It’s time to write to Federal MPs

You may have seen Greg Hunt on Insiders this morning (27 May).  If not, watch it on Iview.  He simply did not answer questions about “indefinite detention”.  Coalition MPs are simply not being honest about the issue of people seeking asylum.  They won’t acknowledge that they are deliberately running a system of indefinite detention of people they call “illegal” but who do not commit ANY offence by coming to Australia seeking to be protected from persecution.

The Coalition justify their deliberate, intentional cruelty by saying they are worried about people drowning in their attempt to reach safety.  (Watch Greg Hunt retreat to this excuse).  It’s  a lie.  If they are so worried about people drowning, why punish the ones who don’t drown?  Why deny us any information about the safety of people on boats that are turned back  (by OUR armed services?  Why not worry about the people who drown in their attempt to reach Europe rather than Australia?  Why not worry about the people who do not try to escape persecution and are killed by their persecutors?

It’s time for all of us to write to our Federal MP (of whichever major party).  Make sure your letters are actual letters: paper, envelope etc, not emails.  Consider writing in the following terms:

“Dear xxx
I am a voter in your electorate.
Do you think asylum seekers are “illegal”?
If so, what offence do they commit?

Yours Faithfully…”

An alternative (or follow up) letter:

“Dear xxx
I am a voter in your electorate.
Are you concerned about boat-people drowning?
If so, do you think we should punish those who do not drown?

Yours Faithfully…”

Try it.  They will not give you an honest answer.  If they ignore you, or send a press release drafted by a staffer, write again, along the following lines:

“Dear xxx
I am still a voter in your electorate.  Thank you for responding to my letter.
It did not answer my questions.  Here they are again…

Yours Faithfully…”

Keep the letters as short as possible: most of them have a limited attention span.

Don’t try to persuade them: they aren’t listening to you any more, even though they are paid to be your representative.

What YOU can do about refugee policy

I am often asked “What can I do about refugee policy?”

Well here’s an idea Kate came up with: get a group of friends together and agree to meet once a week.

At those weekly meetings, agree on things you can do during the following week: helping at the local refugee support group is one possibility.

One thing you CAN do is write to Federal MPs.  There’s a few pointers about how to do this effectively: click here.  Key points: write letters: pen and paper (not emails, not SMS); keep it short: give them nowhere to hide. 

Classic sample letter:

“Dear xxx

I am a voter (in your electorate).  I have two questions:

  1. Do you think boat people are “illegal”?
  2. If so, what offence do they commit?

Yours Faithfully… “

There are lots of other possible questions here.

Write to members of both major parties. If you don’t get an answer (an answer as distinct from a non-responsive reply) write again: after all, this is supposed to be a representative democracy.

If enough people do this every week, so that all federal MPs get lots of letters, maybe they will start to get the picture.

The trolls are at it again

Really? I get paid nothing at all to help refugees, and I pay a lot of tax. So tell me if you are hinting at some kind of fact I am not aware of. Actually, I think you just made up what you said. Are you a troll or a fantasist?

 What 
What is interesting about it is that people are willing to invent things like that in order to distract attention from the obvious fact that some people are unfortunate enough to live in our society without being able to get work.  They are not only denied the dignity of working, the government does not give them enough to live on.  What’s a person supposed to do, if they can’t afford to pay the rent and feed their kids?
What sort of society are we, if we will willingly let people suffer?
Bronwyn Bishop made much of the fact that her pension had been “earned”, whereas payments to the unemployed are not earned.  Even if that is true, even if you assume that a person on Newstart has never paid tax, it remains the fact that they are part of our Society, and our Society is damaged if we let some people in it suffer: or worse, if we let their children suffer because the parents are unemployed and the Newstart allowance is not enough to allow them a life worth living.
People like Bronwyn Bishop, who have never had to scrape along on hopelessly inadequate resources, probably think that some people will rort the system it if offers a Newstart allowance which allows a decent, if modest, chance of survival.
Let that be so: as a Society we have to decide whether it is better to provide a safety net, or let people fall to the ground and be destroyed.
In my view it is better to provide a safety net.  Even if some people will rort the system.
And how can any politician take a different view?  They have salaries which start at $199k a year (more for Ministers, Committee chairs etc), and allowances which add another $200k to $800k a year.
And then there are the pensions, like the one Bronwyn Bishop gets, so she doesn’t have to see what it’s like living on $40 per day.
Expense allowances:
  • All politicians may claim expenses relating have their travel within Australia covered if they are on Parliamentary or electorate business
    • This may include first class tickets on scheduled commercial services.
  • If heading overseas, these entitlements may extend to medical services and clothing allowances.
  • Politicians are also entitled to a travel allowance for overnight stays, with varying rates for different locations and positions.
  • For example, all politicians can claim $273 for an overnight stay in Canberra but this increases to $498 in Karratha.
  • Office holders are given larger allowances in some locations.
  • The Prime Minister is limited to $564 for each overnight stay in a place other than an official establishment or the Prime Minister’s home base.
  • Accommodation and sustenance at official establishments is provided at Government expense.
  • Politicians have a limited number of overnight stays that they can claim.
    • For some MPs this limit might be 90 nights per year.
  • Ministers can also claim the cost of travel for their spouse, if it is in Australia and for official purposes.
  • All politicians are entitled to a private-plated vehicle to be used for parliamentary, electorate or official business.
    • They can choose an additional $19,500 per annum of electorate allowance to meet the costs of transport within and for the service of the electorate, instead.
  • Specific examples from the second half of 2015:
    • Foreign Minister Julie Bishop claimed the largest amount with a total cost of $808,649.49 – more than half of which was for overseas travel in her ministerial role.
    • Her colleague, Warren Entsch, claimed more than $779,512 – including $441,460 for an office fit-out
    • Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull claimed a total of $508,200.67, while Opposition Leader Bill Shorten claimed $423,759.19.

Who should we believe?

It is interesting to compare reports in today’s The Australian and The Guardian Australia

In The Australian, there is an article with the headline: “Newspoll: Malcolm Turnbull’s popularity surges on the back of the budget

In The Guardian there is an article with this headline: “Coalition’s budget fails to turn around Turnbull’s government’s fortunes

On Sunday The Guardian had an article headlined: “An unfunded, uncosted tax plan plays into Labor’s hands – again

Turnbull continues to be preferred PM, but Labor seems to be preferred government.   So, what are we meant to believe?

