Possibly the most vexing "issue" in Australian politics is one that has become so convoluted and distorted that I'm struggling to even know what to call it. I could say that I'm referring to the issue of illegal immigrants, but that wouldn't quite be right; as there seems to be no issue with those who manage to illegally enter Australia by aeroplane. It only seems to apply to those who come by the least seaworthy of all possible crafts. That's right; those who, on engineering principles alone, are least likely to come here at all.
Asylum seekers. Boat people. Boat people. Do they have rudders? When born - below decks, presumably - rather than receive a gentle slap from a midwife to get them breathing, did someone break a bottle of champagne over their heads? It's funny how I'm never heard of people crying foul about those blasted plane people. And where they bring in more than 100,000 people per year, even a hundred rickety crafts are yet to bring in a twentieth of that.
I also find it incredible when the more insular and xenophobic members of our society try to frame their arguments in terms of "border protection". Perhaps they've not noticed, but Australia is surrounded by quite a lot of water. Our borders are really quite well guarded, and by sharks, no less.
So the argument regarding queue-jumpers gets bandied about. I can picture it now; a line, rather like the one that builds in the post-office on a Saturday morning, stretching interminably and miraculously through Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, and about half a dozen war-torn countries. There is no queue. There is only pain and desperation. The ability to wait may, in our increasingly selfish mindset may be inextricably linked to impatience and greed for many, but there are still places in the world where need is the driving force.
But if they were real refugees, they'd just go to the closest country that would have them; they wouldn't come all the way to Australia; so claim those whose hearts are filled so very sparsely with human compassion. I wish to God that this were an applicable caveat, because then I could kick out every bloody English person I come across hence forth. I mean, they are aware that there are countries between here and Blighty, aren't they? I mean, if your issue is with population control, then it is folk from places like the United Kingdom, New Zealand, France, Canada and the United States who really should be denied entry. After all, they, least of all actually need to come here.
The very notion that people should be stigmatised for wanting to come to our country over all other countries is mean-spiritedness of an extent that defies belief. I am sick of people adopting a soullessly quasi-bureaucratic argument that tries to invalidate the exercise; namely, the queue-jumper line. It is bollocks. I simply can't fathom becoming so fearful for my life that I would abandon my home and home country, my friends and everything I own, and risk my life - and my family's life in a journey across an ocean unless I absolutely felt that I had to, if I wanted to survive. The argument that suggests otherwise arbitrarily dehumanises those who seek asylum to a level where they are little more than clinical, calculating thieves who care nothing for their safety, for their own country and culture, or ours. It is an argument of reductive cowardice on the part of those who espouse it that is thoroughly, thoroughly shameful.
The argument that infuriates me more than any other is the one that suggests that those coming in by boat actually have loads of money, and that they are denying the real poor. This is an insane argument no matter how you look at it. For a start, you'd think that if money was a problem, the folk who complain might have a bit more of an issue with those who come here by 747. I mean, last time I checked, QANTAS isn't a free, late-night aero-service.
And I could stomach the idea that those in extreme poverty are more deserving if our help if those who think we ought to turn away boats were prepared to advocate the position that it is our moral duty to go into regions of the earth riddled with poverty and strife, and actually bring those people to Australia without them having to risk their lives on a perilous journey across an ocean. But somehow, they never do.
Listening to those who claim they'd turn the boats away, you'd think that the trip to Australia for an asylum-seeker was some kind of pleasure cruise. I'm sorry, but if I could afford to fly here, I would. I wouldn't risk drowning my family.
It seems that those who actually need to come here and dare to do so are to be feared. I just don't understand that. But, if there needs to be, equity and integrity with regards to those who seek to come to Australia, then I have a solution. It does not involve turning away the boats. Far from it. It it hereby decreed that everyone who comes here must come by boat.
When I say boat, I mean a piece of shit that is as likely to sink as not. And you get one suitcase per family. That's it. And the price is however much you happen to own. Yes, that's right; the sum total worth of your assets. That seems fair. What's that, you own two houses in Dorset? Excellent. Your ticket will be seven-hundred and fifty-thousand pounds, please.
But you won't actually come here. Not for a few years, anyway. I mean, you've just decided to come, you've spent everything you've owned, and abandoned your culture and home. Oh, and you've risked your life. There's obviously something wrong with you. You must be dangerous. So, we're going to store you off-shore for a bit. It's not a prison, it's just a place with high fences on a small island. Not a prison.
Given that immigration to Australia is about 100,000 a year, I don't think Nehru is going to be big enough. We're going to need a bigger Island. To that end, I hope Tasmania doesn't mind, but it's now a Detention Centre.
It's nice when to conclude, all you really need to do is quote from the National Anthem. I think it's high time that the second verse get a more regular airing, and certainly high time that any bastard in favour of turning back the boats or any other draconian sentiment be banned from singing the anthem or waving the flag altogether. Because as the words below unequivocally state, to espouse them is to be thoroughly un-Australian.
"For those who've come across the Seas,
We've boundless plains to share.
With courage, let us all combine
To Advance Australia Fair."
The day this issue is put to bed once and for all is the day we have finally, truly become a nation of world, and a mature one at that. But sadly, I think it's a long ways off. And all of us are poorer, lesser human beings because of it.
Comments