Immigration Watch International (2)

Tuesday, August 14, 2012

Australia's Leftist government bites the bullet on illegal immigration

It is reverting to the policies of the previous conservative administration -- which successfully stopped illegal immigration. The same policies will probably be less effective under a weak-kneed Leftist administration, however

Prime Minister Julia Gillard wants asylum seekers to be processed on Nauru and Manus Island with the government to introduce legislation to parliament tomorrow.

Family reunion for boat arrivals will also be scrapped as a matter of urgency and all 22 recommendations from the Houston panel report adopted in principle by the government.

Ms Gillard said she wouldn’t claim a “victory” in the asylum debate.

The panel’s recommendation dealt a blow to the government’s Malaysia people swap, deeming the deal not yet up to protection and security standards needed.

After more than a year of clinging to the deal and refusing to adopt Nauru without the people swap, Ms Gillard said she would move immediately to reinstate the Howard government processing centres in Nauru and Manus Island. “I will compromise in order to enact the recommendations of this report,” Ms Gillard said.

The government has accepted recommendations that more work be done on its Malaysia deal.

SOURCE

Recent posts at CIS below

See here for the blog. The CIS main page is here.

New CIS Publications

1. Immigrants in the United States: A Profile of America's Foreign-Born Population

2. What Does the USCIS Ombudsman Do, and Not Do?

Blogs

3. No One Will Say 'You Don't Look 30' – A DREAM Scheme Note (Blog)

4. Olympic Visa Overstayers (Blog)

5. Firms Get a Bonus for Hiring Aliens with Degrees in Undersea Warfare (Blog)

6. On Nationwide Tour, Documentary Film Stirs Discussion in a Washington, D.C., Suburb (Blog)

7. Rewarding Illegal Alien Identity Thieves, Sacrificing Innocent American Children (Blog)

8. DREAM Scheme: 25% Bigger and with New Initials! (Blog)

9. The Two Big Fig Leaves on the DREAM Scheme Revealed (Blog)

10. 'On Point' on the Federal Betrayal of American Workers, Part 2 (Blog)

11. IBM: 'The Cost Difference Is Too Great for the Business Not to Look for' H-1B Workers (Blog)

12. GOP Veepstakes and Immigration (Blog)

No comments:

Post a Comment

Background

Postings from Brisbane, Australia by John Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.) -- former member of the Australia-Soviet Friendship Society, former anarcho-capitalist and former member of the British Conservative party.

Why is "La Raza" the one Spanish term that is NEVER translated in the American mass media? Because translating it would make it a lot less respectable. It means "THE RACE" -- The mixed Hispanic "race" of Mexico. Racism is fine South of the Rio Grande only, apparently.

The "line" of this blog is that immigration should be SELECTIVE. That means that:

1). A national government should be in control of it. The U.S. and U.K. governments are not but the Australian government has shown that the government of a prosperous Western country can be. Up until its loss of office in 2007, the conservative Howard government had all but eliminated illegal immigration. The present Leftist government has however restarted the flow of illegals by repealing many of the Howard government regulations.

2). Selectivity should be based on "the content of a man's character, not on the color of his skin", as MLK said. To expand that a little: Immigrants should only be accepted if they as individuals seem likely to make a positive net contribution to the country. Many "refugees" would fail that test: Muslims and Africans particularly. Educational level should usually be a pretty fair proxy for the individual's likely value to the receiving country. There will, of course, be exceptions but it is nonetheless unlikely that a person who has not successfully completed High School will make a net positive contribution to a modern Western society.

3). Immigrants should be neither barred NOR ACCEPTED solely because they are of some particular ethnic origin. Blacks are vastly more likely to be criminal than are whites or Chinese, for instance, but some whites and some Chinese are criminal. It is the criminality that should matter, not the race.

4). The above ideas are not particularly blue-sky. They roughly describe the policies of the country where I live -- Australia. I am critical of Australian policy only insofar as the "refugee" category for admission is concerned. All governments have tended to admit as refugees many undesirables. It seems to me that more should be required of them before refugees are admitted -- for instance a higher level of education or a business background.

5). Perhaps the most amusing assertion in the immigration debate is that high-income countries like the USA and Britain NEED illegal immigrants to do low-paid menial work. "Who will pick our crops?" (etc.) is the cry. How odd it is then that Australians get all the normal services of a modern economy WITHOUT illegal immigrants! Yes: Before the pandemic, you usually COULD buy a lettuce in Australia for a dollar or thereabouts. And Australia IS a major exporter of primary products.

6). I am a libertarian conservative so I reject the "open door" policy favoured by many libertarians and many Leftists. Both those groups tend to have a love of simplistic generalizations that fail to deal with the complexity of the real world. It seems to me that if a person has the right to say whom he/she will have living with him/her in his/her own house, so a nation has the right to admit to living among them only those individuals whom they choose.

I can be reached on jonjayray@hotmail.com -- or leave a comment on any post. Abusive comments will be deleted.

Immigration Watch International (2)

Tuesday, August 14, 2012

No comments:

Post a Comment

Background

Other blogs

Blog Archive

Contributors