Giving Away Our Soverignty

Terje Petersen argues that immigrants to Australia shouldn’t be let in for free but should instead pay an immigration tariff of $25,147 each:

There are many reasoned arguments as to why immigration is good for the economy and good for the country. Some estimate that global GDP could be increased by 50 to 150% if completely open immigration was implemented globally. Without wishing to dismiss such arguments there is however a sense in which letting foreigners into the country is akin to giving away our sovereignty. Let me explain.

Australia is a vast nation with lots of land. For the purposes of this discussion I’m going to assume that large tracts of it are currently worth next to nothing. For example if a million illegal immigrants secretly arrived tomorrow, secretly set up camp in the Simpson desert and then secretly did their own thing there for the next 50 years or so, it is not as if we would feel deprived of the land they occupied. The reality is that we are not using lots of our land.

Some of our land however is extremely valuable and this tends to be land in cities where there is a high amount of established public infrastructure. Libertarians will at times argue that some of this public infrastructure should be privatised or even given away to Australian citizens. However they would not generally argue that ownership of this infrastructure should be given as a gift to foreigners. Given that public infrastructure is essentially owned by the Australia people, via our sovereign government, any admission of additional new Australians represents a dilution of our equity in this stock of public infrastructure. Of course in such a vast land we have the capacity to build new cities with additional public infrastructure but none the less any admission of new Australians represents a dilution of our equity in the current stock.

The stock of public infrastructure in Australia is worth in the order of $600 billion. With a population of 23.7 million this equates to a per capita value for public infrastructure of $25,147. At the margin this is the amount by which our equity in public infrastructure is diluted each time an immigrant is admitted into the country.

This dilution of equity does not occur with private infrastructure , such as housing, because private infrastructure is not owned collectively by all Australians. It is owned individually and privately. An immigrant that moves to Australia may get to use the same footpath you use but they don’t get to use part of your house. The footpath will become more crowded but your house won’t. Continue reading

Piddling into the wind

New MH2

Let’s buy all the boats in Indonesia

What a jolly good idea, they proudly thought. “Australian taxpayers would purchase leaking fishing boats from poor fishermen where intelligence identified they planned to sell them to people smugglers,” was announced with all the excitement of a first newborn.

Another stupid thought-bubble from Kevin Rudd, I thought with a smile. A final nail in the Labor coffin it would be. No, it was not Rudd’s gaff! This madness came from; Scott Morrison the Coalition’s Shadow Immigration Minister whom I thought had more sense. Where were you during John Howard’s gun buyback Scott?

This stratagem to buy old boats from Indonesian peasants will fail. In fact, it will be a political nightmare, as anyone who has been to Indonesia would know and two words cover it aptly—poverty and corruption. 

Jakarta is furious over Abbott’s buyback plan and has responded already with its customary, “get stuffed Australia” response. Mahfudz Siddiq, the head of Indonesia’s parliamentary commission for foreign affairs said, “The Coalition wants to make Indonesia look inferior because they just want to provide money and ask Indonesians to get the job done for the sake of their interests.”

Image18But Siddiq went further to press a strong diplomatic warning, “It’s an unfriendly idea coming from a candidate who wants to be Australian leader…This is really a crazy idea, unfriendly, derogatory and it shows lack of understanding in this matter.” Indonesia views us as jerks, with increasing good reason.

Poverty and corruption: Australia gives Indonesia aid, upwards of $2 billon with the many “add-ons.” Australia’s 12 largest bilateral aid recipients in Asia and the Pacific are: Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Afghanistan, Solomon Islands, Vietnam, Philippines, Bangladesh, East Timor, Pakistan, Cambodia, Burma and Vanuatu.

Ironically, all (in bold) but Bangladesh featured on are within the top 85 of 180 “Most corrupt countries in the world.” That, of course, raises questions about how our tax money is being spent, rhetorical as that question may be. It's no accident that Bob Carr runs that department.

The Coalition pledged $420 million to stop people smuggling. That includes paying Indonesian villagers for information about smugglers and those who buy anything that might remain afloat for more than an hour at the dockside.  Ineptitude in this matter is astounding.

Scott Morrison: “We want to have a program that reaches out up to 100 villages across Indonesia.” According to Australian Government AusAID more than 120 million Indonesians live on less than $2 per day. They are poorer than church mice, smarter and more desperate.

