ReachTEL has published results of an automated phone poll of 2922 respondents across the country which has the Coalition leading 51-49, down from 52-48 in the immediate aftermath of the leadership change, from primary votes of 39.3% for Labor (up 0.5%, 45.4% for the Coalition (up 0.3%) and 8.3% for the Greens (down 0.4%). ReachTEL shows Kevin Rudd with an unusually narrow 52.4-47.6 lead over Tony Abbott as preferred prime minister, but the knife is nonetheless turned on Abbott by a result on voting intention under a Malcolm Turnbull leadership which has the Coalition lead at 58-42. Turnbull is also favoured 65-35 over Rudd as preferred prime minister.
AA
The PNG plan does not stop people leaving their country of origin and seeking asylum, either.
Just that the selected destination is off the list.
[The PNG Plan does not stop refugees coming to Australia. Oz takes 20,000 per year and those 20,000 will now be genuine refugees as assessed by Un and others. Oz could increase to 27,000 intake.]
Yes, nothing stops AU taking them from PNG processing. Which miht be necerssary when settlement goes pear-shaped in a country barely coping with its own people.
This is how most offshore processign schemes ended up: most notably Howard’s pacific solution.
Tricot:
The PNG deal is just to get through the election. The arrangement will no doubt be challenged in the courts, and if the ruling is along the lines of that given to the Malaysia deal, whoever wins the election will have to deal with the result, either by legislating or by withdrawing from international treaties.
The gist of the legal case against Rudd’s plan is something to do with fact that Oz/PNG may well be discriminatory against those who come on boats in that they are being disadvantaged merely as they are coming in by boat.
I am ignorant as to whether there is any substance in this approach.
It is a long bow but as some judge said years ago: “Let a man speak a sentence and I will find enough in it to hang him.”
Such is the power of some in the legal process I guess.
I agree with that, Lefty E..
‘Yes, nothing stops AU taking them from PNG processing. Which miht be necerssary when settlement goes pear-shaped in a country barely coping with its own people’.
See provision for review at 12 months.
Confessions: Think you are right here. The election is everything.
I really do wonder about these High Court challenges.
They seem to happen when Labor tries to do something.
Don’t recall any High Court challenge when Howard starting sending them to Nauru and it hadn’t signed the UN Convention
[What maxims would they may be?]
[Oh this will be good?]
Still waiting Briefly?
If the judiciary decide that the Raskols Cargo Cult Solution is illegal because it is contrary to the provisions of the Convention, then a RuddAbbott government would withdraw from the Convention.
Shorter reality: the lawyers don’t have nearly as many votes as those who want to stop the boat-borne asylum seeker traffic/trafficking.
Confessions
You obviously want Rudd and Labor to fail on this AS issue. Your comments are laced with an under-current of Rudd hatred.
Just get over it all. I’m sure Gillard is coping better than you.
feeney:
You really have no idea what you’re talking about.
This plan is all about preventing poor suffering Australians from having to be confronted by human misery. It’s entirely selfish. We simply don’t want to be inconvenienced by asylum seekers.
[The arrangement will no doubt be challenged in the courts, and if the ruling is along the lines of that given to the Malaysia deal, whoever wins the election will have to deal with the result, either by legislating or by withdrawing from international treaties.]
The Malaysia deal was blocked because Malaysia ISN’T a UNHCR signatory, whereas PNG is.
That was a try, sheez?
feeney
Feeling the Rudd love? Forgiven him for three years of chopping off a Labor Government at the knees? Approve of the way he got the sole right to appoint the ministry when he became prime minister? Happy with the 75% rule?
None of that has anything at all to do with Gillard. It has everything to do with decent Labor members buckling to the irrational.
Enjoy.
DN
Relative to other states, Australia has been, and continues to be, a remarkably generous nation when it comes to taking asylum seekers.
Accepting asylum seekers is, therefore, not the issue, IMHO. If you think it IS the issue, you could demonstrate it by presenting some comparative national stats for the 200 or so states that are member nations of the UN. Good luck with that.
The issue is that the majority of Australians can spot a situation where they are being gamed. They do not like it and they will never like it.
[Approve of the way he got the sole right to appoint the ministry when he became prime minister? ]
He got that right because the caucus voted to give it to him.
I have just found the most awesome website no foodie should be without!
http://www.eatbydate.com/
With hindsight, it is fascinating – and highly amusing – to contemplate the way that yesterday panned out for Abbott and his team.
So they knew something was coming from Rudd on AS. And the ABC got something of a scoop during the day that the Manus Island facility was to be greatly expanded to take about 3,000 asylum seekers. For several hours, that seemed to the sum total of the news Rudd was ready to deliver late in the afternoon. A significant announcement but hardly a game changer.