Hypocritical politicians

I have said before, and I repeat it here, that I regard as hypocrites any Federal politicians who claim to be Christian, and yet go along with the deliberate mistreatment of people seeking asylum.  The key offenders are Scott Morrison, Tony Abbott Peter Dutton and Malcolm Turnbull.

Abbott, Morrison, Turnbull and Dutton claim to be Christians, along with most other members of the Australian Parliament.  For fear of being misunderstood, I should declare that I was brought up in the Christian tradition, but I no longer adhere to any religion.  But I do remember some of the fundamental  tenets of Christian teaching: compassion for those in need; treat others as you would want to be treated…

These men lie to us, and they are hypocrites.  They lie when they call boat people “illegal”, when it is not an offence to arrive in Australia, without a visa, seeking to be protected from persecution.  And by their wilful mistreatment of people seeking asylum they betray the Christian values they pretend to hold.

Christ told the parable of the Good Samaritan.  A Jewish traveller on the road from Jerusalem to Jericho, has been stripped and beaten and left, helpless, beside the road.  A priest and a Levite both pass him by and avoid engaging with him. A Samaritan sees him and helps him, even though Jews and Samaritans were traditional enemies.

Tony Abbott, who claims to be a devout Roman Catholic, once suggested that the parable of the Good Samaritan might have been different if a number of travellers had been found beside the road.  It takes someone like Abbott to claim that he can reconstruct Christs’s teaching.

Abbott, Morrison, Dutton and Turnbull are dishonest hypocrites.  Their conduct is impossible to reconcile with their asserted Christian beliefs.

Today I got a very snippy email from a person who did not like my views on this subject.  He wrote:

Dear Mr Burnside,

You have on several occasions publicly berated and condemned Australian leaders for failing to live up to your understanding of the teachings and example of Jesus Christ(15).

Yet you deliberately and wilfully ignore the terrifying(3) implications of Muslims living in accordance with the teachings and example of Mohammed(11), as Islam commands them to.

You appear to be ideologically incapable of progressing beyond your own facile, self-serving understanding of what Islam actually teaches:

– Islam incites hatred against Jews, Christians and all non-Muslims(1)

– Islam incites violence against all non-Muslims(2)

– Islam incites terror against all non-Muslims(3)

– Islam’s prophet Mohammed was a self-professed terrorist(4)

– Prophet Mohammed tortured people to death(5)

– Mohammed beheaded men, women and children(6)

– Mohammed advocated killing non-Muslim children(7)

– Mohammed advocated global Islamic supremacy through violence(8)

– A Muslims highest goal is martyrdom, Islam’s only sure path to paradise(9)

– Islam’s prophet Mohammed sexually enslaved women after killing their menfolk(10)

– Prophet Mohammed is Islam’s perfect example for all Muslims(11)

Islamic State follow the prophecy and example of Muhammad, in punctilious detail”(12)

– Mohammed slaughtered anyone who insulted him(13)

– Islam demands the death penalty for anyone who questions or criticises Islam(14)

Pots in glass houses should be careful when throwing black stones at kettles.

(There followed an impressive number of footnotes quoting passages from the Quran)

I replied:

Thank you for advancing my education on religious matters.

Quoting extracts from the Quran is probably no more helpful than quoting selected extracts from the Bible: some well-known passages from Leviticus, for example.

In any event, your fundamental point (as exemplified by the subject line of your email) was the difference between the conspicuous Christianity of some of our political “leaders” and their conduct.  As best I recall, Christ never taught people to despise or mistreat people of other religions, so politicians who make a public virtue of their Christianity (Abbott, Morrison, Turnbull…) can hardly justify their mistreatment of refugees because many refugees are Muslims.  That would be difficult to square with, for example, the parable of the good Samaritan.  The point of that parable, of course, was that the Samaritan helped someone who adhered to a different faith and was part of a despised group.  But the hypocritical Christian politicians, who are our political “leaders” apparently think it’s OK to mistreat members of a despised minority, buoyed by the fact they are (or might be) Muslims.  If you can tell me how that is acceptable as a matter of Christian teaching, I would be fascinated.

And then there is the small matter of comparing mainstream Australian values (mateship, “fair go” etc) with  what the politicians do.  And it seems pointless to notice that they lie to us: calling boat people “illegal”, even though they commit no offence by coming here the way they do, and calling the exercise “border protection”, although speaking for myself I feel less need to be protected from people fleeing persecution than I need to be protected from our dishonest, hypocritical politicians.

I have met people from many faiths.  I have never feared any of them on account of their religious beliefs.  But it is a major concern to see dislike of Islam becoming so vocal: it’s the new anti-Semitism.

In this context it is worth recalling that in July 1938 an international conference was held in Evian-Les-Bains, France.  The purpose of the conference was to arrange help for the increasing number of Jewish refugees fleeing Germany.  The Australian representative, T. W. White said: “as we have no real racial problem, we are not desirous of importing one”.  Most countries said they could not accommodate any more refugees.

History soon showed us how terrible this response was.

 

 

TSUNAMI of Homelessness and Poverty set to hit on JUNE 4

We are facing a tsunami of poverty and homelessness within a month. Home Affairs have two planned waves designed to hit the people in the community who are going through the visa process, first singles and then followed by a second wave to target families with children. This Dutton designed program of poverty is underway. Key dates for implementation cascade through May and the Tsunami is designed to hit on June 4 when families will be told that they have four weeks to “transition off SRSS”. This is Home Affairs speak for get out of your house and live on nothing. Please  read  briefing note from the Refugee council  which provides the detail of this heinous policy. More Information on the numbers affected and detail is available here   https://refugeecouncilms.sharepoint.com/:f:/s/Public/EhYidNjIuGVPgrwfR__zFBsB3RgPRsC6_Q1wnMWP4sIhBg?e=j4HP5i.

This policy change could affect 13,299 people including 4059 children under 17 years who can be made homeless and destitute at the stroke of the Ministers pen.

Not since the DEPRESSION in the 1930’s has an Australian  government so deliberately set out to deliberately impoverish a group of people including children.

