacts with some waitinf ro resettlement in Indonesia.
In addition, today the UNHCR has said “some of the group have already been recognised as needing refugee protection”.
As I said in my earlier comment, the group on the Oceanic Viking do not have the right to brought to Australia to be assessed, particularly given their claims can be assessed in Indonesia by UNHCR. But if they have been recognised as refugees and nothing then happens for years to come and they have no security or rights where they are, it is not surprising they will explore another option which may give them security. That’s why a coooperative regional (and eventually global) solution is desirable, but that will take years to develop.
In the interim, Australia could certainly increase its humanitarian intake by 5 or 6 thousand. It would still be a very small proportion of our overall annual migration intake.
Nov 4th, 2009
red crab
question ?
just how fast do you think that australia will act to pic up refugees who are in trouble not in australian waters after this incident .
Nov 5th, 2009
Tony
Red Crab
Red Crab says:
just how fast do you think that australia will act to pic up refugees who are in trouble not in australian waters after this incident .
There’s no doubt that these refugees must disembark in Indonesia.
They have no other option.
If the Oceanic Viking returns them to Australia, it will break almost all protocols. Your right the lives of many thousands that will be left to die at sea are at stake.
1. First we need to have real discussions to the governments from where these refugees are coming. Perhaps some international support to house them there and guarantee their safety. Perhaps temporary residencey while waiting to be housed back home.
2. Maybe a guarantee that once they have diembarked that their cases will be processed quickly. (regional countries could and should be prepared to accept true refugees). Those with real claims that have direct family in Australia should have priorty to be processed in Australia.
3. Those who are declared economic refugees to quickly dispatched back to their country of orgin.
The risk of bringing them back into Australia after being rescued in Indonesian waters would open the floodgates for all who seek a better life in Australia and elsewhere to jump on the closest boat they could find and head here. (a virtual cash cow for the people smugglers and the death sentence for many women and children caught up in the surge)
Its a tough one and a test for a Prime Minister that has no answers, yet attacked everything the previous government proposed.
Tony
Nov 5th, 2009
paul walter
Anyone watch QA tonight?
Steam.
Nov 5th, 2009
ken
Isn’t the fact that now they aer on an Australina Government boat mean they are technically now on Australina sovereign teritory? Why would; they get off, I certainly wouldn’t in there situation.
Nov 6th, 2009
red crab
if the govt folds to the demands of these ppl it could mean the end of the govt.it dose not mater weather its the rite thing to do or not it will be perseved as the govt being week by the ppl of australia and any other group who wants to push any other issue .
if these ppl have taken control in any way of the boat that rescued them from harms way then it should be seen as piricey and delt with acordingly.
question
have these ppl already broken the laws of the land they want to come to buy stopping the Oceanic Viking going about its lawful activities.
Nov 6th, 2009
Tony
Ken
ken
Isn’t the fact that now they aer on an Australina Government boat mean they are technically now on Australina sovereign teritory? Why would; they get off, I certainly wouldn’t in there situation
The Oceaniac Viking was responding to a distress signal in Indonesia waters. As I said prevously they must disembark.
I’ll put this example to you. If I were fishing in moreton bay and sent out a distress signal and a British Destroyer answered my distress signal, would that entitle me to travel to England. No.
If they are allowed to leave Indonesian waters and demand passage to Australia, it would have massive consequences. It would no doubt lead to distress calls being ignored in the future and the cost of many lives.
It seems that urgent prosessing assurances have been declined by these people and force may be the only answer, unless another country accepts them.
No one has the right to foreceably remain onboard and demand passage to a destination of their choice.
Besides who would welcome them into their country after this showing of total disregard to maritime law.
Whilst Australia welcomes all that have respect for our laws and customs, I know of no one who would welcome this group if they managed to force their way into Australia.
Maybe charges should be laid on the ring leaders, that would cancel all opportunities to claim aslyum.
Tony
Nov 6th, 2009
Andrew Bartlett
Ken
I don’t think being on an Australian government boat means they are on Australian sovereign territory, although it is certainly true that the Australian government has responsibility for them in an immediate duty of care sense whilst they are on board.
However, that doesn’t extend to them being entitled to lodge an asylum claim while on board. Red Crab has a point, up to an extent, in suggesting this may make some vessels slightly less keen to do a rescue at sea if they think they’ll just get stuck in a stand-off. However, it would be nothing compared to the impact of what happened to the Tampa, who not only got blocked from offloading refugees who wanted to get, but get boarded and taken over by SES troops for their trouble.
The current situation is unfortunate although it’s far from a crisis (other than for Kevin Rudd perhaps). However, it is true that the people on the Australian boat don;t have any entitlement to be taken to Australia. If the facts in my post are true (and I’ve seen nothing since to suggest they’re not) and many of them have already been assessed by UNHCR as refugees some time ago, there would be a lot of sense in Australia offering to resettle those people. As to the others, they should disembark and be assessed by UNHCR in Indonesia. How to get them off if they continue to refuse is a difficult issue – one which I expect would have been a lot easier if Kevin Rudd hadn’t tried to make a point of his ‘toughness’ by suggesting that these boats had been stopped in/sent to Indonesia as a result of his direction.
Nov 6th, 2009
Andrew Bartlett
Having said that, I’m told that media reports in Indonesia suggest that Indonesian government officials want to use Sri Lankan government diplomats to help resolve the situation.
Reportedly, the Sri Lanka government has indicated a willingness to repatriate the asylum seekers by transporting them back with Sri Lankan’s Navy boat.
If that’s the case, there is no way the asylum seekers should get off the boat. If there’s any prospect at all of these asylum seekers being delivered into the hands of Sri Lankan government officials, Australia may as well just sail away with them now.
(I’m told that what is printed at this link, when interpreted, details the potential involvement of the Sri Lankan government – if anyone knows the language and believes it doesn’t say that, let me know)
http://antaranews.com/berita/1257409877/pemerintah-sri-lanka-tidak-diizinkan-tinjau-warganya
Nov 6th, 2009
Marilyn
They were not rescued in Indonesian waters, they only extend 12 nm from the coast. They were rescued in international waters and while the call to take them to the nearest port was legally correct it was wrong because it amounted to refoulement under Article 33 of the refugee convention and Australia knows it.
Yes they do have a right to come to Australia, every person on the planet does whether we like it or not.
We are not allowed to lock them in that hell hole in Indonesia which is why Article 33 of the refugee convention is in play – we cannot and will not guarantee their freedom and safety as refugees.
And Indonesia did try to get the Sri Lankan government people on board, I think you will find the union guys on board will not let that happen and nor will the union guys on the docks in Indonesia.
One only has to read the story of Galang in the Australian today to realise the crap that they spin us.
Nov 6th, 2009
Marilyn
And Andrew, the last of the Lombok group have now been accepted after more than 8 years. So what really do people think they are debating about?
We are still in the refugee convention, it is still given force at Article 36 of the Migration act, people still have the right to seek asylum from persecution in other countries, there is still no offence entering or staying in Australia without visas and hasn’t been since 1992 so what are we all on about?
Bugger the narrow principle of taking to the first port, they didn’t take them to the first port they took them to a brutal and corrupt Australian run prison to jail them in a place where refugees are beaten to a pulp and babies are behind bars again.
Nov 6th, 2009
Tony
Marilyn
They were not rescued in Indonesian waters, they only extend 12 nm from the coast. They were rescued in international waters
12 nm is well within the Indonesian waters.
Marilyn Says: Bugger the narrow principle of taking to the first port
How irresponsible is that statement.
Lets just hope that there arent any more Marilyn’s out there as this would leed to many deaths and many ships failing or ignoring distress signals in the future.
Marilyn says: And Indonesia did try to get the Sri Lankan government people on board, I think you will find the union guys on board will not let that happen and nor will the union guys on the docks in Indonesia
Union guys ? In Indonesia ?
Nov 7th, 2009
paul walter
Yony, it is not the “Marilyn’ s” of the world who cause unneccessary deaths at sea and elsewhere through the third world.