To poor Indonesians the smell of Australian government money will prove more alluring than the stench of a rotting pig is to a starving blowfly. Such a wild concept will also be a lottery for criminals that will surely out-fox our functionaries – as they always do. Having witnessed firsthand the gun buyback as officials handed out fantasy sums for rubbish without question, I can only imagine the same rules being applied to boats—in a foreign country.

Government buybacks of whatever do not achieve the noble goals promised by their inventors. The John Howard gun buyback, for example, did collect certain firearms from civilian hands but failed to lower private ownership numbers overall. Half a billion dollars were blown via outrageous prices for junk, much of which was well beyond use.

But, to bribe local peasants living on $2 per day with financial reward from a foreign country to rat on their fellow villagers will likely lead to the most violent of reprisals. Don’t forget the corrupt coppers’ grab. Jakarta will be right to view this plan as a very dangerous foreign intervention to their sovereignty—serious stuff.

The immediate and to the point backlash from Indonesia must have the Coalition calling halt to this idiotic notion. And, to its Coalition creator should go dismissal for announcing the madness within days of an important election when bad moves could have cause loss of faith.

Labor gave a figure of some 750,000 boats that would have to be bought. Given that boats for coastal Indonesians are more common the cars that number is a gross underestimate. Also underestimated is Indonesian peasant ingenuity in league with an accommodating Australian bureaucrat.

The promise of instant riches will see every piece of flotsam resembling a boat being paraded for cash. Hulks rotting in the sand and in the jungles will be dragged to the water’s edge regardless of holes and worms. Those that won’t float will be buoyed from beneath by airtight, 20 litre plastic drums to create freeboard.

Others that sunk decades ago will be beached high on the sand and sold there. No boat will be tested in any way, nor will any engine, not that any will work. The cries of a family business of 200 years ended by the sale of what looks like a piece of driftwood will assure top dollar—no argument.

If Australia truly wanted to get serious about securing its borders, and send a message to both smugglers and Indonesia, it needs to get tough which is its absolute right.

Withdraw from the UNHCR either temporarily or permanently.

Place a moratorium on unauthorised entries until the backlog is settled.

Deduct full costs of every boat person processed from our foreign aid to Indonesia.

It’s time to address Australia’s needs, not those who take us for a ride and abuse us in the process.

The watery grave that Labor dug

New MH2

Writers of political weeklies can’t possibly be topical given the rapid change in Labor’s pandemonium as the noose of electoral execution tightens by the day, if not hour.

Political chess moves of Rudd, Shorten and Tony Sheldon seem unlikely to cause any stay of the hangman’s scaffold. A two-party-preferred result according to surveys, have remained rather stable for more than a year. Any re-arrangement of deck chairs might save a handful of seats but won’t affect the outcome. To put it nicely—Labor is stuffed—in a manner unprecedented.

For the past 18 months voter concern about the nation’s porous borders has been marching toward top billing. And now, with the latest drowning of more than 50 off Western Australia’s coast, any hope and all spin Labor might use to camouflage reality perished with that craft and those poor souls on it.

Voter angst is mounting as more than 43,000 illegal immigrants have arrived by boat since the Rudd government terminated John Howard’s Pacific Solution in 2007 while Tony Abbott chirps louder about “turning back the boats” giving hope to all who find Labor’s own cost estimates of $203,704 per opportunist an unwanted burden and potential social disaster to be halted.

Meanwhile, the deluded Gillard says “the government’s border protection policies are working,” and that co-operation with Indonesia has successfully disrupted “many” people-smuggling ventures. What crap!
Eager for any opportunity to huff and puff before a camera is NSW state wrecker, now bungling foreign minister, Bob Carr. Bob’s cerebral wisdom reckoned Tony Abbott’s plan to turn back asylum seeker boats will trigger an “immediate foreign policy crisis” with Indonesia.

Carr, the old spin-doctor used a variety of descriptors with different media. “This is sheer recklessness.” And, “To talk about turning back the boats in his first days as prime minister would be to engineer a crisis in our relations with our most important neighbour.” Would also lead to a “humanitarian catastrophe on a vast scale,” and “Tony Abbott’s playing with fire,” Bob told Sky News.

However, Indonesia’s ambassador to Australia Nadjib Riphat Kesoema has ruled out any collaboration with Abbott to return people to Indonesia because it wasn’t their country of origin. Balderdash! Boats under Indonesian flag, crewed by Indonesians, port of origin Indonesia and provisioned in Indonesia says differently. The Ambassador is an idiot to assert such nonsense. Besides, it’s unlikely he would be privy to arrangements, if any, made between Abbott and the Indonesian government if there is a Coalition win in September.

