Should all kids, offshore and mainland, be released from Australia's detention centres?

[Harpodom]

Bizarrely, Morrison is pinning the blame on ALP/Greens for the fact that under his watch, children are spending 3 times longer in detention (currently 349 days).

 

He has a one track mind: TPVs. The fact that he's been blocked from his mission to re-introduce TPV's, means that because he can't issue TPVs, he's keeping kids in detention.

 

"The Chair of the Australian Churches Refugee Taskforce (ACRT) The Very Rev’d Dr Peter Catt was dismayed that Minister Morrison appears to be holding the Federal cross-benchers hostage by saying he won’t process the asylum claims of children and families until the Senate approves his plans to bring in Temporary Protection Visas (TPVs)."

 

http://www.australianchurchesrefugeetaskforce.com.au/acrt-press-release/

[flag of convenience]

Really it is just like being at boarding school for the kids.

 

Afraid the fond memories of going's on at boarding schools, that appears to linger in your mind is not necessary reciprocal in others.

[flag of convenience]

No keep them behind bars or send them back simple..there are alot of australian kids going hungry too in case you havent noticed??

 

No I hadn't noticed. Going ferrel in Tasmania not necessary the best place to gauge the pulse of need in Australia.

[MARYROSE02]

They have supposedly fled from inhumane conditions in their own countries. They chose to pay people smugglers to transport them on unseaworthy boats. We rescue them, we house them, we look after them. That is enough for me. And since the Abbott government came to power, we no longer have to do all this.

 

I am happy with the present Government's policies. I will vote for them again. I care not a jot for what the UN, the Greens, or anybody else thinks about our policies. I will believe we are really creating concentration camps when people stop wanting to come here.

[Harpodom]

Curious concept that, 'people smugglers'.

 

Has a single 'people smuggler' been arrested or even identified?

[MARYROSE02]

Curious concept that, 'people smugglers'.

 

Has a single 'people smuggler' been arrested or even identified?

 

You are right, as usual. The boats are supplied, and crewed, by the United Nations, gratis.

[tea4too]

What crime has been committed that deserves such a hard line approach? Signatories to the UN Convention, including Australia, are required to protect the human rights of people seeking asylum. There are no conditions or get out clauses that depend on the method of transport used by the asylum seeker. Everything I have read suggests these camps are prisons where people are afforded little dignity, few rights and are left to effectively rot for indefinite periods of time, and no civilised society would judge that to be an appropriate place for an innocent child to be raised IMO. Tx

[MARYROSE02]

What crime has been committed that deserves such a hard line approach? Signatories to the UN Convention, including Australia, are required to protect the human rights of people seeking asylum. There are no conditions or get out clauses that depend on the method of transport used by the asylum seeker. Everything I have read suggests these camps are prisons where people are afforded little dignity, few rights and are left to effectively rot for indefinite periods of time, and no civilised society would judge that to be an appropriate place for an innocent child to be raised IMO. Tx

 

Signing up to a UN Convention does not mean kowtowing to every edict the UN issues. Why should Australia surrender its sovereignity to an undemocatic body like the UN?

 

You seem to be advocating a system where anybody who calls themselves an asylum seeker, and who makes their way to Australia should be allowed in, no questions asked. I don't want that.

 

I will believe that Australia is operating a prison camp system when the people stop wanting to come here.

[tea4too]

Signing up to a UN Convention does not mean kowtowing to every edict the UN issues. Why should Australia surrender its sovereignity to an undemocatic body like the UN?

 

You seem to be advocating a system where anybody who calls themselves an asylum seeker, and who makes their way to Australia should be allowed in, no questions asked. I don't want that.

 

 

I will believe that Australia is operating a prison camp system when the people stop wanting to come here.

 

Why would you think that? I have not suggested it, and do not advocate such an approach. I agree that anybody who purports to be an asylum seeker should have their claim properly examined, and only those judged to be genuine allowed asylum. And I assume any country that has signed up to the UN convention has signed up to that approach too. What I can't condone (or understand tbh) is why people have to be treated like criminals as part of that process, with their children incarcerated in places that can only harm their long term emotional well being.

