““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)
this is a brilliant use of tumblr and you should follow it.
““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
(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.
libertarians and the free trade of workers
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.
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