Despite my low-budget opinion of Bob Carr, I must agree when he said that believing Tony Abbott will turn the boats around is to believe in fairies.

In April 2009 an Australian Navy ship HMAS Albany took in tow the smuggler boat SIEV 36 near Ashmore Reef. As HMAS Childers was boarding SIEV 36 one of the smuggler’s crew gave a cheesy grin, a salute and then touched off an explosion killing 5 and wounding 40. Blown into the water narrowly escaping death were our Navy personnel. President Bambang’s ruse for strengthened search and rescue co-operation proved a farce and the scuttling of craft is now textbook practice for smugglers.

A new wave of people smugglers has outwitted Australia’s government witless. First signal to smugglers was from the Royal Australian Navy in July 2012 when a senior officer said if there is even the slightest risk of danger to navy sailors or asylum seekers the navy skippers would disobey orders to invoke the “turn around or tow back” policy. “No navy officer would allow anyone, be they people smuggler, illegal fisherman or even terrorist, to perish at sea,” another officer said. The smugglers’ prayer mats got a fervent workout that day.

Moreover, Maritime Law says ships’ masters and crew have a legal and moral obligation to help distressed seafarers. International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea: “A master of a ship at sea, which is in a position to be able to provide assistance on receiving a signal from any source that persons are in distress at sea, is bound to proceed with all speed to their assistance.”  Maritime Law is a people smugglers’ licence to print money.

Only a fool would believe a smuggler and his bilge load of illegal interlopers would allow the RAN to hook-up a tow cable and drag the lot back to Indonesia. If Abbott’s plan becomes government policy the following standing orders for all smugglers will be:

By radio or mobile phone send SOS, report position and sabotage engine. Make a cup of tea. Upon sight of RAN taxi service to Australia, open seacocks in engine room. In case of no seacocks, cut engine cooling water input or chop a hole in the hull with an axe. If anticipating difficulties with authorities, pour petrol into Bilge. All on board with life vests, and those without, will then jump into the water while one remaining crew flicks a match down the hatch.

The craft will explode, seriously burning the crewman. (Note to skippers) This is desirable as no further dialogue will occur as the situation becomes a “life saving” exercise as the navy adheres to Maritime Law convention no matter what Tony Abbott says.

Over to you Tony.

The Muslim problem

Jack Wilkie-Jans

This perspective on a touchy subject comes from a young, Aboriginal man who feels need to speak out about a looming problem. GC.Ed.@L.

Prior to the 70s it was the Aboriginal Problem. Mainstream society was concerned that the Aboriginal population would over-take those of non-Indigenous Australians. Some politicians were concerned that politics would be side-tracked and made to pander to Aboriginal Affairs until kingdom come and essentially under-valuing non-Indigenous Aussies. 

Every generation has a Youth Problem, "those trousers are too creased!", "that music is too loud", and the golden-oldie "what's those things in your ears?". Well as a nation we now have the Muslim Problem. Society goes through eras where a particular people are placed under the social, political and academic micro-scope. Which, given Australia's rather cagey history (i.e. White Australia Policy) when it comes to new comers, can be understood. It is a part of growing up, it is a part of educating ourselves on those who come to our shores. It is the process in which we compare old values and perceived values and then decide on maintaining or re-forging a national identity.

In the late 60s we did just that, and grew to be a nation inclusive and non-discriminatory (in theory) towards Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. One would suss out someone on one's door-step attempting to enter the home, and so I say people hoping to come here should be sussed out likewise by society.

Mainstream society are now concerned that the Muslim immigration and inundation is growing too much and some members of Parliament and the Judiciary are concerned that Islamist religion, customs and attitudes will influence sentencing and laws. There was a public campaign to include Sharia Law in our courts and legislation- meaning, a separate set of ideologies and standards for dealing with criminals. Nothing has come of it yet but there are still cases of Sharia Law being dealt and handed down within the Muslim society.

Reading the book, Infidel, one can glean a different, internal perspective of Islam and also the dogma driving it. The book is from a female Muslim's perspective, on completion of only the first few chapters one can be forgiven for being nothing less than wary of the religion and certainly concerned about the influence it has in Western society today. We as a nation have come so far on Indigenous rights, women's rights, animal rights, environmental protection and political fairness, and the road to each has been hard and it is natural for a country to want to preserve their victories and to expect those coming here to celebrate them.

