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

Labor's tide in and out on boats

By Ben-Peter Terpstra - posted Friday, 12 July 2013


Once upon a time, but not so long ago, turning around boats was Labor's policy; a policy Laborites were happy to talk to Australian voters about in 2007.

Today, however, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd sensationally claims that Tony Abbott will cause a conflict with Indonesia because the Coalition believes in safely turning around boats.

Is Rudd just trying to distract voters from Labor's broken border protection policies, or does he suffer from severe memory loss?

Advertisement

The facts are clear. In 2007, Kevin Rudd promised he'd turn around the boats on at least three occasions.

"You'd turn them back," he told The Australian (November 23).

"If they're out there in the high seas, what you would do is seek to turn them back through the agency of the Australian Navy," he told Radio 2GB's Sydney audience (July 12).

"Labor's policy" he said, "is that if people are interdicted on the high seas, then these vessels should be turned around" (Australian Broadcasting Corporation, February 23).

Yes, "these vessels," he stated.

So, in the spirit of accountability, I'd like to know: Is Kevin Rudd patronising Australians, or suffering from severe memory loss? As voters, we have a right to know.

Advertisement

In any case, and according to the PM's own logic, Labor's stated policy could have led to confrontation with Indonesia.

What's more, Labor is left with another problem. In addition to the free advertising material Kevin Rudd has generously given Liberal TV, his ministers won't be able to avoid scrutiny.

Take the new Immigration Minister Tony Burke. Like Kevin Rudd, he has a long history of flip-flopping, due once again to severe memory loss, or what I call Labor Alzheimer's.

Recall in 2006, when the then-opposition immigration spokesperson claimed that Jakarta was running Canberra? Or as he put it, "This Government has decided that Indonesia will decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come" (The Age, June 15).

To Burke, at least, the Coalition was too soft on Jarkata. Or as he stressed, "The Prime Minister's attempts to appease Indonesia were the opposite of border protection. They were border surrender" (The 7:30 Report, August 14).

Was he inspired by Paul Keating's introduction of indefinite mandatory detention for unauthorised arrivals in 1992? Or, just trying to create a conflict with Indonesia?

For what it's worth, I believe in a Big Australia. The problem is that Labor's history of immigration spin is undermining the public's faith in a safe pro-immigration culture.

Moreover, if one's suffering from Labor Alzheimer's one needs to be reminded of Bob Hawke's history of strong language, as summarised on the The Australian's loud front-pagein 1977 (November 29): "Hawke: Return bogus refugees."

The Northern Territory Labor Council advanced the nutmeg theory that refugees were "pirates, brothel keepers and drug runners" too (N.Y. Times News Service, December 15, 1977).

Then, there was Gough Whitlam's overlooked record on so-called Asian pirates. Or as the renowned political scientist, John P. Roche opined, "the egregious leader of the Australian Labor Party…practically suggested before the recent general election they may be shoved off in the general direction of the South Pole" (The Times-News, January 13, 1978).

Labor's election vocabulary indicates a desire to be all things to all voters. Tell refugee advocates how libertarian you're while reminding security hawks how tough you'll be. After all, and despite accusations that you stand for nothing, it's important to confuse people.

Yet, as Julia Gillard found, confusing voters in the short-term is damaging for the ALP's long-term credibility. At least the High Court didn't buy her unfair Malaysia solution in 2011; a "solution" even Burke is running from.

Since 2008, 45,000 people have been lured to Australia on dangerous boats, but Labor is also confronted with the fact that 1,000-plus people have drowned on their watch. All desperate asylum-seekers seem to know is that Canberra said they'd turn around the boats but didn't; a contradiction exploited by "smugglers."

As for the future, Prime Minister Rudd is still writing Labor's"boat people" story. It's just that it won't have a happy ending unless it's a consistent one.

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


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

21 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

Ben-Peter Terpstra has provided commentary for The Daily Caller (Washington D.C.), NewsReal Blog (Los Angeles), Quadrant (Sydney), and Menzies House (Adelaide).

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Ben-Peter Terpstra

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

Article Tools
Comment 21 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy