Saturday Morning Musings - Australia's refugee mess

In a comment on Wednesday’s post, Response to the Syrian refugee crisis - Australia v Canada, 2 tanners wondered in a meta comment "do we find all this too difficult to talk about?" He was referring specifically to discussion on this blog.

In response, I wrote: 

“You may well be right in your meta comment, 2t. We do find this too painful to talk about. I think that you are also right in concluding that the combination of rhetoric with policy explains Australia’s poor performance in meeting its own targets as compared to Canada. It is impossible to imagine Australian PM Turnbull driving admission and welcoming refugees in the way the Canadian PM did.   Few would argue, I think, that Australia should have open boarders. The question then becomes where you draw the line. Australia has open boarders for economic migrants so long as they meet set criteria, closed boarders for refugees. 

 I think that the Government has long given up on arguing a nuanced line over refugee policy and indeed migration in general. The left is deeply riven by the conflicting desires to limit population while still admitting refugees. The Opposition is effectively locked into the Government’s policy. The end result is a moral coarsening of public policy”.

As I write, protests continue over the treatment of baby Asha. It is easier to galvanise (or to attempt to galvanise) public opinion over specific cases than to argue on general principles. The Australian Government has locked itself into policy positions whose inexorable logic drives it in directions that, in the end, damage the country.

The Government is involved in discussions with third countries to take people in the camps on Manus or Nauru. Meantime, it cannot accept offers of resettlement from New Zealand because those people might then be able to enter Australia.

It’s all so unnecessary, but now so inevitable. In the end, the Government will have to do what it can to clear the camps. This will come at a price that already includes human suffering, considerable expenditure and some moral tarnishing. In the end, it is likely that some people will have to be resettled in Australia.

In framing the discussion in such simple black and white terms as stop the boats, this and previous governments have placed the country in an impossible position. The argument that you must stop the boats to stop people drowning is potentially defensible, but only if it forms part of a broader approach based on clear principles that take international circumstances, national interest and values into account.

Values including especially humanity are important. The corrosive impact of current policies lies in the absence of values. We all need things to be proud of. There appear to be no elements in current refugee policy that meet the pride criteria. Indeed, it appears that we cannot deliver even on the commitments that we do enter into. In all, it’s a mess.