Of interest is that Dutton and Pezzullo, the instigators of the “starve ’em out” regime have not announced this loudly. The Information has dribbled out through agencies and the people affected. This is Home Affairs method of quietly undermining the decency of the community who would be shocked if they saw what is happening. Many Liberal MP’s are ignorant as to what is planned. This gives us a chance to make sure they hear what Minister Dutton is doing with his all expansive super powers.

People seeking asylum on the myriad of complicated processes are all to be hit but the ones who are likely to suffer most are the sick and vulnerable and parents with sick children as access to medicines and care is cut.  People seeking asylum by boat or air are all to be included. The so-called Legacy Caseload who were denied the right to apply for a visa by successive ministers are being especially targetted by this cruelty, after waiting up to five years to be allowed to apply for a refugee visa,

In August 2017, 60 single men and women across Australia were cut off from all support on same day notice. They had been released from detention into Community detention but on this day they were given Bridging visas with no support. They had to vacate their shared houses in two weeks. This included the young women brought down from Nauru after violent attacks and the men from Manus because of need for medical care. Three girls told me how they slept in a car for three nights because they had no money and nowhere to go. The car was parked in the garage of their previous home because they were so scared. They had a friend still in Community Detention and she snuck them in to her house to wash and eat until they were forbidden. Nine months later they are still struggling to find work, They have each managed to find casual work in factories, shops and cafes but not enough to pay rent. Most of the work offered to people with Bridging Visas is cash in hand as employers know that they are desperate and take advantage of the situation. These are the facts of life for people on Bridging Visas.

The one thing that people are seeking is work, the most highly sought after is “work with tax”, a phrase used to denote legal work. As has been explained to me many times, ” if you have work you can stop thinking and worrying as well as eating”. The government has so demonised people on bridging visas that once a prospective  employer sees the Bridging visa they say no. A young woman who applied for a job, cleaning the public toilets in a large hospital was on track for the job until they asked about her visa status. When she said that she had a BV, they replied sorry we only take citizens or permanent visas.

This is why people need the SRSS support to keep alive while they find work and wait for the interminable visa process to finish. In August last year, generous groups including the Victorian State Government responded finding safe homes for the single people. We managed then but this tsunami of literally thousands of people made destitute is beyond our capability.

Please contact your local member and your local media. We have to act now.

Australia in breach of Convention Against Torture

The Human Rights Council, which we have struggled so hard to join, has just received the latest  Report of the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Page 9 of the report carries special criticism of Australia, by reference to several cases in which Australia failed.  Page 9 includes the following:

27. The Human Rights Committee has repeatedly considered that “the combination of the
arbitrary character of the […] detention, its protracted and/or indefinite duration, the refusal
to provide information and procedural rights to the [detainees] and the difficult conditions of
detention are cumulatively inflicting serious psychological harm upon them, and constitute
treatment contrary to article 7 of the Covenant.”44 Indeed, the experience of being subjected
to detention that is neither necessary nor proportionate to serve any legitimate purpose,
particularly in conjunction with its prolonged and potentially indefinite duration, and with
the absence of any effective legal remedy has been shown to add significant mental and
emotional stress to the already extremely vulnerable situation of irregular migrants, with
many cases reported of self-harm, post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety and depression.
Thus, even factors that may not necessarily amount to ill-treatment when applied as an
isolated measure and for a very limited period of time – such as unjustified detention, delayed
access to procedural rights, or moderate physical discomfort – can cross the relevant threshold
if applied cumulatively and/or for a prolonged or open-ended period of time.
28. In the view of the Special Rapporteur, as a general rule, the longer a situation of
arbitrary detention and inadequate conditions lasts, and the less affected detainees can do to
influence their own situation, the more intense their mental and emotional suffering will
become, and the higher is the likelihood that the prohibition of ill-treatment has been
breached. Depending on the circumstances, this threshold can be reached very quickly, if not
immediately, for migrants in situations of increased vulnerability, such as children, women,
older people, persons with disabilities, medical conditions, or torture trauma, and members
of ethnic or social minorities including lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex
(LGBTI) persons. In particular, the Special Rapporteur endorses and reiterates the view
expressed by his predecessor that the deprivation of liberty of migrant children based solely
on their own or their parents’ migration status is never in the best interests of the child,
exceeds the requirement of necessity, is grossly disproportionate and, even in case of short
term detention, may amount to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.45
29. In the view of the Special Rapporteur, detention based solely on migration-status, as
such, can also amount to torture, most notably where it is being intentionally imposed or
perpetuated for purposes such as deterring, intimidating, or punishing irregular migrants or
their families, coercing them into withdrawing their requests for asylum, subsidiary
protection or other stay, agreeing to voluntary repatriation, providing information or
fingerprints, or with a view to extorting money or sexual acts, or for reasons based on
discrimination of any kind, including discrimination based on immigration status.46

Footnote 44 contains references to three cases against Australia.

Paragraph 18, on page 6, includes this:

“In practice, the possibility to leave must not be a merely theoretical option to be exercised at
some point in the future, but must be practicable and available at any time. For example,
holding migrants at an international border, an offshore facility or an airport transit zone and
refusing their immigration while granting them the theoretical right to leave to any other
country or territory of their choice still amounts to deprivation of liberty for such time as they
are being held, …”

Sounds just like Manus and Nauru, doesn’t it?

Here’s the full report

Trolls

Not surprisingly, I get a lot of trolls sniping at me on Twitter.

I posted a suggestion recently that we should identify the trolls, without wanting to give them any publicity.  People have been writing to me with suggested trolls.  The list follows.  I will update it as time goes on.  Let’s make social media #SocialAgain

Here’s a short-list of people on Twitter who seem unable to tweet anything but false allegations or meaningless insults:

@AstralCowboyz

@bennalongtime

@BoyfromBurleigh

@bush_bushy1961

@ClubMadManus

@Colt_Of_Freedom

@form0sa

@germ_nation1

@GondwanaLands

@GreattobeAussie

@Home_Oh_Hamish

@LeroyGJacobs

@Mabels_Message

@PrimaBaci

@ResistingHate_

@scammersbeware_

@scratchmynose

SchitCunce

@TiberiusMcGreg1

@UFC_fanboy

@wingisforever

@Yeahnahtoyou

Peter Dutton

In mid-March 2018 I retweeted a tweet which included a photo-shopped image of Peter Dutton as a Nazi.

