All Politics is Local

Those who know me know that I revel in social media. I thrive on the ability to express myself, and to make contact with all sorts of people, from a trade in the suburbs to old school friends, to the people who own the voices of my favourite radio stations to politicians, activists and public figures. Those who know me will also know that while I can swear like a sailor with a toothache, I don't do it often. My inner voice has more in common with Gordon Ramsay than I like to admit, but I have an 'inside voice' that I use online.

I'm pretty polite and respectful on social media. I rarely lose my temper, although my default sarcasm comes through too often. But I'm basically respectful of those I interact with.

Masters of Social Media: Mark Robinson and Andrew Laming

I was last night, too, when my local LNP member's Facebook page caught my attention. The subject was the Safe Schools programme, and Mark Robinson MP was complaining that Queensland Education Minister Kate Jones was not acting to address the horror of the safe schools programme.

I've read great slabs of the course material, I've watched many of the Safe Schools videos that are available as learning resources, and I'm in favour of this programme. According to the Safe Schools website:

Safe Schools Coalition Australia is a national network of organisations working with schools to create safer and more inclusive environments for same sex attracted, intersex and gender diverse students, staff and families.

There's a lot to respect about the Safe Schools materials, and while it isn't perfect, it's the best we have. 

By the way, anyone who suggests that as I'm not a parent, I have no right to an opinion can just get in the sea right now. 

Mr Robinson and some of his Facebook supporters have described the programme as "Un-Safe Schools". I asked Mr Robinson what was in the programme materials that made it unsafe. He was either unwilling or unable to answer with any specifics.

Another commenter, Julie Robinson, discussed an e-petition to have the Safe Schools programme removed from Queensland schools. Julie Robinson is Mark Robinson's wife. Here's what happened next.

I'll admit, I was too-ing and fro-ing about whether to mention in my post that Julie is Mark's wife. I chose not to; it's irrelevant, as she is also a constituent, and has every right to her own opinion. Equally, she has no business making up numbers to support her argument. 

The rest of the comments were short notes of agreement with Mark's initial post...except for the one from Shaun Edwards. He wanted to introduce Shariah (sic) Law into the thread. I responded with something like "What about it?" I could not see - and still can't - what Sharia Law has to do with the Safe Schools programme.

Self portrait of the blogger

And there it is. According to my local state member, I'm a troll. I pick incredibly polite fights with strangers on the internet. 

Did I mention that along with calling me a troll, Mr Robinson also deleted my post to Shaun Edwards and blocked me from commenting on his Facebook page? He's blocked me on Twitter, too, has never posted on his Instagram account, and seems not to have a Pinterest account. He's not alone; it's almost standard Liberal Party/LNP operating procedure to use social media as another distribution channel for press releases.

Having blocked me from using social media to contact him, I opted for the Contact form on his website to communicate. 

I am disappointed that you have suggested that I am a troll, that you have deleted a relevant Facebook post, and that you ultimately blocked me from commenting on your Facebook page. I am an engaged and aware constituent of Cleveland who just happens to disagree with you. I have been unfailingly polite; I have treated you with respect, but I have challenged your perspective on a number of issues and I have asked direct questions. 

Social media, and indeed politics, are not tennis matches where players can be penalised for showing dissent. Vigorous debate is healthy, and yet you refuse to engage, or even acknowledge people who disagree with you. You represent all of us, Mark, even the dreadful lefties. When you close off communication with people whose views differ from yours, you deny them informed representation, but you deny yourself the opportunity to put your own case forward, you lose the chance to learn about your constituents and your perception of your electorate's disposition is skewed. 

I don't expect you to change your mind on any of the issues we disagree on; I do, however, expect to be treated with the same degree of respect as I have always treated you. Perhaps you would like to chat with Steve Minnikin. We clashed too, but instead of blocking me, we met for coffee and had a chat. 

I await your written response.

It's 3:45pm, and there's no response yet. I'm wondering if a letter to the local paper might be in order. 

Safe Schools - Steve's Perspective.