And Abbott and his gang were salivating. They had their lines ready. It was going to be an adjectival blitzkrieg. They notified the media: we’ll be ready to roll more or less the moment Rudd stops talking.
“Perfect,” they were no doubt thinking. “A massive expansion of Manus just emphasises the extent of the Rudd failure. This is an open goal!!”
And then came the joint announcement with Peter O’Neill. Perhaps some in the Abbott camp began to get an uneasy feeling as they watched when Rudd and O’Neill, without explanation or preamble, began to sign documents. “Is this just for the expansion of Manus?” they wondered, with a tightening the stomach.
And then came the bombshell we all know about.
Panic ensued in the Abbott camp. No question. “What can we possibly say?” It was their worst nightmare. In the words of Paul Kelly in the Australian today, the Rudd plan was more brutal, smarter and more decisive than any Abbott had ever proposed.
And so poor Abbott was reduced to agreeing it was a great idea, and quibbling over whether Rudd could implement this stunning strategy.
SO:
Yes, you are correct. However, I’m sure the lawyers will find something on which to challenge the PNG deal.
None of this matters to the election of course. No court challenge will have a ruling brought down before we go to the polls.
[Yes, you are correct. However, I’m sure the lawyers will find something on which to challenge the PNG deal.
None of this matters to the election of course. No court challenge will have a ruling brought down before we go to the polls.]
Maybe so, but the fact is nowhere does the Refugee convention say that we must give permanent residency to everyone who gets to Australia and is found to be a refugee.
So Tony is in favour of the PNG deal yet says he will not allow another country do our bidding re AS. Which is it Tone?
A lot of debate is going to occur in PNG on this as well and probably another Court Challenge.
That nut job, Belden Namah, the former DPM tried it already on the re-establishment of the Manus AS Centre, but it was dismissed, yet he says he will try it again – as of early July this year.
Yesterdays announcement will have him barking mad, anew.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/png-court-dismisses-manus-challenge/story-fn59niix-1226674359173
Well they have already said that the first load of people to arrive by boat will be sent to PNG.
A masterstroke by Rudd.
I think Rudd will stop the boats 😀
feeney
Don’t let Boerwar get you down he has been on the same meme for ages now.
His aim is to drive those who do not agree with him off this site and then he can talk to himself all day.
Yes you’re quite right Dave, but two things:
1. No regime in Port Moresby will be able to resist the (as yet undisclosed) honey pot that accompanies this deal from Canberra
2. As Confessions rightly notes, no court challenge or other quibbling in Oz or PNG will matter a jot in the context of the election. Abbott is left gobbling air on this issue. Rudd has deftly taken away all of his oxygen – I mean every skerrick. He has nothing except bleating about the past. And Australians are tired of that negativity. Rudd has a plan. It’s tough, cruel and decisive. And, over time, it will save the lives of babies drowning in the sea.
What a piss weak argument the Libs are trying to run. Nothing wrong with the idea just that Labor can’t implement it. Just weak as.
Galaxy tonight for tomorrow’s spreads, or will News Ltd want all the attention on Newspoll?
gary
Tones is in deep shite over this he had no other option but to agree at least in part to this solution.
Rudd has taken the ground from under him.
[but the fact is nowhere does the Refugee convention say that we must give permanent residency to everyone who gets to Australia and is found to be a refugee.]
You should explain that to the Greens and those who opposed the Malaysia deal and who now oppose the PNG deal.
Confessions
Unfortunately for you, I do know what I’m talking about. Your visceral Rudd hatred is obvious for all to read.
Julia Gillard will be living in Adelaide shortly, much closer to home for you, so go and commiserate with her there. And, oh, take that bore, Borewar, with you.
[gary
Tones is in deep shite over this he had no other option but to agree at least in part to this solution.
Rudd has taken the ground from under him.]
So you agree with the PNG deal, yet opposed the Malaysia deal?
Hilarious.
Alias. Spotted that drip feed.
Ha Ha!
[That was a try, sheez?]
I just said, close enough give it a try. Then heard the video ref was Shayne (its all about me) Pain. I then tipped no try.
Confessions
Not hilarious at all but then I have never agreed with much that you say.
I assume the PM has had legal advice on how the new policy should be framed.
I do not doubt that those who favour no limits on AS-based immigration will mount legal challenges. Also, if a large number of persons continue in the attempt and wind up in PNG there may be problems there. However the main point is that the dealings with Indonesia and PNG before any announcement this time, mean that a multi-lateral regional approach is being taken. That is a step forward. The previous situation, causing thousands of people arriving in Indonesia (many evidently flying) and waiting for a boat was a recipe for organised crime and not good for the Indonesians either.