The Jewish Anti-Defamation Commission criticised me for it.  Andrew Bolt published a piece on his blog which was very critical of me.  He did not bother to contact me about it for comment, before or after.

At the outset, I would say that I am very sorry that some people were offended by the tweet.  It is worth noting that I did not compare our present conduct with the events of the Holocaust, and I never would.

Twitter is not an ideal place for complex ideas.  I agree with the ADC that nothing in the Western world today is equivalent to the Holocaust, which cost the lives of millions of Jews.  Australia’s detention centres, onshore and offshore, are not death camps.

However it is important to recognise that the Nazi regime spent years generating in the German community a hatred and fear of Jews, without which the Holocaust would not have been possible.  The Nazis took control in 1933.  By degrees they generated fear and hatred of Jews.  If they had introduced the ”final solution” in 1933, I think the German public would have revolted,   By spending years spreading lies about Jews, the Nazis were able to get away with increasing mistreatment of Jews: mistreatment which reached flash-point in November 1938 (Kristallnacht) and rapidly descended into the events we call the Holocaust.

Peter Dutton is not doing things equivalent to the unspeakable acts which we call the Holocaust; but he is cultivating a climate of fear and hatred of some (I emphasise some) refugees: in particular Moslems and people who are not white.  His wish to encourage white South African farmers to come to Australia under “special arrangements” stands in marked contrast to the fact that he is encouraging  Rohingya refugees to return to Myanmar, by offering them money if they will go back: but we all know that the plight of Rohingya Muslims is far worse than that of white South African farmers.

The Jewish community in Australia is to be congratulated for its strong advocacy in favour of decent treatment of people seeking asylum.  And no wonder: they understand better than most what can happen if fear and hatred are allowed to govern the way people are treated.

I retweeted the image because I regard Peter Dutton as a dangerous force in Australian politics: he is leading the dogwhistle charge to make ordinary Australians fear Moslems generally, and Moslem refugees in particular.  He is making life increasingly difficult for them.  The pattern of his conduct is familiar: certainly they should be alarmingly familiar to the ADC.

Presumably it suits Peter Dutton for arguments like this to break out, driving a wedge between advocates who broadly agree with each other.

As I say, I am sorry that the tweet offended some people, but the direction in which the conduct of Australia is being taken by Peter Dutton is very troubling: we must be aware of what he is doing.

As George Santayana said “Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

PS: the whole thing was brought to light by an article in the Australian, a Murdoch newspaper.  It is easy to forget that just before the 2013 Federal election a Murdoch paper ran front page pictures of Rudd and Albanese in Nazi uniforms!

PPS: Since posting this piece on my blog, I received a number of emails.  Here is one of them, and my response:

“Mr Burnside
YOUR COMMENTS RE Peter Dutton were inappropriate and wrong
How dare you slander this politician who has done in my opinion a great job in protecting Australia
Yes he has even cleaned up Labor’s mess in getting children out of refugee camps.
Why can’t you give him some credit you righteous person.
Love to hear your comments sorry Mr Bolt didn’t talk to you ….did you ring him first before you published?
Who do you think you are
Regards …”

My response:

“Dear …

Thank you for your email.  I am sorry you take such strong exception to my comments about Peter Dutton.

I will not match your personal abuse of me because I do not know who you are or what you do.

However I do know a bit about Peter Dutton, and what he does.

Peter Dutton kept many children in detention (on Nauru) despite his plainly dishonest public claims that there are “no children in detention”.  Apparently his dishonesty fooled you.  You may not have caught up on the news that being held on Nauru has caused terrible harm to the children who have been sent there.  In the past 4 months 2 children have been transferred from Nauru for treatment in Australia.  Both were suicidal.  Both were about 10 years old.  All the experts said that the children could not get appropriate treatment on Nauru.  Mr Dutton’s department resisted attempts to bring the children here so that the damage we had done to them could be treated.

Incidentally, you may not have caught up on the fact that self-harm and suicide is extremely rare in children under the age of 12 or 13: except in Australia’s detention system, where it is common.

Peter Dutton says we have to put people in offshore camps in order to prevent asylum seekers from drowning.  I do not believe he is troubled about people drowning.  In fact I think he is lying about that: if he was truly concerned about people drowning, he would not punish them for not drowning.  But if people try to escape persecution and survive the perils of the journey, he forces them to Manus or Nauru and keeps them there for years, in conditions which have attracted criticism from around the world.  Of course, he won’t tell you that, because he is too dishonest to admit that he is doing it all for electoral advantage.

Most of the people seeking asylum who are now held on Manus or Nauru have been there for 4 years or more.  New Zealand has offered to take 150 people a year from our offshore camps.  Peter Dutton has actively discouraged that by making dark noises about trade arrangements.  Did you know that Australia spends about $570,000 per refugee per year to keep them offshore: that’s roughly 5 times more than it would cost to keep them in immigration detention in Australia, and roughly 20 times more than it would cost if we let them live in the community until their refugee claims were assessed.

Peter Dutton has been at the forefront of dog-whistling about boat people, in order to persuade a lot of Australians (apparently including you) that cruelty to innocent people is OK: that is what the Nazis did between 1933 and 1938.  Oh, by the way, they are innocent people.  Even though dishonest politicians call them “illegal” they do not break any law by coming here the way they do in order to seek asylum.  None of them is ever charged with having  come here without a visa, because it is not an offence.  We just jail them indefinitely.

If you have read this far, please feel free to tell me if any of the facts I have set out above is incorrect.  Because I am confident that the facts are as I have set them out, I regard Peter Dutton as dishonest, and I regard his dishonesty as profoundly dangerous: it has persuaded decent Australians to tolerate things which would have appalled us 10 or 20 years ago.  Peter Dutton is doing what the Nazis did between 1933 and 1938.

Very best wishes… “

 

Some random ideas to improve Australia

I don’t claim to have the answers to all our problems.  And I recognise that Australia has a lot going for it: great climate; great natural resources; great people.  Maybe our good fortune is the source of our complacency.  We’re a bit like Middleton’s Rouseabout (see the poem by Henry Lawson here).

It’s hard to go to any public function in an Australian city these days without the MC intoning recognition of “…the traditional owners of the land we meet on.  The people of the …Nation; their leaders past, present and emerging…”.

