Governments should not develop immigration and refugee policy based on emotion or votes. This unfortunately has been the case and Australia has suffered the consequences for many years later. Examining our history it appears that many Labor governments have been the culprits of shaping our immigrant population to win votes and not what is best for the community already here. -The Kevin LABOR government abolished Howards Pacific Solution which saw many deserving refugees not resettled, as queue jumpers were taking their place. -The Hawke LABOR government responding to the Tiananmen Square massacre in Beijing, declared that Chinese students could remain in Australia which unbalanced the immigration intake for years. -In 1983 the Labor member for Watson in southwest Sydney, Leo McLeay, wanted to know why we werent taking in more immigrants from Lebanon. Why the rejection rate for applications from this area was high. The Hawke LABOR government responded by relaxing all rules, making it easier for family reunions and not enforcing visa breeches especially for those affected by the fighting overseas. Turns out that some in this last group who arrived around this time are the parents of those who have left to fight with terrorist groups overseas. A psychiatrist has observed: ........psychiatrist Tanveer Ahmed said in The Australian that some of the violent behaviour exhibited by homegrown terrorists such as Khaled Sharrouf should be noted as part of a legacy of the predisposition of some of those who migrated from fractured and traumatised families from Lebanon during those years of fighting.... So did any of these Labor government ever stop and consider Australias future at the time or were their decision taken purely to win votes from certain groups? Well its happening again. Labor MPs with a high Muslim voter percentage of constituents are being lobbied, with demands certain decisions be made that will benefit this group only. These Labor MPs are obeying, campaigning on their behalf with the whole Labor party capitulating for votes, with no consideration given for the wider Australian community which is made up of many cultures. The Muslim lobby were fierce opponents to 18C, so Labor campaigned against it. The Muslim lobby are fierce opponents to expanding anti-terrorist laws so Labor is hesitant to support these. The Muslim lobby are fierce opponents to cutting welfare of those that are deemed to be fighting for terrorists. Havent heard Labors position. Curious to see what they do here but wont be surprised if they oppose this too. The Muslim lobby are fierce opponents of Israel and demand Australia changes its foreign policy from a 2 state existence to an inhalation of Israel one (not in so many words, but read between the lines or comments on twitter by their community leaders). Labor has obeyed and changes its foreign policy to condemn Israel. The Muslim lobby fiercely opposed the appointment of Paul Howes as a Senator to replace Bob Carr and threatened to not vote for Labor at the next election if they went ahead with Howes. Labor obeyed and didnt endorse him. If all their demands are met what will Australia look like 5, 10 years down the track? Immigration and refugee policy should NOT be based on emotion or votes as Labor appear do have done throughout their terms as government. theaustralian.au/opinion/columnists/australia-cannot-afford-a-refugee-policy-based-on-each-new-crisis/story-e6frg75f-1227026108565
Posted on: Sun, 17 Aug 2014 03:54:34 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015