Another part of the solution will be to continue to take a quota of asylum seekers each year, that should be proportional to Australia’s size and comparable quotas in other similar standard of living countries. However, as others have said, this should be from all sources, including many Sudanese and others who have no ability to get to Indonesia.
The A Drip, as someone recalled of Paul Keating’s derisive comment.
If it is not there in black and white you can generally rely on the judiciary to develop implied thresholds, principles and benchmarks – particularly when they feel they are beind cut out of the moolah by the elected arm.
Boerwar, sure, we just don’t want to have people suffering right in front of us. We want a sanitised version of dealing with a worldwide problem. Since there isn’t one, we sanitise our role in things by pushing the bits we don’t want onto other people.
The element of Rudd’s announcement that is getting little or no attention is his move to convene a meeting of nations affected by the AS issue to review the 1951 convention. This is highly significant, I think – and it will gain enormous traction in various countries in Europe for example. The danger for Rudd is that he gets himself entangled with some right wing nutters over there.
Broadly speaking, though, the idea of revisiting the convention – as Psephos has argued strenuously for some time (though mainly with a view to withdrawing from it) – has to be a very sound idea.
Just to cite one change since 1951, relating to the emergence of mass global travel via jetliner, it was unimaginable back then that a person in fear of persecution would have the means to get herself to the other side of the globe, and even then, not to the country of preferred residency but to a neighbouring state where some helpful entrepreneurs would arrange the final leg. They simply didn’t contemplate that kind of scenario back then.
It did not take long:
[The first boatload of asylum seekers to be processed under the Government’s hardline new deal with Papua New Guinea has been intercepted.
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has announced that asylum seekers arriving in Australia by boat will be processed in PNG and resettled there if they are found to be refugees.
Immigration Minister Tony Burke says two boats which arrived yesterday afternoon will not be processed under the new regime.]
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-20/asylum-seeker-boat-intercepted-off-wa-coast/4832886
Boerwar ! I have Infinate Faith in your Subtle Abilities and Multiple Talents to do the Right Thing and Put The Coniptions across to the Unbeleivers here on Planet PB.
I slavishly agree with everythang you might deign to bestow, Evil-Mindedly, on the Plebs Heregathered.
Some bludgers may recall that a few weeks ago I posted an analysis of the rigging of the Malaysian election at my website
http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/m/malaysia/electioncomment.txt
Today I got an email from a Malaysian politics student, thanking me for the analysis and telling me that it was circulating widely among democracy activists, who were using it as ammunition in their campaign for election reform. Quite moved, I was.
Don’t let anyone tell you that psephology is a socially useless activity, bludgers. “And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.”
[1953
confessions
Tricot:
The PNG deal is just to get through the election. The arrangement will no doubt be challenged in the courts, and if the ruling is along the lines of that given to the Malaysia deal, whoever wins the election will have to deal with the result, either by legislating or by withdrawing from international treaties.]
At the end of the day, it seems just inconceivable that the High Court would prevent Australia from transferring “unlawful non-citizens” to other jurisdictions, such as PNG.
The Court may apply conditions and may make the process subject to checks of various kinds, and will certainly ensure that administrative processes remain subject to judicial review. But there is nothing in our law that says the citizens of other countries will be granted rights to settle either permanently or temporarily in this country by virtue of the conditions that might apply in those other countries.
There is a kind of presumption that refugees may assert rights to settle wherever they like. This is just false. Refugees have few rights, and the most important of them is that they will not be returned to circumstances where they face persecution. As long as this is respected, Australia will be able to make arrangements with respect to the entry or non-entry of non-citizens.
feeney
I notice that you are ignoring the issue of Rudd’s substance. Typical.
AA
‘I really do wonder about these High Court challenges.
They seem to happen when Labor tries to do something’.
Put’s one in mind of the police, State and Fed.
Albeit pursuing only the non LNP suspects.
Psephos, do they let you into Malaysia these days?
MTBW:
It’s bloody hilarious. All that railing by you at Psephos for being too rightwing on asylum seekers, and now here you are in lock-step with a Labor decision to flatly refuse entry to anyone who arrives here by boat.
If Gillard had announced this you’d be complaining long and loud about it.
😆
rua
It was simultaneous ball on ground in goal area and knee in touch.
Simultaneous is try is it not?
chris murphy @chrismurphys 1h
We 3719 citizens @PeterSlipperMP also demand an Inquiry re #ashbygate affair @KRuddMP @DreyfusMark #auspol https://www.change.org/petitions/attorney-general-parliament-house-canberra-inquiry-into-people-involved-with-james-ashby-acting-against-peter-slipper#share … …