It is one-sided and self-indulgent.  It does not recognise that our ancestors took the land from them, and caused them immense harm.  And we don’t intend to give it back.  Then we added to the harm by taking their children from them.

It is easy to overlook that Aboriginal settlement in Australia goes back about 65,000 years.  Compare that with recent developments like ancient Egypt (about 4,000 years ago) and ancient Greece (about 3,000 years ago) and blow-ins like ancient Rome (a bit over 2,000 years ago).

Aboriginal people are about 2.8% of the Australian population.  So how about this:

  • A once-off tax of 2.8% of the capital value of the land we took. The proceeds would amount to billions of dollars.  Use that money specifically to fund programmes designed – genuinely designed – to repair the damage we did to members of the oldest, longest-lasting civilization on earth.

The Arts struggle to get genuine, meaningful support from governments and big-Australia.  Of course there are exceptions, but it is rare to see a head of government also holding the Arts portfolio.  And most practising artists in Australia can’t make enough from their art to cover the cost of surviving, so they take a job as a teacher or as a waiter.

But in the long sweep of history, it’s artists who are remembered.  Try this experiment:

Take a room of 50 or 60 people of fair intelligence and reasonable education.  Give them a list of names from the past 6 centuries.  They will recognise the names of painters, sculptors, composers and writers out of proportion to the number of practising artists from time to time.  They will not recognise the names of lawyers, accountants, sporting heroes…They will recognise the names of a few politicians, but mainly the ones who were tyrants.  By this experiment you will demonstrate the real, transcendent value of the Arts.

  • So: when governments at any level (from local to Federal) put out a request for tender, they could include this question: “What does your company do to support the Arts?”. It’s a fair bet that a lot of companies would want to be able to give a good answer and might just start supporting the Arts creatively – and generously.

In 1974 the parliament passed the Trade Practices Act which, by section 52, decreed that a corporation should not “engage in conduct which is misleading or deceptive”. It was  new norm of conduct for companies in Australia.  While it was resisted at first, it is, by now, a deeply ingrained idea of the way companies should behave.

But parliamentarians are not subject to similar restrictions. We accept without questioning that the norms of conduct, which parliamentarians set for commerce in 1974, do not apply to politicians.

Most people expect politicians to lie. Not many politicians have shown the capacity for dishonesty and hypocrisy which Tony Abbott, Malcolm Turnbull, Scott Morrison and Peter Dutton have displayed in connection with people seeking asylum.

But should we expect better?  I propose:

  • Parliament should pass an Act which provides that “A politician, in his or her capacity as a politician, shall not engage in conduct which is misleading or deceptive, or likely to mislead or deceive”.

Imagine how our politics would be transformed if politicians were expected to behave with the same honesty they demand of companies…

News from Manus

A person who is held on Manus – at our expense, as taxpayers (thanks, Peter Dutton) – has written to me a couple of times setting out the hardship refugees on Manus are facing.

Bear in mind, the misery we inflict costs us, the taxpayers, $570,000 per refugee per year.  And also bear in mind that New Zealand recently revived its offer to take 150 refugees per year from Manus and Nauru.  Dutton made it clear that, although it is a matter for New Zealand and PNG/Nauru to consider, they should be aware of the trade implications!  He might just as well have threatened reprisals directly.

This is the same Minister who claims to be a Christian, but he is inflicting misery on people who have not broken any law by trying to escape persecution.

This is the same Minister who dishonestly tells us he is concerned about people drowning at the hands of unscrupulous people-smugglers.  He’s so concerned about them drowning that he punishes them if they don’t drown.   So far, most of them have been held on Manus or Nauru for the past 4 years.

Peter Dutton is a dishonest hypocrite.  He disfigures our nation.

Here is a snapshot of the misery inflicted on human beings by your government:

“Actually I don’t know how to start it because there has been a lot of issues since Australia government brought us in here.

We are all in a bad mental condition as we are here for such a long time and still hope for a better future.

PNG Authorities keep insulting us and use a lot of bad words when they talk to residents, for example, yesterday PNG ICSA and police brought some non refugees from Port moresby to hillside compound and tried to accomodate them and while they were doing their job they started saying that you are not a refugee and you should sleep in the rubbish bin and they said that we won’t have any good future and we should get the hell out of their country because we are non refugee.

You know we are so sick of living like that.  When we were in pervious detention we were hoping that after this hell we may go to a nice and safe country but unfortunately they brought us to another camp by force and now they are making road , building new accomodation and they are hiring new security officers.  This is really scary for us because we don’t know how long more they want to suffer us in here.

We know that there are a lot of Australians who are happy about what Australia is doing to us in here but please if you can spread my message to them that Australia is using their taxes for nothing in here they are just wasting money in our name and please tell them that we are trying for everything in here but not one thing and that’s coming to Australia.

Hope I didn’t make you upset but this is really true.  This is current situation in our camp.”

Second message:

“About our current situation, we still do not know about our future as Australia put us in this whole shit situation and do not take any responsibility.

We don’t really know what is going on in here but what we know is PNG ICSA is deporting Bangladeshi people to their home country after 5 years which is unfair.  For rest of us, we have not been told anything yet but spread the message between us that they want to bring refugees from Nuru to Manus which I believe they are bullying us.

Believe it or not, that take us as hostage in here.

There is something weird going on in here, for example PNG immigration do not provide any visa to Australian security officers to come here for work but not sure for tomorrow.

Another thing is they are slightly decreasing their services. Whatever we request in here they say NKW company is responsible then we talk to NKW staff and they say JDA company is responsible for that and at end they say Australia must look after you not us.

They are passing us to each other however they have contract with ABF and they have been paid a lot of money but these companies I told you do not provide us our necessary things. All of these companies I told you take advantage from our miserable situation.

Since the local take our this place they become so cranky and they are really rude to us. “

Trump’s Gettysburg Address

I am grateful to Barry Jones for drawing this to my attention: the Gettysburg address as Trump would have made it.

First, the original:

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.  Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation, so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate…we can not consecrate…we can not hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government: of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”

Now, the Trump version:

It was many, many years ago that our beautiful founders created this great nation for Americans to love deeply. It’s been 400 years, or 700 years. That’s the information I was given. We’ve had a tremendous number of years. And they’ve been good years, believe me, the best. No country in the history of the world has had years like ours. Because we were conceived in winning and dedicated to the proposition of America first. Always America first.

