Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

PNG solution cutting against Rudd

By Graham Young - posted Friday, 26 July 2013


More likely to vote Labor because of measure

ALP

Grn

LP

Minor

Grand Total

Much more likely

26%

0%

1%

10%

11%

More likely

20%

7%

1%

9%

9%

Neither more nor less likely

47%

35%

31%

37%

38%

Less likely

5%

33%

12%

13%

11%

Much less likely

1%

24%

54%

31%

29%

Unsure

1%

1%

0%

1%

1%

Grand Total

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

Total more likely

46%

7%

3%

18%

21%

Total less likely

6%

57%

66%

44%

41%

Net more likely

40%

-50%

-63%

-26%

-20%

 

Reasons for supporting the initiative and thinking it will work run pretty much along the lines of the general debate. It’s seen as a deterrent, and fairer to the world-wide population of refugees, most of whom can’t afford to be sea-borne asylum seekers.

Advertisement

Interestingly, while almost every politician unfailingly invokes deaths at sea as a reason for being tough on refugees, this is only directly mentioned by 1.9% of respondents, just slightly more than those who raised the issue that many asylum seekers are “Muslim”.

For those who oppose the initiative the major reasons are concern that it hasn’t been “thought through”, which often accompanies concern that PNG won’t be able to cope. The issue of cost is also prominent, as is the belief that this is just an election promise.

This also is reflected in responses to the question of whether it will work. A key part of their reservations on this question revolve around PNG being the country taking the asylum seekers.

Concern that we might be dumping our problem on the neighbour least able to deal with it jostles with the fear that they won’t be able to cope with anything like the numbers so that the solution will implode.

Practicalities are also raised. Many respondents say that women and children can’t be sent to Manus Island, so the policy fails at the first hurdle because it can’t mean that every genuine asylum seeker will be resettled in PNG. This leads one respondent to even claim that this will probably lead the courts to invalidate the solution because it will lead to families being split.

All of which is diabolical for Rudd. In pure cold political terms he needed to come up with a solution to the problem, but everyone knows that, meaning that any solution he comes up with is viewed cynically. Further it is tainted by past performance.

Advertisement

Unless he completely copies the Liberal Party platform, which he can’t because he has ruled out towing back the boats, then any time a boat turns up, he will get the blame, even if his solution has made the numbers fewer than they would otherwise have been.

Seeing his weakness people smugglers are more likely to send even more boats. The prospect of a potential Abbott win will actually embolden them to do more sooner in case business gets harder after the election.

And every time a fresh boat turns up, or sinks, it is another day that Labor will lose control over the issues, and have to deal yet again with an issue that our research shows inclines voters, particularly minor party voters, against them.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

140 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Graham Young is chief editor and the publisher of On Line Opinion. He is executive director of the Australian Institute for Progress, an Australian think tank based in Brisbane, and the publisher of On Line Opinion.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Graham Young

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Graham Young
Article Tools
Comment 140 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy