Hard figures back case to open gates

June 29, 2012

Opinion

PM Julia Gillard calls in a panel of experts to consider Australia’s asylum options, as the Opposition says it will never accept the Malaysia solution.

Autoplay OnOffVideo feedbackVideo settingsAustralia's relative economic prosperity and low jobless rate have transformed us into a destination of choice for economic migrants and refugees alike. If you think that's a problem, let me set you straight.

One in four Australians alive today was born overseas, according to the latest census results. In Sydney, it's one in three. Migration has not only contributed to Australia's economic success over the years but is the cornerstone of the brilliantly vibrant and diverse cultures in our local communities that are rarely reflected in our national debates.

While other advanced nations struggle to attract workers to their recession-ridden economies, Australia stands out as a country experiencing above-average migration growth, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's ''International Migration Outlook'', released this week.

Problem? Far from it.

''[The] positive role of migration in maintaining the size of the labour force in many countries is expected to become more important as more baby boomers retire,'' the report states. ''By 2015, immigration - at the current level - will not be sufficient to maintain the working-age population in many OECD countries, especially in the European Union.''

One of the defining global narratives of the coming decades will be the struggle of ageing nations to rejuvenate their populations and provide for the needs of their elderly. But here in Australia we force young, willing hands in nearby countries to board leaky boats to take their chances in a cruel sea. That is not only morally shameful, it's economically stupid.

Figures from the same OECD report prove decisively that job gains for migrants do not come at the expense of existing Australians.

Across the first half of the noughties, the employment-to-population ratio for foreign-born Australian men averaged 73.2 per cent. The average for native-born Australian men was substantially higher, at 78.8 per cent.

In the second half, this gap shrank. The average employment-to-population ratio for foreign-born men advanced to 76.3 per cent. But this did not come at the expense of the native-born, who saw their ratio also increase, to 80 per cent.

Because, for all the focus on asylum seekers, Australia's overall migration program is heavily focused on filling existing skills shortages and, hence, is skewed towards younger working people. Australia's total migration and humanitarian intake was 182,500 people last financial year. Of these, most - 92 per cent - came from the migration program.

Just 8 per cent, or 13,799 visas, were granted under the humanitarian program. Of these, most - 8971 - were granted to people seeking asylum from an offshore location. The number granted to people who had made their way to Australia first, by boat or plane, was 4828.

Australia's refugee intake is not only small compared to its total migration intake, but also compared to the number of people who would like to seek asylum here. Australia received 54,396 offshore applications for humanitarian visas last year, meaning for every successful one, five others went unanswered.

Is it any surprise people get on boats? With such an undersupply of places relative to demand, a black market in people smuggling is the only natural result.

It seems distasteful, somehow, to apply an economic framework to a such a morally charged policy issue as asylum seekers. It is governments, after all, not markets, that decide the supply of migration places.

But people smugglers are a good example of the economic phenomenon of black markets. Black markets for products and services spring up where supply in legitimate markets is overly restricted. Just as alcohol prohibition in the US forced up the price of booze and fuelled criminal activity in the 1920s and '30s, a shortage of humanitarian visas to Australia has encouraged people smuggling. People smugglers are today's bootleggers, with tragic consequences.

The evidence shows, after all, that most people who arrive unlawfully by boat are eventually settled in Australia on protection visas - 83.3 per cent of the ''irregular maritime arrivals'' in 2009-10, according to the latest figures from the Department of Immigration.

By far the best way to smash the people smugglers' business model would be to expand the legal market for seeking asylum. It's time to accept there is a constant, and even increasing, demand by people to seek asylum in Australia.

If we want to stop the boats, the best way might be to fire up the 747 turbo engines and simply fly people here, legally and safely, in the first place. If we want to deter desperate people from making a treacherous journey, let's make it known in international refugee processing centres around the world: there is an easier path to Australia and an open door on arrival for those who follow it.

Sound radical? Perhaps the most bizarre aspect of this week's debate on asylum seekers is that there is, in fact, tri-partisan agreement on just this point.

The Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, promised this week to increase the humanitarian intake to 20,000 within three years of forming a government. The Greens issued a press release yesterday titled ''We Can Save Lives From Today'' proposing much the same thing.