Now we have a huge fight on our hands. I’m telling you folks, we’re fighting to take back our country and start winning again. We’re fighting to make America great again. We’re fighting to make America first again. Some people have taken some very unfair hits in this fight. They’ve been hit by liberal activists and the dishonest fake news media. They’re gone now, but we remember their dedication to our movement, and we will be even more dedicated in their memory. We will commit ourselves to secure borders to keep our nation safe, extreme vetting to keep out the bad dudes, and the best trade deals to guarantee that our great American economy does not perish from the earth.
Chris O’Carroll/Donald Trump

Florida School Shooting

A student who witnessed the shooting called out lawmakers on TV, looking directly into the camera and saying: “We’re children. You guys are the adults. You need to take some action and play a role. Work together, come over your politics, and get something done.” He added: “Ideas are great but without action, ideas stay ideas and children die.”

And when people say we need to discuss gun control, the NRA and its patsies in Congress say “Now is not the right time…”

So, when is the right time to start taking a rational approach to gun control, in a country where the possession and use of guns is out of control?

Devastating UNHCR report on Manus & Nauru

Rico Salcedo, the Regional Protection Officer, UNHCR Canberra, recently spent time on Manus and Nauru to assess conditions.  Hisreport makes difficult reading.

If you are an Australian, it is hard to avoid feeling ashamed:

Geneva, 13 February 2018

Update on humanitarian situation of refugees and asylum-seekers on Manus Island

The following is a transcript of the remarks by UNHCR Regional Protection Officer, Rico Salcedo in Canberra – to whom quoted text may be attributed – at today’s press briefing at the Palais des Nations in Geneva.

Rico Salcedo, Regional Protection Officer, UNHCR Canberra

Thank you for the chance to briefly update you on UNHCR observations from our latest mission to Manus Island (Papua New Guinea).

What stood out the most from this mission at the time we were there, was a pervasive and worsening sense of despair among refugees and asylum-seekers. I observed and people shared with us that many are staying in the rooms, not going out, and not meeting and talking with others around them.

Those that you see walking or meet are usually downcast. In our conversations with different people there’s a sense of desolation. People are grasping for hope. They ask many questions that we, as UNHCR, have previously heard and repeatedly raised as well – what will happen to them; when will this end; how long will they have to stay in these conditions? These questions are particularly concerning in the context where current services, as well as future solutions outside of Papua New Guinea, remain insufficient.

While the relocation of refugees to the United States is an ongoing and welcome process, the knowledge that many remain without any resolution is weighing on everyone.

More than 3,000 refugees and asylum-seekers have been forcibly transferred by Australia to the offshore processing facilities since 2013. Currently, more than 500 refugees and asylum seekers are living in three sites in Wards 1 and 2 in Manus Island in Papua New Guinea.

It was evident again from our last mission and after more than 100 days since the closure of Australia’s so-called Regional Processing Centre, that the need for greater mental health support, emergency medical care and specialised torture and trauma counselling remains critical and unmet.

I spoke with a refugee who shared with me his daily struggles and what he was going through. He told me how he was concerned about some of his friends who are suffering of depression, who were thinking of self-harm and how he tries to be there for them. He also shared how he felt unable to help on some days because he himself could not get the help he needed.

The services provided at the site are predominantly implemented by Australian-contracted providers. The Government of Australia is no longer playing a coordination role on Manus Island. This is in contrast with previous arrangements at the former Regional Processing Centre.

UNHCR staff have observed a consistent and ongoing lack of clarity on the designated roles for specific services amongst contracted providers. This continued confusion makes it hard for refugees and asylum seekers to obtain the necessary services and to understand if they are even provided. This highlights the lack of outreach services to people with mental health concerns. This is particularly important at this point as the most vulnerable aren’t able to seek assistance outside their accommodation sites.

We’ve already emphasised and it remains the case that the local health facility, primarily the Lorengal hospital, has very limited capacity and resources to assist refugees and asylum seekers with serious mental health concerns.

Another observation is the safety of the refugees in the community which remains a major concern. This is noted from the conversations with refugees and community leaders.

In the local community, while no curfew is in place, the police have advised all refugees and asylum-seekers that they should return to their accommodation by 06:00pm each evening to mitigate security risks, and to walk in groups and not alone.

We cannot emphasize enough that solutions must be found for all, outside of Papua New Guinea, as a matter of urgency. Australia remains ultimately responsible, as the state from which these refugees and asylum-seekers have sought international protection, for their welfare and long-term settlement outside of Papua New Guinea.

The Government of Australia should assume a clear coordination role with regard to the service providers it has retained, and adequately monitor and provide services in line with growing and evolving needs.

Clearly, much more needs to be done to bring the circumstances of refugees and asylum-seekers on Manus Island up to a basic minimum standard. These critical steps however, will only be a stop-gap measure until durable solutions are found and made available for them outside of Papua New Guinea.

Thank you.

Dishonest hypocrites

In 1974 the Parliament passed the Trade Practices Act which, by section 52, decreed that a corporation should not “engage in conduct which is misleading or deceptive…”.  But parliamentarians are not subject to similar restrictions. We accept without questioning that norms of conduct which parliamentarians sets for commerce do not apply to them.

Most people expect politicians to lie.  But few politicians have shown the capacity for dishonesty and hypocrisy which Tony Abbott, Malcolm Turnbull, Scott Morrison and Peter Dutton have displayed in connection with people seeking asylum.

Abbott, Morrison, Turnbull and Dutton claim to be Christians, along with most other members of the Australian Parliament.  For fear of being misunderstood, I should declare that I was brought up in the Christian tradition, but I no longer adhere to any religion.  But I do remember some of the fundamental  tenets of Christian teaching: compassion for those in need; treat others as you would want to be treated…

These men lie to us, and they are hypocrites.  They lie when they call boat people “illegal”, when it is not an offence to arrive in Australia, without a visa, seeking to be protected from persecution.  And by their wilful mistreatment of people seeking asylum they betray the Christian values they pretend to hold.

Christ told the parable of the Good Samaritan.  A Jewish traveller on the road from Jerusalem to Jericho, has been stripped and beaten and left, helpless, beside the road.  A priest and a Levite both pass him by and avoid engaging with him. A Samaritan sees him and helps him, even though Jews and Samaritans were traditional enemies.

