To start with the honest truth - I'm a raving lefty, so it is to my own surprise that I find myself in support of Mr Rudd's announcement regarding asylum seekers being processed and re-settled in PNG.
I am disappointed that Australia has such a poor human rights record, that we treat asylum seekers so terribly, and that they have become pawns in Australian political discourse. It is, however, a simple fact that 'boat people' are a political issue and there is no easy or quick escape from that reality. You can thank Mr Howard for that, Pauline too, and the media who used xenophobia to sell content rather than to educate and inform the Australian people.
Whilst our focus should be on protecting those fleeing persecution, the debate has deteriorated to such a point that there didn't seem to be a way that a Labor government could sell that to the Australian people. We've had nearly 20 years of indoctrination reinforcing the idea that 'boat people' are 'bad'. Should they have tried to re-frame the debate? Perhaps, but in the context of the current debate, and all the other political issues at play, wouldn't that have simply handed Tony the keys to the Lodge?
And where would asylum seekers be under Mr Abbott, with Scott Morrison in charge of their interests? I shudder to think about that. I believe with the Greens that a strong regional (preferably global) solution is required - but to expect Mr Rudd to pull that off in under 100 days, and then change the thinking of a seeming large majority of the Australian population in the same time frame, is bonkers. It is a sad indictment on Australia, but with this solution Mr Rudd is protecting asylum seekers from the Liberal Party, from people smugglers, and from the people of Australia themselves.
The Greens objection to this plan seems to be that PNG is such a horrible place that we are subjecting these refugees to further trauma. It is true that PNG has many problems - but might it not also be the case that by assisting asylum seekers to resettle in PNG, we could also assist our closest neighbours in some of their issues? And if we're saving the billions of dollars that we otherwise spend on processing and housing these refugees ourselves, then couldn't this money do wonderful things in PNG?
What if some of the money we give to PNG in compensation goes towards expanding their police force so that they can address the high crime rate? What if this new influx of potential citizens helps build their economy, and drives growth? Multiculturalism has done wonderful things for Australia - might it not do the same for PNG?
But we can't stop here. We should view this as the beginning of a true regional solution and an opportunity to re-frame the debate. I was overjoyed to read many comments online today from people who would like to see the asylum seeker debate move more towards the left. I've always been there, but I felt pretty alone. It's nice to know that I'm not. We also need to increase our refugee intake.
If this debate has ever really, truly been about protecting asylum seekers from risking their lives on dangerous boat trips, then this solution will work. If this has ever been about making sure that those waiting in refugee camps are not disadvantaged by 'queue jumpers', then this solution will work. If this has ever been about breaking the people smugglers business model, then this solution will work. If we can at the same time help PNG overcome some of it's problems, then this solution will work.
That said, I don't for one minute think that those reasons were true for anyone. Those arguments were simply useful ways to appear compassionate without actually having to be compassionate. Now that we've disposed with that facade, perhaps we can actually move towards a real solution.
I applaud Mr Rudd. It's not a perfect plan - but it's a hell of a lot better than anything else that came before it, and a hell of a lot better than the alternative under an Abbott lead government. Onwards and upwards Australia!