It is the complacent, uncaring and uncomprehending nations and peoples of our Western Empire, who are happy to live off of global sufferings, yet like Ralph Nickleby from Dickens’ Nicholas Nickleby, will begrudge the global poor a sniff of hope , let alone (God Forbid!) any actual material help.
Some of these even try to pass themselves off as “Christians”, whilst antagonistically spurning the spirit and teachings of the Gospels, such as outlined in Sermon on the Mount and the various Parables.
Nov 7th, 2009
red crab
Bugger the narrow principle of taking to the first port, they didn’t take them to the first port they took them to a brutal and corrupt Australian run prison to jail them in a place where refugees are beaten to a pulp and babies are behind bars again.
glad to see you back marilyn.
more storys to make ppl feel bad wheres the proof what babys behind bars.
what brutal corrupt jail ?
heres what they do on christmas island they take bus loads of refugees to the local resterants for meals because THEY dont like the food given to them at the brutal prision all payed for buy the tax payers . so much for brutal treatment .
last time i was there lettuce was $8 each and meat price was obseen
so where do you get the idea of bad treatment.
Nov 7th, 2009
philip travers
I guess having a right to Andrew Bartlett’s blog by simply meeting the requirements of such, means one can feel powerful and then criticise others without even the numeracy involved in the relativity of the superior sense as expressed.Dare I say, that there maybe thinking Indonesians privy to this site,Christians,Sri Lankans, maybe UNO types and even the people discussed about.Now it seems to me,on matters of legalities,actually only Australians maybe seeking the definite or the potential of definiteness.So lets then have a look at Sri Lankan Naval persons! I don’t know if these naval types were ever involved or wanted to be involved with hostilities to Tamils.They may not know every nuance of legality that Australians are concerned about.And they could be co-signatories,the Sri Lankans with Australians on other issues like non-hostility pacts.So,if someone had the language nous,as Australians,maybe the Sri Lankan Navy could pickup the refugees and hand them then to Australians in a more clear and precise way.Then that would mean some statements made by the Sri Lankan Government have been true,or at least in this case potentialised and seen as true.That is,they have said they will treat people fairly.There doesn’t seem to be a great advantage for the Sri Lankan Government in this case,not to be seen by many to take a role that would mean their statements were inherently untrue.To me,here, Indonesians are being insulted,wether or not their treatment is fair or not,I am not talking relationships between leaders[PM. &PRES.],but the generally powerful of Indonesia. It is pretty easy to know when one could be offending Indonesians,it is however much harder to recognise,when they may no longer feel that,by simply engaging in how they may get round to thinking Australians are not trying to be insulting.Could it be there is more open space in attitude with Sri Lankan officials too!?
Nov 7th, 2009
JACK KENNEDY
THANKS for some facts…I wish people would let their local members know their thoughts on these matters.They are supposed to guage their own electorates and represent them on the issues.The present Government must do the best as they see it. When the election comes this is when the silent majority will decide.Keep up your good work.
Nov 9th, 2009
Andrew Bartlett
Thanks Jack.
I’ve added some extra material to the bottom of my post from this piece in the Sydney Morning Herald.
It provides some good information in response to the frequently asked question as to why Tamils fleeing Sri Lanka don’t go over to the Tamil Nadu region in India.
(short answer: the vast majority of them do, and India holds far more asylum seekers than Australia. But the majority would be unable to obtain the sort of rights that come with genuine resttlement and residency.)
Nov 9th, 2009
paul walter
I note the “Oz”reports that Garrett, apparently keeping his powder dry for a “biggie” has vetoed this peculiar Travesty dam thing that Queenslanders seem to have been so exercised with as late, possibily as an example of corporatist power formations overruling both democratic, as well as science and economics, and in pursuit of an outcome favouring the constellation of vested interests to benefit from the project.
Is this the result of a public backlash against Rudd’s “development at any cost” population manifesto of last week?
Do we begin to see evidence of why the government has kept up its “tough but humane” rhetoric on the current wave of asylum seekers?