Just last month, the Minister for Immigration, Chris Bowen, told the International Association of Refugee Law Judges of his desire to progressively increase the humanitarian program to 20,000. As for why he had not already done this, Bowen cited budget constraints. Every additional 1000 humanitarian places would cost the budget $216 million. Increasing it to 20,000 would cost about $1.35 billion over the first four years.

And so it comes to this: what price asylum seekers' lives?

It's time for politicians to bite the bullet and agree to increase Australia's humanitarian intake. As a rich nation with low public debt and so much to gain from migration we cannot afford not to do so. That politicians can agree on this central point and continue to squabble among themselves is not only deeply shameful, but the ultimate sign of the deep dysfunction that prevails in our nation's Parliament.


Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/hard-figures-back-case-to-open-gates-20120628-2156z.html#ixzz1zSTewFjR

you have to be kidding me....and this guy is in the government?????



[youtube]L1pEt7bgY2U[/youtube]

Mirabella blames poor vision for failing to help GetUp chief Simon Sheikh on Q&A
LIBERAL frontbencher Sophie Mirabella has blamed poor vision and shock for her delayed reaction to the collapse of her Q&A co-panellist Simon Sheikh last night.

Ms Mirabella was sitting next to the GetUp! director on the ABC program last night when he slumped forward, his head hitting the table with an audible thud.

The opposition's industry spokeswoman was attacked on social media sites over her reaction to the incident, with critics accusing her of recoiling from Mr Sheikh in an unsympathetic manner.

But she told The Australian Online said she hadn't realised what was happening.

"Initially I like others in the audience and on the panel, I though Simon was making a joke or laughing at Greg (Combet)," she said.

"Being right next to him and having very challenging vision in my right eye, I had to turn right around. I couldn't see him.

"Then when it became apparent there was a medical problem the crew were there to assist him and I think we were all in a bit of shock."

Ms Mirabella said she'd got Mr Sheikh's mobile phone number after the show and had texted him this morning wishing him well.

She said critics on Twitter had jumped to the wrong conclusion.

"People will use whatever opportunity to have a go at a political with whose views they may not agree," she said.

"Some people can conveniently jump to certain assumptions. All I can say is we were all in shock when we became aware it was a medical problem."

Today, GetUp took to Twitter defending Ms Mirabella. "Folks, please don't criticise @SMirabellaMP it was an extraordinary circumstance and everyone was shocked," the lobby group said.

The on-air incident occurred as Climate Change Minister Greg Combet was answering a question on the carbon tax.

"I'm not quite sure what Simon's doing there. Is he okay? I think... he's not okay. Simon is not okay," Mr Combet said.

He and members of the show's crew rushed towards Mr Sheikh, while Ms Mirabella appeared confused by the incident.

Daily Telegraph columnist Joe Hildebrand tweeted: "Oh, and if I'm ever in need of first aid I really hope the first person on the scene isn't Sophie Mirabella."

Other Q&A viewers tweeted: "Watching Simon Sheikh passing out is horrible. But worse is seeing Sophie Mirabella recoil in horror, rather than help".

Another said: "Just watched the #QandA footage of Simon sheik collapsing. Disgusted at Sophie Mirabella's reaction. No thought of helping someone in need."

GetUp released a statement after the program saying Mr Sheikh had been given the all-clear by doctors at Liverpool Hospital in Sydney, where he was taken after the collapse.

Mr Sheikh has been battling the flu for a number of weeks, the statement said.

"We have a number of important campaigns we are working hard on at GetUp right now and perhaps like a lot of us, I have been burning the candle at both ends," Mr Sheikh said.

Mr Sheikh said he was grateful for the messages of support he has received and was keen to let everyone know he was recovering.

"I am sorry to have caused any concern and am grateful people have been texting and emailing to check everything is okay," he said.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/media/mirabella-blames-poor-vision-for-failing-to-help-getup-chief-simon-sheikh-on-qa/story-e6frg996-1226415713452

Yet you said Tony running out of parliament acting like a goose was good.

Clive Palmer confirms tilt at politics

From: AAP July 03, 2012 6:45PM

Mining magnate Clive Palmer has confirmed he will seek Liberal National Party (LNP) preselection at the federal election, but not against Treasurer Wayne Swan.