 

I have a bit of a dilemma with the argument that prison camps cannot be awful because people keep arriving - people are fleeing horrendous situations and would reasonably expect a first world, democratic, civilised society to respect their human rights......especially when that first world democratic civilised society has signed up to do so. Tx

[Harpodom]

Its no good using simple logic, reason and common sense tea.

 

The haters are so dead set in their belief that 'deterrence' is the way to go that no matter what form that 'deterrence' takes, its still justifiable.

 

I think about it like this, in 50 years time, will the world look on Australia's temporary cessation of boat arrivals as an example of 'best practice' when it comes to dealing with displaced people all over the world.

 

For it is temporary. Sooner or later the cruelty will have to stop. It is not feasible for this level of cruelty to continue ad infinitum: if nothing else the country will go bankrupt, so expensive is Operation Sovereign Borders to run.

 

It's a short sighted, evil, stupid and TEMPORARY blip, but will do irreversible damage to Australia's reputation.

 

Be very wary of people who sneer at the UN and the international community: they are NOT to be trusted.

 

 

Why would you think that? I have not suggested it, and do not advocate such an approach. I agree that anybody who purports to be an asylum seeker should have their claim properly examined, and only those judged to be genuine allowed asylum. And I assume any country that has signed up to the UN convention has signed up to that approach too. What I can't condone (or understand tbh) is why people have to be treated like criminals as part of that process, with their children incarcerated in places that can only harm their long term emotional well being.

 

I have a bit of a dilemma with the argument that prison camps cannot be awful because people keep arriving - people are fleeing horrendous situations and would reasonably expect a first world, democratic, civilised society to respect their human rights......especially when that first world democratic civilised society has signed up to do so. Tx

[MARYROSE02]

It would not matter what kind of facilities were provided, you would be claiming that they were not good enough, little more than 'prisons', etc. The chair of that enquiry yesterday called the detention centres 'prisons' but had no answer when Scott Morrison asked her if she was seriously comparing them to Long Bay Gaol in Sydney. She also alleged that the guards are all 'armed,' which Morrison denied vehemently.

 

The bottom line is that you literally want every person who arrives, claiming to be an asylum seeker, to be immediately accepted as such, and released straight out into the community, given a home, money, health care. Anything less would be a denial of both their human rights and our obligations to our masters at the UN.

 

I have never opposed Australia's official refugee intake, and indeed, resent the fact that offical refugees are forced to wait even longer for resettlement, whilst, what I see as 'queue-jumpers' are given priority.

 

I also fail to comprehend why the huge increase in boats during the previous government's time in office was a better situation than under the present government's rule?

 

Hundreds of people drowned on these voyages, (the trauma and psychological damage to survivors would surely be far in excess of anything allegedly caused be detention in camps), whilst the owners of the unseaworthy boats made fortunes. The boats have stopped. The drownings have stopped. The people smugglers profits have stopped.

[Harpodom]

No.

 

The 'bottom line' is that kids shouldn't be kept as prisoners, at the risk of permanently damaging them mentally and physically, to set 'an example'.

 

Sorry that you find that so hard to accept, but it really is a simple matter of ethics and justice.

 

To use an analogy, would you recommend terminating every Down's pregnancy, because of the knowledge that a baby with Down's is a financial drain on society?

 

Sure, it would be pretty bad for the baby and their family, but think of the benefit to society as a whole, all that extra money that would otherwise have 'gone to waste'!

 

It would not matter what kind of facilities were provided, you would be claiming that they were not good enough, little more than 'prisons', etc. The chair of that enquiry yesterday called the detention centres 'prisons' but had no answer when Scott Morrison asked her if she was seriously comparing them to Long Bay Gaol in Sydney. She also alleged that the guards are all 'armed,' which Morrison denied vehemently.

 

The bottom line is that you literally want every person who arrives, claiming to be an asylum seeker, to be immediately accepted as such, and released straight out into the community, given a home, money, health care. Anything less would be a denial of both their human rights and our obligations to our masters at the UN.