A little longer, as the opposition may well fragment as a political force, leaving the Ruddites as sole occupiers of parliamentary politics in this country, as
Four Corners seemed to be indirectly implying earlier this week?
Nov 11th, 2009
Naomi Cartledge
I still can’t understand why the govt, opposition and others are getting so hung up about 4% of people seeking asylum in or via Australia?
Other countries have had over a hundred 100% increases, which number in the thousands. They must be aghast by our nonsense!
MAREE WHITTON – the other 96% of people seeking asylum arrive by plane. Why don’t you suggest to your state govt, that they organise raids on every backpacker hostel on a weekly basis. let’s get those pesky “illegals” into detention centres as soon as we can – babies and all! You might like to go on Crikey website and take a read of ‘Asylum seekers – the facts in figures’. You are just spruiking the nonsense that you’ve been listening to for years. Why don’t you educate yourself re the facts. THAT would be refreshing!
Incidently, I was also on a DSP(it’s called a Disability Support Pension _ has been that for at least 13 years) and deserved to receive it. I think you’ve also been taking too much notice of the rednecks at the Telegraph, or another of Murdoch’s rags. If you’re really angry about monies going to people unfit to work, you might like to ask your local federal member, ‘why do does Centrelink spend many millions chasing recipients who may have received a couple of thousand they aren’t entitled to, but barely nothing in comparison on getting back the billions the rich are stealing from us’?
You could also query why billions($10 billion) of our dollars(via subsidies from federal govt – under Howard too?) go to help wealthy mining industries make even more billions profit?
Imagine the jobs and housing, not to mention the health system we could help with those billions$$$$$ Or a huge boost in funds to take proper care of people with a mental illness. Over 80% of inmates in NSW’s prisons suffer a drug addiction or have a mental health illness or both. Many have been victims of abuse, and too many didn’t finish their formal education.
Nov 17th, 2009
Naomi Cartledge
MAREE – It’s been proven, that a dollar a day spent at the beginning of a child’s life can save $15 per day when they’re older by ending up in jail or not contributing in a positive way to their lives. Imagine what those billions could do? NSW allows the prison system to ‘care’ for too many people whose main crime is a mental illness. I don’t think the other states have a better record! Multiply this by a lot more in relation to aboriginal people?
Those who arrive in Australia by plane, are usually white, and speak english. They either lie on their visa, or it lapses for a reason, or they seek asylum when they arrive – but they’re not usually locked up in a jail. There can be 50,000 people in Australia at any time, who don’t have a visa? I don’t hear people getting hysterical about them. Seeking asylum is legal – so locking them up is against international laws on human rights.
I think we should’ve learnt via Howard, that locking up traumatized people until they’re driven medically mad is a horrific crime – locking up kids is beneath contempt. Some kids were born in a jail-like environemt, and some were there for too many years – until they started pulling out their own hair, and bashing their little heads on the wall! I feel great shame and anger at this kind of treatment!
Nov 17th, 2009
Naomi Cartledge
After watching tonight’s ABC News at 7pm; so much for Howard’s changes to the Act that would prohibit the locking up of kids. Also, the 90 day processing policy was his too – under great pressure from those brave Liberal backbenchers. I’m disgusted with the carry on of both the Govt and the Opposition. It seemed to escape everyone’s priority radar, that these people are human beings. Nothing should stop any boat/ship in the future from rescuing distressed people at sea – it’s the Law. Every Captain in the world knows this Law, and every Govt does do. This is a nonsense to suggest that the nonsense over the OV will deter saving distressed people.
Sadly, that’s what happened with SIEV-X? I hope, that one day, somebody has the guts to tell the truth. I think it’s close to what many of us suspect – that they were allowed to die! By whom? What country? I don’t know, but I think it was a preventable tragedy. If not, why did Howard act in such a way – not even to utter their names? They were known! Very suspect indeed!
The role of mainstream media has been diabolical! The quality of so-called journalism in this country is pathetic. They stick to the popular line(govt. corporate. military) – on just about everything. That’s not the role of the media! The don’t ask the pertinent let alone probing questions?
Nov 19th, 2009
Reply to “Some facts about the people on the boats”