Tony Abbott, who claims to be a devout Roman Catholic, once suggested that the parable of the Good Samaritan might have been different if a number of travellers had been found beside the road.  It takes someone like Abbott to claim that he can reconstruct Christs’s teaching.

Abbott had earlier exposed his bankrupt version of Christianity when he gave the second Margaret Thatcher Lecture, in London on 27 October 2015.  Among other things he said:

“Implicitly or explicitly, the imperative to “love your neighbour as you love yourself” is at the heart of every Western polity. It expresses itself in laws protecting workers, in strong social security safety nets, and in the readiness to take in refugees. It’s what makes us decent and humane countries as well as prosperous ones, but – right now – this wholesome instinct is leading much of Europe into catastrophic error.”

So, a wholesome instinct is sidelined because of its consequences.

In the same speech, Abbott said this:

“…no country or continent can open its borders to all comers without fundamentally weakening itself. This is the risk that the countries of Europe now run through misguided altruism.

On a somewhat smaller scale, Australia has faced the same predicament and overcome it. The first wave of so-called “illegal” arrivals to Australia peaked at 4000 people a year, back in 2001, before the Howard government first stopped the boats: by processing illegal arrivals offshore; by denying them permanent residency; and in a handful of cases, by turning illegal immigrant boats back to Indonesia.

The second wave of “illegal” boat people was running at the rate of 50,000 a year – and rising fast – by July 2013, when the Rudd government belatedly reversed its opposition to offshore processing; and then my government started turning boats around, even using orange lifeboats when people smugglers deliberately scuttled their vessels.”

(Incidentally, in addition to his lie about “illegal boat people”, his figures were false.  The Australia Parliament House library shows that the largest number of boat people to come to Australia in a single year was just short of 25,000).

Malcolm Turnbull converted to Roman Catholicism .  He has not tried to reinterpret Christ’s teaching, but he has embraced Abbott’s practical lessons in morality by embracing his policy of mistreating refugees.

By contrast, Pope Francis has taken a principled stand on the need for compassion for the plight of asylum seekers said:

“Biblical revelation urges us to welcome the stranger; it tells us that in so doing, we open our doors to God, and that in the faces of others we see the face of Christ himself.”

He was referring to a passage in the Bible (Matthew 25), where Christ says:

“For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.”

Sadly, neither Abbott nor Turnbull appear to have listened to the Pope or understood the Bible.

Scott Morrison’s maiden speech in Parliament placed great emphasis on his Christian values.  Among other things he said:

“So what values do I derive from my faith? My answer comes from Jeremiah, chapter 9:24:

… I am the Lord who exercises loving-kindness, justice and righteousness on earth; for I delight in these things, declares the Lord.

From my faith I derive the values of loving-kindness, justice and righteousness, to act with compassion and kindness, acknowledging our common humanity and to consider the welfare of others; to fight for a fair go for everyone to fulfil their human potential and to remove whatever unjust obstacles stand in their way, including diminishing their personal responsibility for their own wellbeing; and to do what is right, to respect the rule of law, the sanctity of human life and the moral integrity of marriage and the family. We must recognise an unchanging and absolute standard of what is good and what is evil. Desmond Tutu put it this way:

… we expect Christians … to be those who stand up for the truth, to stand up for justice, to stand on the side of the poor and the hungry, the homeless and the naked, and when that happens, then Christians will be trustworthy believable witnesses.

These are my principles.”

If those are Scott Morrison’s principles, he is not a man of his principles.  During his time as Immigration Minister, Morrison showed no trace of “loving kindness” or justice or compassion for refugees who came to Australia by boat looking for protection from persecution.

Peter Dutton claims to be Christian, but he boycotted Kevin Rudd’s Apology to the Stolen Generations in February 2008.  Like other members of Coalition governments during the past 16 years, he refers to boat people as “illegal” and he administers a system of detention which shows astonishing cruelty.

This is not the place to give details of Australia’s mistreatment of refugees: the facts are well-enough known.  Equally well-known is the Coalition message that a harsh refugee policy is essential to protect refugees from the risk of drowning.

But to suggest that they are worried about refugees drowning is a lie: a fig-leaf to make immoral mistreatment look compassionate.  “Worried about people drowning”!  So worried that, if they don’t drown, we punish them as if they were criminals, and call them “illegal” to make their punishment look vaguely respectable.  We do it, explicitly, as a deterrent so that others will not try to find safety in Australia.  And these dishonest politicians, pretending to be motivated by compassion, overlook altogether that if persecuted people stand their ground and are killed by their persecutors, they are still dead: just as if they drowned; if they die in an attempt to escape to some other country, they are still dead: just as if they drowned.

For politicians like Abbott, Turnbull, Morrison and Dutton to say they are worried about boat people drowning is a lie.  For them to mistreat asylum seekers in the way they do is a betrayal of the Christian values they cherish.

They are dishonest hypocrites.

Send Our political “Leaders” to The Hague

The International Criminal Court (ICC) sits at The Hague.

We joined the ICC in 2002.  Since then, our treatment of people seeking asylum has involved various crimes against humanity.

So far, 5 communiques have been sent to the ICC, inviting it to investigate and prosecute our PMs and Immigration Ministers for crimes against humanity.  The one exception is Chris Evans, who behaved very well as Immigration Minister.  The rest: appalling.

Offshore processing has just made it worse.  The Memorandum of Understanding between Australia and Papua New guinea makes it clear that humane treatment was never the point: rather, the point was to end the people smuggling trade by holding refugees in horrible conditions for a long time.  For most of them, it’s been 4 years now.  MOU-PNG-Aus

To understand how our treatment of refugees amounts to a crime against humanity, here is one of the communiques.  Analysis of the legal aspects starts at page 15: Communiqué to ICC

The Deal between Australia and PNG

It is worth looking at the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding between Australia and Papua New Guinea.

It sets the frame-work for the humanitarian horrors which are unfolding there.

Bear in mind: the MOU makes it clear that the purpose of the whole exercise is to combat people smugglers by making an example of the people held on Manus.  When government Ministers say they are worried about people drowning, don’t believe them: they are using the survivors as hostages.