 

I have never opposed Australia's official refugee intake, and indeed, resent the fact that offical refugees are forced to wait even longer for resettlement, whilst, what I see as 'queue-jumpers' are given priority.

 

I also fail to comprehend why the huge increase in boats during the previous government's time in office was a better situation than under the present government's rule?

 

Hundreds of people drowned on these voyages, (the trauma and psychological damage to survivors would surely be far in excess of anything allegedly caused be detention in camps), whilst the owners of the unseaworthy boats made fortunes. The boats have stopped. The drownings have stopped. The people smugglers profits have stopped.

[ramot]

No.

 

The 'bottom line' is that kids shouldn't be kept as prisoners, at the risk of permanently damaging them mentally and physically, to set 'an example'.

 

Sorry that you find that so hard to accept, but it really is a simple matter of ethics and justice.

 

To use an analogy, would you recommend terminating every Down's pregnancy, because of the knowledge that a baby with Down's is a financial drain on society?

 

Sure, it would be pretty bad for the baby and their family, but think of the benefit to society as a whole, all that extra money that would otherwise have 'gone to waste'!

 

 

I've seen some stupid outrageous comments in my time on PIO, but this probably is amongst the worst.

[Harpodom]

I've seen some stupid outrageous comments in my time on PIO, but this probably is amongst the worst.

 

why?

 

There are many parallels between the two scenarios, mainly doing something in the name of 'the greater good', at the (considerable) expense of a small number.

 

I used the Down's analogy, topical as it is thanks to Richard Dawkins, as it is a subject close to my heart.

 

I had a brother with Down's Syndrome who died some years ago. If you look at what he achieved in his life 'on paper', in terms of net financial gain to society, he was a drain on the tax payer. But he was much loved by his family and by his local community. He was loved by all around him, by rough skinheads and old grannies alike. I'm not asking for any sympathy, just letting you know where I'm coming from before you hit the 'offence' button

 

It goes without saying that terminating all babies with Down's Syndrome would be unspeakably cruel, even if it did 'benefit' society.

 

I don't see much difference between that and the indefinite incarceration, mental torture and permanent damage being inflicted on children by mandatory detention: a small number of people paying a huge price for the 'benefit' of society.

[Parley]

Drawing a very long bow harpo.

[Guest]

why?

 

There are many parallels between the two scenarios, mainly doing something in the name of 'the greater good', at the (considerable) expense of a small number.

 

I used the Down's analogy, topical as it is thanks to Richard Dawkins, as it is a subject close to my heart.

 

I had a brother with Down's Syndrome who died some years ago. If you look at what he achieved in his life 'on paper', in terms of net financial gain to society, he was a drain on the tax payer. But he was much loved by his family and by his local community. He was loved by all around him, by rough skinheads and old grannies alike. I'm not asking for any sympathy, just letting you know where I'm coming from before you hit the 'offence' button

 

It goes without saying that terminating all babies with Down's Syndrome would be unspeakably cruel, even if it did 'benefit' society.

 

I don't see much difference between that and the indefinite incarceration, mental torture and permanent damage being inflicted on children by mandatory detention: a small number of people paying a huge price for the 'benefit' of society.

 

 

Beautifully put Harpo.

[MARYROSE02]

why?

 

There are many parallels between the two scenarios, mainly doing something in the name of 'the greater good', at the (considerable) expense of a small number.

 

I used the Down's analogy, topical as it is thanks to Richard Dawkins, as it is a subject close to my heart.

 

I had a brother with Down's Syndrome who died some years ago. If you look at what he achieved in his life 'on paper', in terms of net financial gain to society, he was a drain on the tax payer. But he was much loved by his family and by his local community. He was loved by all around him, by rough skinheads and old grannies alike. I'm not asking for any sympathy, just letting you know where I'm coming from before you hit the 'offence' button

 

It goes without saying that terminating all babies with Down's Syndrome would be unspeakably cruel, even if it did 'benefit' society.