Today, my friend Steve Molkentin received a private message about the Safe Schools programme. Steve, a practising Christian and all round good guy, chose to share his response on Facebook, and has generously allowed me to reproduce it here.

I received this private message from an FB friend today:

---
Just like to let you know what the labor party stands for in the safe school program. At prep they will and do introduce the child having the opportunity as to what gender you would like to be. Big discussion for young children. Yes you don't have to make this discussion now but you can start experimenting hey go to the boys toilet if you are a girl and if you are a boy go to the girls toilet how safe are you feeling now. That is one issue and there are many more. When it comes to discrimination don't go there open the boarders and let them come and soon we will be like the best terror spot around. Don't close your mind yet open your eyes and see what else is undercover that they have not told us about. Being a family that grew up in the church like your parents marriage is between a man and a woman and imagine a world where more children have not had the family balance that works and we have more questionable values thrown in where do we go now how many pedefiles there be here now. Just thought I would put you in the light.
---

I won't identify them. I know I have other FB friends who would think the same/similar as above.

I offer this response to that person and the other like-minded friends on FB:

This election, more than any other, has become about division. Dividing us along age (Boomers v Milennials), dividing us along sexuality (supporting Marriage Equality & Safe Schools or no), dividing us by means (removing services/increasing cost of services for those with little). Then there's the division based on what you think Australia should do with asylum seekers (last night's ACA was appalling in its portrayal of the situation in Nauru).

I am a person of faith. I struggle to be the best reflection of Jesus most times, yet I persist.

The Christ I know offers love, grace and compassion to all people. It doesn't matter your age, faith, sexual preference, means, ethnicity, place in the world. If we get the bit where we love God with all our being and then we love our neighbour as ourselves, we won't get hung up on scare campaigns from the ACL about gender fluidity, shared toilets and educating people so that the LGBTIQ+ community aren't the bogeyman.

Some of the advice contained within the Safe Schools material.

I encourage you to not be drawn into division. Care for your neighbour - and, according to Jesus, that's anybody that isn't you. Don't project your belief system onto someone that doesn't believe the same as you... just love them. Be compassionate. 

Please do not spread misinformation, false truths and least of all hate. Have informed conversations. Listen to other people and consider their experiences and points of view.

It burns me some of the things the ACL do in the name of "Christianity" and "Christians" around the country. As difficult as it is God asks me to love them too. (I am thankful daily God doesn't ask me to agree with them or support them.)

I reject the assertions in the above message that the Safe Schools program is dangerous. That's not how I read the material in the program.

I reject the suggestion that only a marriage of a man and a woman can offer a "proper" home for children. By extension it suggests that single parent families are incomplete, and that couples who don't have kids are somehow less valuable.

I wholly reject the way we are dealing with asylum seekers. Horrors are being committed in representation of Australia. Of us. By us. Show these people who ran for their lives some mercy. Channel the money spent on the camps in Nauru into processing centres in Indonesia and the like to end the business of those who would take advantage of the weak and vulnerable and put them on boats.

I love God, and I love you. If you believe there's truth in the original message I shared above I'll happily chat with you about it, and I'll pray for you (and with you, if you'll let me). Please be prepared for me to challenge you strongly if you are person of faith and you think any of the original message is biblical and how God wants us to operate.

PLEASE - if you are going to comment or reply to comments to this, I ask you to be polite. I will delete anything that is intentionally racist, inflammatory, or gets personal (not only of the people commenting, but also of politicians, etc).

For those people of faith - God asks us to care for everyone, and when given the chance share what he's all about. That doesn't give us the right to condemn or influence/advocate laws that separate and divide. Start from a place of love and see where the Spirit of God leads you.

For those that have experience hate, been singled out or ostracised because people believe something different to you - I'm so very sorry.

Enough division. The only way we'll conquer these things is together as people who care about each other.

Home of the Brave

It's fifteen years since the attacks on September 11, almost that many years of continuous US involvement in pointless Middle Eastern wars, and I wonder if anything will heal that gaping hole in the American psyche. 