However Australians need to understand that while Islam may well be out-dated and preaches, very clearly in the Qur'an, a stark difference between women's and men's rights and roles, many Muslims are not reflective of their faith. Not all Muslims are extremists; a term that can be likened to extremism in politics and non-religious ideology. Nowadays Muslims are categorised similar to Jews, no other people are referred to by their religion as opposed to their country of birth or heritage. So do Muslims in general truly identify with the Islam religion? Can they, or do they, adopt national identities as opposed to religious ones? I have never met an atheist Muslim myself, I have met some very friendly and easy-going and integrated Muslims but also some very prejudice Muslim immigrants.

In Cairns, Far North Queensland, an immigration worker anonymously rang up the 4CA AM breakfast show two years ago and told of the un-Australian and very Islamic attitudes expressed towards her by Muslim refugees that her service works with. She claimed that Muslim men refused to work with her based on her sex and their wishes were granted by the department. So clearly there is a big issue here and it's one that keeps arriving and will most likely be here to stay.

The standards for refugees or asylum seekers is very different and lapse compared to the standards for legal migrants who seek citizenship. Something has got to give and it is up to us Australians to decide if it will be our standards, potentially our values and ways of doing things or will it be our current and future Government's attitude towards unruly, ingrained, outdated and medieval values. Whenever one calls the negative values and preachings within Islam into critique, one is usually attacked for being racist or prejudice, when one does so for Christianity it's considered academia or social commentary. 

We don't let child sexual abuse hide behind religion, why should we afford a dissimilar courtesy to (what remains) a minority religious group with equally shameful traits.

Jack Andrew Wilkie-Jans

Jack is an Aboriginal Affairs Advocate, Artist and Traditional Owner
from Far North Queensland with British, Danish and Aboriginal Australian


From Scott Morrison

The arrival of the latest boat means that over 40,000 people have now arrived by boat under Labor’s failed border protection regime.

That’s more than the population of Kalgoorlie-Boulder (30,900), Wodonga (31,600), Gladstone (32,100), Queanbeyan (35,900) and Tamworth (36,200).

So far this financial year, over 20,000 people have arrived on 320 boats. This compares with just 25 people on three boats in the final year that the Howard Government’s policies were in place.

Labor’s failure to protect our borders worsens by the day – and alongside its failure to control the Budget, is this Government’s greatest policy failure.

It is a failure that has cost lives, damaged our country’s reputation, cost over $6.6 billion in Budget blowouts and resulted in tens of thousands of people dumped into the community.

The people smugglers know this is a weak government that doesn’t have its heart in defending our borders. 

With the failures on our borders worsening every day, Australia cannot afford another three years of Labor

The Coalition offers a clear choice when it comes to implementing policies that will secure our borders.  We will:

  • re-introduce Temporary Protection Visas to deny the people smugglers a product to sell,
  • have rigorous offshore processing, and
  • give new orders to the Navy to turn back boats where it is safe to do so.

We will restore the proven policies of the last Coalition Government that actually stopped the boats.

Regards, Scott Morrison. Shadow Minister for Immigration & Citizenship

EXCLUSIVE: UK Leftist Concedes, Left Was Wrong on Immigration

A UK based leftist concedes the Left was wrong on Immigration

A UK based leftist concedes the Left was wrong on Immigration. Quoted from the Daily Mail author David Goodhart says that he is "now convinced that public opinion is right and Britain has had too much immigration too quickly". Hopefully he isn't ostracised for speaking his mind. 

Read more: 


It’s our house, we set the rules.

What a joke! The government’s baulk at solving the tsunami of foreign interlopers was trotted out as a powerful message certain to cause people smugglers to cease business has increased human traffic. Nauru is now technically filled to capacity even before it is operational.

And, Immigration Minister Bowen seeks to resume chatter with Malaysia and the magic fix where we send one and take five. Rarely mentioned is our legal system is absolutely clogged with appeals, many of which are frivolous.

While our socialist inspired leaders fudge and fumble with an avalanche of people who are acutely aware that the drawbridge will soon be raised, Canada, under Stephen Harper’s conservative government, is bravely leading the way with a bold but workable solution to the same problem. Their move is to revoke citizenship of those found to have obtained permanent residency by fraud.

Investigations so far have uncovered a possible 11,000 candidates for status revocation. While infractions vary, most are for falsifying official documents. “This is by far—by many orders of magnitude—the largest enforcement action ever taken in the history of Canadian citizenship,” Mr. Kenney told reporters in Montreal. News of the scoundrel chase spread quickly causing about 1,800 applicants to immediately withdraw their applications, no doubt to avoid possible legal action.