MR Palmer had previously expressed an interest in Mr Swan's Brisbane seat of Lilley but on Tuesday said he would run in a different Queensland seat.

"I will announce in the next few days the Queensland seat I believe I can be of the most benefit to the community and to Australia," he said.

Mr Palmer said Lilley already had "a number of first-class potential candidates" to stand for the LNP.

"It will be an electorate where I am known and people know what I stand for and the things I hold dear to me," he said.

"An electorate which will play its part in the defeat of Labor."

Mr Palmer's announcement came as Howard government minister Mal Brough confirmed he would contest Peter Slipper's Sunshine Coast seat of Fisher.

Mr Swan later used the social networking site Twitter to claim Mr Palmer was "too scared to run against me".

"After all the talk & billboards [Clive Palmer] doesn't have the guts to fight," he tweeted.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/business/breaking-news/clive-palmer-confirms-tilt-at-politics/story-e6freuz0-1226415764377

I'll add my political input for once:

- If you vote Liberal you're an idiot or just old and deluded
- If you vote Labour you're a centralist, it's an appeasement party with no balls and hasn't had any for a very long time
- If you vote Greens then you care way too much about the planet which is gonna be fine anyway and you care way too much about humans who as a whole are incredibly stupid and flawed

Buuuuut everything's relative! Vote for John Jackson or Jack Johnson

Then you need a firm slap

I'll add my political input for once:

- If you vote Liberal you're an idiot or just old and deluded
- If you vote Labour you're a centralist, it's an appeasement party with no balls and hasn't had any for a very long time
- If you vote Greens then you care way too much about the planet which is gonna be fine anyway and you care way too much about humans who as a whole are incredibly stupid and flawed

Buuuuut everything's relative! Vote for John Jackson or Jack Johnson

I'll add my political input for once:

- If you vote Liberal you're an idiot or just old and deluded
- If you vote Labour you're a centralist, it's an appeasement party with no balls and hasn't had any for a very long time
- If you vote Greens then you care way too much about the planet which is gonna be fine anyway and you care way too much about humans who as a whole are incredibly stupid and flawed

Buuuuut everything's relative! Vote for John Jackson or Jack Johnson

A vote for the greens has zero to do with the enviroment......your dreaming.....and the labor government are as fucked as they are largely because of the deal they did with the greens.......

The asylum problem that exists could be resolved if the mighty greens and independants backed the government, what a match made in heaven.......Labor did a deal to form government with the greens and independants and now are hamstrung by their lack of support, but you morons say its all abbotts fault for not supporting the bill......the problem is the imbessiles who formed a toxic government and you can't admitt it......

A fine display of the natural heart felt kindness of a conservative towards his fellow man in providing for the lesser educated. Not only the provision of a fine description of imbecility, but also a novel example of an illiterate passage of an imbecile with the added authentic touch of an imbecile's propensity to parrot the commonly heard words and phrases of others because of the unfortunate inability to process their own.

A vote for the greens has zero to do with the enviroment......your dreaming.....and the labor government are as fucked as they are largely because of the deal they did with the greens.......

The asylum problem that exists could be resolved if the mighty greens and independants backed the government, what a match made in heaven.......Labor did a deal to form government with the greens and independants and now are hamstrung by their lack of support, but you morons say its all abbotts fault for not supporting the bill......the problem is the imbessiles who formed a toxic government and you can't admitt it......

](*,) ](*,) ](*,) ](*,) ](*,) ](*,) ](*,) ](*,) ](*,) ](*,) =; =;

You keep on pointing those fingers

Say what you like about Tony Abbott, but he wasn't willing to compromise the ideals of his party

Tolling up a storm tonight mate?

you're*

In terms of serious discussion though, you're forgetting (conveniently or inadvertently doesn't really matter) what Abbott promised the independents (including selling his 'arse') when they were considering who should form government.

Serious discussions require correct spelling (and how long have you been making this mistake?)

As hard as it is for you to comprehend, but people can actually make errors and it not actually be as a result of a fundamental lack of intellect, but rather just a mistake!

And lets face it notor, you're incapable of having a serious discussion or debate with anyone who holds a different view to your own, and you know it.