Hi Deborah, I did the same yesterday and got the same form letter. I did get a personal reply from Bob McClelland though who advised me to read Duncan Kerr's speech (yesterday's) but I have yet to find it.
I don't think Beazley wants to be faced with his dreadful failings. Trudy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Yesterday I emailed Kim Beazley to express my disgust at the ALP following the > Government's lead on refugees. This is the response. I am not comforted. > D Ford > ----- Forwarded by Deborah Ford/LPE/NTG on 20/09/2001 09:45 am ----- > > "Beazley, Kim > (MP)" To: "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'" ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > <Kim.Beazley.MP@a cc: > ph.gov.au> Subject: RE: SMH - Beazley backs >Howard's tough line on boatpeople > > 19/09/2001 06:42 > pm > > > > Thank you for your email concerning the Labor Party's position on the > Government's proposed border protection legislation. > > The stand which the Labor Party took in the national interest on this matter > has been completely vindicated. The Commonwealth has always to our mind had > the power to turn boats away from Australia. The Federal Court has > confirmed our view. > > Now, through its new legislation, the Government has acknowledged that our > concerns about its original proposal were right. The only resemblance that > the new legislation bears with the original is its title. We now have > legislation which will provide practical and effective defence of the > national interest without overriding the rule of law in Australia or > endangering lives. > > The Howard Government's original proposal was unsupportable. It was a > panicky piece of legislation whose consequences had not been properly > thought through. > · It sought to override all other Australian laws without > qualification. > · It created unnecessary, unreviewable and absolute discretion > irrespective of the safety of people. > · It lacked guidance as to when and how decisions would be made to > remove vessels or persons. > · It allowed people to be returned to unseaworthy vessels and without > the identification of safe havens. > · It was so broad that it would have applied to Australian citizens > and Australian vessels. > > The new legislation adopts a completely different approach: > · It specifically acknowledges the role of the High Court under the > Constitution in respect to actions taken under the laws. > · It permits the use of force in detaining vessels only when it is > necessary and reasonable to do so and when the officers concerned act in > good faith. > · It specifically prohibits the return of a person to a vessel if it > is unsafe to do so. > · It provides that all action must be taken within the existing legal > frameworks and constraints in the Migration and Customs Acts. > · Christmas and Cocos Islands will be used as safe havens for people > arriving by boat or rescued at sea. > · These people will be given a humanitarian class of visa enabling > them to be assessed by United Nations standards but they will not be able to > trigger the formal asylum-seeking mechanisms of the Migration Act without > leave of the Minister. > · Finally, the legislation no longer applies to Australian citizens or > Australian vessels. > > The Labor Party has given its bipartisan support to these changes. > > This whole incident stemmed from the Government's attempt to manipulate a > matter of legitimate community concern for short-term political advantage. > Labor was initially criticised for its response but it is now clear that our > response was central to developing a solution which defends the national > interest in a managed, orderly and considered way. > > The Labor Party will be announcing its broad immigration policy before the > election. I should say now though that we support the policy of detention > as a means of maintaining the integrity of the migration program and > protecting the health and other interests of the community but that a Labor > Government would act to reduce the human and financial burden associated > with the current detention and processing system. > > Labor plans to streamline the system of determination for refugees. This > will ensure that those who have a genuine claim under the relevant UN > conventions are processed and granted protection visas as soon as possible. > Those without a humanitarian claim will be repatriated at the earliest > possible opportunity, reducing the time spent in detention and the > subsequent cost to the taxpayer. > > Thank you once again for drawing my attention to your concerns on this > important issue. > > Kim C Beazley > Leader of The Opposition > Parliament House > Canberra ACT 2600 > > This e-mail was sent in response to your e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > If you no longer wish to receive e-mail from this address, please send us an > e-mail advising us of your preferences. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, 19 September 2001 10:47 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: SMH - Beazley backs Howard's tough line on boatpeople > > Shame on you Kim Beazley, and your party. I had you marked as a man of > compassion - I am appalled. > > Deborah Ford > 5/6 Banyan St > Fannie Bay NT 0801 > > "Trudy Bray" > > <ozbrays@dingobl To: "news-clip" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > ue.net.au> cc: > > Subject: SMH - Beazley backs > Howard's tough line on boatpeople > 19/09/2001 10:03 > > am > > Please respond > > to recoznettwo > > The Sydney Morning Herald > September 19, 2001 > > Beazley backs Howard's tough line on boatpeople > > By Margo Kingston in Canberra > > Labor today fell in behind the Government's hardline stand on boatpeople, > backing moves to stop their vessels landing in Australia. > > It will now support the Border Protection bill, the outsourcing of refugee > processing offshore, and an end to judicial review of decisions on refugees > in Australian detention camps. > > The wholesale desertion of boatpeople asylum seekers by Labor - after > previously voting down the Border Protection bill and the Judicial Review > in Parliament - marks an end to Labor's commitment to the human rights of > refugees and compliance with international refugee treaties. > > Opposition leader Mr Beazley quashed dissent in the Caucus room meeting > today by citing current political imperatives. > > Today's historic decision by Caucus to support the government's hard line > stand marks a new bipartisan consensus on refugee policy, and total defeat > for forces supportive of boat people refugees. > > After previously refusing to pass the Border Protection bill - which would > have retrospectively validated the military takeover of the Tampa and allow > Australia to turn back boats from our territorial waters - Labor will now > pass it after minor amendments. > > The new bill retrospectively validates the government's actions since August > 27 with respect to the Tampa, the Aceng and "any other vessel carrying > persons in respect of whom there were grounds for believing that their > intention was to enter Australia unlawfully, and persons on those vessels". > > Unlike the old bill, the new bill only allows officers to return people to a > ship if it is "safe" to do so. > > Under the old bill, the courts had no power to examine the actions of > officers to see if they were unlawful. Under the new bill, officers are > protected from court scrutiny if "they acted in good faith and used no more > force than was authorised". > > Labor has also agreed to allowing Christmas Island and the Cocos Islands to > be excised from Australian territory with respect to boat people. Labor will > allow these islands to be used as processing centres which do not apply > Australian refugee law, cutting off refugees from legal protection. > > Labor's backdown means that from now on, boat people will not be > allowed into mainland Australia. Neither they, or boat people now in > detention in Australia will be able to access court oversight of the > government's actions. > > In a subdued Caucus briefing to journalists today, the spokesmen refused to > reveal the content of Mr Beazley's report on the issue. > > http://www.smh.com.au/news/webdiary/0109/19/A62644-2001Sep18.html > > ************************************************************************* > This posting is provided to the individual members of this group without > permission from the copyright owner for purposes of criticism, comment, > scholarship and research under the "fair use" provisions of the Federal > copyright laws and it may not be distributed further without permission of > the copyright owner, except for "fair use." > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > RecOzNet2 has a page @ http://www.green.net.au/recoznet2 and is archived at > > http://www.mail-archive.com/recoznet2%40paradigm4.com.au/ until 11 March, 2001 and > > Recoznettwo is archived at http://www.mail-archive.com/recoznettwo%40green.net.au/ >from > > that date. > > This posting is provided to the individual members of this group without permission >from the > > copyright owner for purposes of criticism, comment, scholarship and research under >the "fair > > use" provisions of the Federal copyright laws and it may not be distributed further >without > > permission of the copyright owner, except for "fair use." -- ***************************** Join the peoples' movement: The Australian Reconciliation Party http://www.green.net.au/arp/ ***************************** --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- RecOzNet2 has a page @ http://www.green.net.au/recoznet2 and is archived at http://www.mail-archive.com/recoznet2%40paradigm4.com.au/ until 11 March, 2001 and Recoznettwo is archived at http://www.mail-archive.com/recoznettwo%40green.net.au/ from that date. This posting is provided to the individual members of this group without permission from the copyright owner for purposes of criticism, comment, scholarship and research under the "fair use" provisions of the Federal copyright laws and it may not be distributed further without permission of the copyright owner, except for "fair use."