Mr. Kenney said in a statement issued prior to the news conference. “Canadian citizenship is not for sale. We are taking action to strip citizenship and permanent residence status from people who don’t play by the rules and who lie or cheat to become a Canadian citizen.” Bravo Canada!

Furthermore, in Gatineau, one of Quebec’s larger cities with a population around 250,000, the city fathers have compiled a 16-page guide for immigrants. It’s called a “Statement of Values” explaining what the locals expect from newcomers. However, it is more a list of what is not acceptable to the host community. Although the French are considered a tad rude or arrogant, they earn full marks for setting the ground-rules for social harmony. This should have been done in Australia some time ago.

The guide ranges from bribing officials, a piece on “honour killings” down to cooking smelly foods. The section,  “Children are our most precious good,” warns that “excessive punishments, corporal and sexual abuse, confinement, neglect, forced labour, humiliation, wilful malnutrition,” among other things are not tolerated. It also says that people have a right in Canada to disagree or even criticize the government but says religion is a private affair and religious indoctrination is “often not well perceived,” and violence is not justified in the name of “ancestral rights.” The latest federal government’s citizenship guide says Canada’s “openness and generosity do not extend to barbaric cultural practices that tolerate spousal abuse, ‘honour killings,’ female genital mutilation, forced marriage or other gender-based violence.”

NEWS: The Daily Telegraph, 14/9/12.

A SYDNEY sheik accused of involvement in the barbaric "genital circumcision" of sisters aged 6 and 7 is alleged to have told his Muslim community to lie about its widespread practice.

The children remain with their parents. A NSW police detective said, “It may seem a contradiction to say that when the parents are facing such serious charges. But they are not in any danger of any physical abuse.” Surely he was misquoted. Surely this is tacit acceptance of behaviour repugnant and barbaric to Australians, if not most of the human race?

The Telegraph:

Child Abuse Squad detectives have investigated the allegations against the 44-year-old father and 42-year-old mother and charged them under Section 306(4) of the Criminal Code. It will be alleged the couple arranged for female genital circumcision to be performed on their one-year-old daughter and took her overseas for the procedure. This is pure insanity!

Senator Helen Kroger said the Royal Women's Hospital in Melbourne saw 600-700 women a year who suffered genital mutilation.

Quebec’s Statement of Values also deals with “Hygiene, Cleanliness, and Quality of Life.” The guide says respecting others extends to curtailing smells like cigarette smoke and “strong odours emanating from cooking.”

It’s not that Australia has an “anything goes” policy, or lack of policy but it does lack will to favour Australian customs. When immigrants become Australian citizens they pledge an oath Officially called the "Pledge of Commitment":

From this time forward, under God,

I pledge my loyalty to Australia and its people,

whose democratic beliefs I share,

whose rights and liberties I respect, and

whose lawsI will uphold and obey.

All new citizens have the choice of making the pledge with or without the words ‘under God’.

Surely, that constitutes a contract with the government of Australia whereby violators may have their citizenship revoked. Unfortunately, it doesn’t work that way. Legislators could easily give teeth to that oath making it a useful tool and a last resort. In the meantime, Australia could send a message to the world that Australian citizenship is most valuable and not something to be bought or obtained fraudulently. We should launch that message by following Canada’s lead ASAP.

Geoff Crocker.

If you enjoyed this article please click the Facebook "like"

Don’t Settle Here


New migrants should get taxpayer subsidies to visit overseas relatives, an Islamic group has told the Federal Government.

The Islamic Women's Welfare Association also says Muslims prefer to live close to their own people and Australia should consider how to "facilitate the purchase of homes for new migrants".

The last thing Australia needs is more migrant enclaves, especially Muslim ones. Let's try not to emulate France, shall we?


In a submission to a federal multicultural inquiry, the association has urged the Government to give tax deductions to newly arrived migrants so they can visit relatives in their homelands.

"Migrants face a lot of sacrifices such as having to travel long distances to visit relatives, spending on communication costs, missing out on some events occurring in native countries etc," the submission said.

"This loss should be compensated by the Government in one way or the other to retain migrants in their country of adoption."

It’s really stupid ideas like this which puts a wedge between non-Muslims and Muslims. Why is that it’s always some Muslim group who wants “this” or “that” special treatment?

Talk about insulting the host.

Follow Andy on twitter