If they were genuinely worried about people drowning, they would treat the survivors decently, but there’s no trace of that: not in the MOU and not in the way it is playing out: inadequate medical care; refugees had to queue 7 hours today to get fed.

Just for a moment, imagine that the refugees held on Manus are German Jews, late 1930s: is our treatment of them ethically acceptable?

Here’s the MOU: notice there is no promise they will be treated decently.

MOU-PNG-Aus

Two New Books About Asylum Policy

I have recently read two new books about Australia’s policy in relation to boat people.

They are both excellent, they both contain a lot of facts which need to be understood, and they both deserve to be widely read.

Claire Higgins’ recent book Asylum By Boat, is published by UNSW Press.  It is a very good history of boat arrivals since the Fraser years.  It paints a remarkable contrast between the resolute generosity of Australia’s treatment of boat people escaping Vietnam and Australia’s current response to boat people.  It explains how the policy shifted over time, and how (back in the late 1970s) the government persuaded the public that mistreating asylum seekers was unthinkable.

Tony Ward’s recent book Bridging Troubled Waters is published by Australian Scholarly Publishing.   It is an excellent account of Australia and asylum seekers.  It is very rich in facts and it has a number of  very useful graphs and tables. It is superbly researched.  It discusses Australia’s various manoeuvres designed to avoid its humanitarian obligations and (of particular interest) it notes in passing that asylum seekers who arrive by air (with visas for tourism, study etc) have outnumbered boat people in all but one of the past 20 years.  And yet “aeroplane people” are not given a hard time, are not vilified and are not detained, even though they are far less likely to be assessed as refugees than “boat people” are.

 

Kate Durham to open exhibition in Dandenong

On Thursday 16 November, Kate Durham will speak at the opening of the Home exhibition at the Walker St Gallery in Dandenong.  It includes works by Zia Atahi, Renee Dixson, Mahla Karimian, Pierre Mukeba and Zakiria Tahirian

Kate spoke at the opening of the Dandenong Annual Art Prize in 2015.

Defiant Dandenong

Dandenong Annual Arts Prize

Dear Dandenong,  Defiant Dandenong, look at you, how you’ve grown. I remember you, but not like this. Dandenong you are like a council of nations. Here in this intricate city is an Ark, as if from the bible, representatives of every breed, clan or culture are assembled here, a gathering has taken place, Moses would be pleased. What did this city know of the bewildering displacement, the loss of art and cultivation, the self-expression or the needs of the people of the world? Or how to welcome their tentative steps towards a cautious resettlement, in an often hostile terrain?

What is the purpose of the shelter, the vessel, the shield you have made here? The purpose is a very human one: to allow people to represent and to reproduce themselves, and their lives; to find passage to future generations, to stretch their allotted time and space on this ground, to leave the sea of turmoil. Like those animals in the Ark, people seek, if not deliverance from a place of evil, then a place to stay, the way a creature needs a habitat.

The people of the well-named Greater Dandenong recognised as an opportunity, other’s need to find a resolution to the search, a nest, a home, a full stop. With them, they also knew those exotic people would bring their freight of ancestry, their knowledge,,, their joke-bags, their grievance and losses, fears and expectations.

Their great enterprise will be to flourish, but also to pass on an indefinable essence, to pass it on, and to pass it on. Like the game Pass The Parcel: here is my gift, it may get smaller, but keep it, please keep it.

I’m picturing Dandenong, twenty years from now. Take yourself there now, on a little mental voyage. You may discover, that for the first time in a long while, white people, and certainly white females like me, even with the price of a ticket, can no longer travel to more than a quarter of the world’s surface, its prohibited or at least risky. White people are astonished, they have been the ones fussing over, visas, tickets and border control . We, no longer rule the world. we start to experience ostracism, mistrust and boundaries, like those immigrants only a generation ago.

The travel Industry, has not shut down, a vast commercial machine like that won’t rest or die, it will simply restrict or invent our horizons in a manner that suits its business model. They are already doing it. Travel is re-focussing, its offering has changed. In the 70’s the idea was to experience otherness, other cultures, other vistas. Nowadays its imperative to experience more about YOU. You, trekking, you on a mountain. you, snorkelling, you chilling on a beach, any beach. You taking a short trip around Europe within the sanitary and speedy confines of an ersatz Las Vegas: Disneyland for grown-ups, time – poor and afraid of anything but the highlights…

Some of you and some of these artists will remain here in Dandenong. Most of you will possess far more than highlights, you will have the fine grain, the memory, the advice of your former politics and parents. You will have a culture that is not thin, not dilute, but strengthened by its hybridity. Dandenong will be well known for its cultural curiosity and learning.

The artists in this show have something in common, mostly their otherness. In the future, artists like Valamanesh will not have such close, direct insight into Islamic Art and its cosmic gaze, but they’ll have this artist to guide them so the past won’t be so misunderstood. I’ve followed this artist for a while, admiring his cool austerity and wit.

I also know and have desired artworks by Guan Wei, also witty, with an out-sider’s idiosyncratic eye in relation to Australia.

Rhubaba Haider’s work spoke immediately to me of her feminine Hazara heritage. She has morphed that knowledge into something strong yet fragile and contemporary, and philosophical. Whilst retaining a great deal of typical Hazara woman’s discipline and personal restraint.

Khaled Sabsabi”s work turns like a Dervish on Sufi themes, that strange metaphysical branch of Islam which is becoming endangered. Thank you Khaled for preserving it.

Gosia Wlodarczak’s unsettled lines following and chasing life, restless and unfixable, charting her relationship to objects. She makes a cartographic record over time and space.

Kosar Majani’s work is highly symbolic and resonant. It speaks of unrelenting rituals and repetitions that we’ve never known or encountered, in our young country.

20 years from now we may find ourselves grateful that Greater Dandenong ignored the ”Team Australia“ slogans of some of the worst leadership known in this country. That Prime Minister tried to frighten us about the living and cultural aspirations of others, demanding to know whose side we were on, challenging us to mistrust foreigners or the unfamiliar.

Fortunately we barely remember that Prime Minister, he left no relics or artefacts. Unlike these artists who have joined us in a gathering just like this to fill this once slight and shallow space with all our lives, heredity, children, art, adventures and exploration on the vast subject of US and WE. Not THEM or THEY.

Thank you Dandenong, dear Dandenong: you are the Ark. Pass it on, pass it on.