 

I don't see much difference between that and the indefinite incarceration, mental torture and permanent damage being inflicted on children by mandatory detention: a small number of people paying a huge price for the 'benefit' of society.

 

If you are talking about Australian children with Downs Syndrome, or any other problem, I care deeply and never support a programme of euthanasia. But if you are talking about children from anywhere else in the world, thus afflicted. No, frankly I don't care about them. Although I would be quite happy to see large amounts of foreign aid diverted from the Swiss bank accounts of corrupt dictators, and used to help people in need.

 

I also care deeply about the way we treat our old, and the way the government, rather cynically expects people in the communtiy to care for their ill and/or handicapped families, with little help from the government.

 

I would much rather we spend our mental health budget looking after these people than anyone else.

[MARYROSE02]

I've talked before about the amount of money my late father was expected to pay towards the cost of his nursing home care in the UK. A man who served his country throughout WW2 and never had a day on the dole in his life.

 

Why should I want to spend a penny or a cent on helping people who pretend to be asylum seekers, when there are far more deserving cases amongst our own people.

[MARYROSE02]

Its no good using simple logic, reason and common sense tea.

 

The haters are so dead set in their belief that 'deterrence' is the way to go that no matter what form that 'deterrence' takes, its still justifiable.

 

I think about it like this, in 50 years time, will the world look on Australia's temporary cessation of boat arrivals as an example of 'best practice' when it comes to dealing with displaced people all over the world.

 

For it is temporary. Sooner or later the cruelty will have to stop. It is not feasible for this level of cruelty to continue ad infinitum: if nothing else the country will go bankrupt, so expensive is Operation Sovereign Borders to run.

 

It's a short sighted, evil, stupid and TEMPORARY blip, but will do irreversible damage to Australia's reputation.

 

Be very wary of people who sneer at the UN and the international community: they are NOT to be trusted.

 

B******S to our 'international reputation! Nobody cares! The UN is a farce, worse than The League of Nations, and paid for largely by democratic benefactors like the US, whilst international basket cases like Zimbabwe are allowed to strut about, telling us what to do.

[mickyb]

Every time I read one of these threads , I start with an open mind and sympathy for boat people and the children. Then I read the same people deriding opposing views , name calling and questioning of intellects .

The suposed good/ nice guys do little for their cause when they resort to that level of debate. I'm righteous , your an idiot .

do you really believe you can alter people's points of view by treating them as simpletons ?

when was the last time any of the ' good guys ' wrote to their MP or organised a protest outside the Indian embassy to put pressure on a more local solution ? How about a march to get all those other countries to sign up to the resolution ?

My own personal view , no children shouldn't be locked up on camps , even if that camp is better or safer than where they left . And they'd be better off with their parents out as well . I'd grant temporary work / resident visas . The problem of course is that they'd be a hell of a lot more boats coming . There are over a billion people in the world who would be better off in tent in a camp . Luckily notmany can afford the people smuggling route .

[Echidna66]

Apparently Australia is running out of money fast, so much so that our beloved Govt may have to put our taxes up....so why allow hoardes of economic migrants into the country..I dont want one cent of my taxes going to any of them...

[Diane]

I didn't realise until today that the people working at Nauru don't even have to undergo "working with children" checks - that is appalling! These people are being treated terribly and surely even the most far right leaning Australian should see that things as they are cannot be acceptable. ​http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2014/08/22/minister-fiery-exchanges-children-detention-inquiry

[Echidna66]

Couldnt care less, they could always go back to where they came from?

[Xenon4017]

I didn't realise until today that the people working at Nauru don't even have to undergo "working with children" checks - that is appalling!

 

I'm afraid it's worse than that. Some of the people cooking the meals aren't qualified sous chefs. And not all the electrical equipment has been tested and tagged by the relevant authority. How can we expect people to live under such conditions?

[Parley]

I think the problem is that Labor and the Greens have refused to allow temporary protection visas which would have allowed the detainees claims to be assessed and release them into the community until circumstances improved in their home country.