Article 14 from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Pretty simple really.
Anthony Albanese speaking in parliament on the ‘MIGRATION AMENDMENT (DESIGNATED UNAUTHORISED ARRIVALS) BILL 2006’
This is worth reading in full, but some particular highlights from when Anthony Albanese was in opposition are included here - unfortunately now that he is in Government he doesn’t seem to remember his own strong arguments for a compassionate approach!
- “You cannot achieve peace by undermining human rights.”
- “We need a government that is prepared to promote hope over fear, and we need a government that is prepared to respect the human rights of all individuals. I urge the House to reject this abhorrent legislation.”
- “Most of them were people fleeing the Taliban in Afghanistan—an abhorrent, fundamentalist regime that persecuted Christians, women and people who questioned the regime—and the abhorrent regime of Saddam Hussein. These refugees are understandably confused that the Australian government says that these regimes are so abhorrent that we will risk the lives of the brave men and women of the Australian defence forces to combat those regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq, and yet those people who fought courageously for democratic change and human rights in those countries and were persecuted as a result arrive in freedom-loving Australia only to be locked up and sent away to Nauru for processing. You cannot have it both ways.”
- “This undermines the global framework of the 1951 refugee convention…These Jewish refugees were pushed back offshore in their boats, in many cases sent back to their deaths. The world said: ‘Never again.’ By adopting the refugee convention the world said that humanity is better than that, that we are part of a global community and that we do have a responsibility to stop that occurring again.”
- “This government has a policy that is built on sand. It shifts with the wind, it shifts on the basis of what is in the political interest of the government in terms of its preparedness to promote fear, to promote hatred and to vilify some of the most vulnerable people in the global community.”
- “It is no way for this parliament to provide the leadership that we have been entrusted to provide by our respective communities.”
- “We need to put this into perspective. As of 28 April, there were 803 people in immigration detention in Australia—18 of them were unauthorised boat arrivals. During the first nine months of 2005 Australia received around 2,400 claims for asylum. This compares with 23,000 claims in Britain and 38,000 in France. The USA received 38,000 claims, but many times that number of people simply arrived in the USA without applying. During the past five years approximately 80,000 migrants and asylum seekers have reached the Italian peninsula by boat. More than 6½ thousand Africans have arrived, by sea, on the Canary Islands archipelago this year alone.”
““Isn’t it an outrage that there is one poor fellow stuck on Manus Island? I mean, I think the whole Pacific solution has been an expensive, cruel waste of money and the reports about Manus Island, not only the money being spent there, but the idea that you have one poor forgotten fellow sitting there are just outrageous.””—
Tanya Plibersek on ABC PM (11 Feb 2004)
““Another element of this debate that has to be confronted is the so called Pacific Solution. Labor says the Pacific Solution has to go. The Government has backed itself into a corner but it now needs to acknowledge that there is no longer any viability for the so-called Pacific Solution.””—
A quote from Stephen Smith (current Minister for Defence) speaking to UN Youth Association’s WA Chapter State Conference in 2004 as Labor’s Opposition Spokesperson on Immigration. Read the full speech here.
Remember when the Sydney Anglicans had to clarify that their understanding of marriage, with “loving, sacrificial leadership of a husband and the intelligent, voluntary submission of a wife”, shouldn’t be used to justify domestic violence?
2007 Session of Synod Resolutions
Biblical pattern of marriage
Synod:
(a) affirms that the relationship of loving, sacrificial leadership of a husband and the intelligent, voluntary submission of a wife is the Biblical pattern of marriage, and
(b) totally rejects the use of this Biblical pattern to justify any form of domestic abuse, and
(c) totally rejects all forms of domestic abuse, and
(d) expresses its concern for those children, women and men, who are victims of domestic abuse, and
(e) calls on Christian husbands and wives to use their God-given responsibilities for the good of their families, and
(f) calls on ministers to teach congregations the Biblical model for marriage and also to teach against domestic abuse.
So they might not be great people to look to when it comes to defining marriage. Just saying.
so the libertarian argument is that it’s bad when aust unions stand in solidarity with workers in poor countries to fight for labour rights in “free trade” agreements. the only way for those people to get better jobs is for them to be “imports” for the aust mining industry.
(see threads around these comments last week, and this kind of comment today)
i think there should be free movement of people around the world, but i don’t think that people should be effectively forced to migrate if they want better jobs. it’s not a coincidence that australia has these (well paid) jobs (and unemployment payments if you lose your job, and access to health care, and all those other things that make it an attractive place to live). the ability to organise in unions - labour rights - was absolutely critical to australia’s social and economic development post-invasion.
the ethical response to living in privilege (that was hard-fought, as well as thanks to global political and economic factors beyond our control) is to use our resources, including our political influence when we negotiate trade agreements, to support the push from those with less resources for the same rights that we take for granted.
in terms of filling mining industry jobs in isolated places.
1. there is clearly a need for more and better training of Australian workers, and state and federal governments should increase funding to TAFE instead of cuts and privatisations
(I think Federal Labor said they would do this but as far as I can tell they haven’t - and that is really what non-MP ALP types (and Doug Cameron) are saying at the moment, although they could really be clearer about that, and it is right to criticise those who are happy to make it seem like they endorse racism)
2. similarly our migration system should be principled, not adjusted ad hoc whenever large businesses (and wealthy individuals like Gina Rinehardt) complain loudly enough
More about the Trans-Pacific Partnership currently being negotiated