Greg Deans posted the following on Facebook last Wednesday.  It's a letter from an American airline captain about his fear of Muslims. My response is at the end.

THIS IS ONE OF THE CLEAREST STATEMENTS ON THE AMERICAN DISCOMFORT OF THE MUSLIM COMMUNITY. 

A newspaper stated that some Muslim doctor is saying we are profiling him because he has been checked three times while getting on an airplane.  The following is a letter from a pilot.  This well - spoken man, who is a pilot with American Airlines, says what is in his heart, beautifully.

 

  

YOU WORRY ME!

By Captain John Maniscalco, American Airlines Pilot

 

I've been trying to say this since 911, but you worry me.  I wish you didn't.  I wish when I walked down the streets of this country that I love, that your color and culture still blended with the beautiful human landscape we enjoy in this country.  But you don't blend in anymore.  I notice you, and it worries me.

 

I notice you because I can't help it anymore.  People from your homelands, professing to be Muslims, have been attacking and killing my fellow citizens and our friends for more than 20 years now. 

I don't fully understand their grievances and hate, but I know that nothing can justify the inhumanity of their attacks.

 

On September 11, ARAB-MUSLIMS hijacked four jetliners in my country.  They cut the throats of women in front of children and brutally stabbed to death others, hacking their necks, over and over, with box cutters.  They took control of those planes and crashed them into buildings, killing thousands of proud fathers, loving sons, wise grandparents, elegant daughters, best friends, favorite coaches, fearless public servants, and children's mothers.

 

The Palestinians celebrated, the Iraqis were overjoyed as was most of the Arab world.  So, I notice you now. I don't want to be worried.

I don't want to be consumed by the same rage, hate and prejudice that has destroyed the soul of these terrorists.  But I need your help.  As a rational American, trying to protect my country and family in an irrational and unsafe world, I must know how to tell the difference between you, and the Arab/Muslim terrorist.

How do I differentiate between the true Arab/Muslim Americans and the Arab/Muslim terrorists in our communities who are attending our schools, enjoying our parks, and living in OUR communities under the protection of OUR constitution, while they plot the next attack that will slaughter MORE of the same good neighbors and children?

 

The events of September 11 changed the answer..  It is not MY responsibility to determine which of you embraces our great country, with ALL of its religions, with ALL of its different citizens, with all of its faults.  It is time for every Arab/Muslim in this country to determine it for me.

 

I want to know, I DEMAND to know and I have a right to know, whether or not you love America .....  Do you pledge allegiance to its flag?  Do you proudly display it in front of your house, or on your car?  Do you pray in your many daily prayers that Allah will bless this nation; that He will protect it and let it prosper?  Or do you pray that Allah will destroy it in one of your Jihads?  Are you thankful for the freedom that this nation affords?  A freedom that was paid for by the blood of hundreds of thousands of patriots, who have through our history, given their lives for this country?  Are you willing to preserve this freedom by also paying the ultimate sacrifice?  Do you love America??  If this is your commitment, then I need YOU to start letting ME know about it.

 

Your Muslim leaders in this nation should be flooding the media at this time with hard facts on your faith, and what hard actions YOU are taking as a community and as a religion to protect the United States of America.  Please, no more benign overtures of regret for the death of the innocent, because I worry about who you regard as innocent.  No more benign overtures of condemnation for the unprovoked attacks, because I worry about what is unprovoked to you. I am not interested in any more sympathy; I am interested only in action.  What will you do for America - our great country - at this time of continuing crisis, at this time of war?

 

I want to see Arab-Muslims waving the AMERICAN flag in the streets.  I want to hear you chanting 'Allah Bless America'.  I want to see young Arab/Muslim men enlisting in the military.  I want to see a commitment of money, time and emotion to the victims of this butchering and to our returning wounded and to this nation as a whole.

 

The FBI has had a long list of people they’ve wanted to interact with regarding the threats that they believe to be ongoing. Many of these people live and socialize right now in Muslim communities.  You know them.  You know where they are.  Give the FBI a heads up as to where they may be.  Better yet, hand them over to us, NOW!  But I have seen little even approaching this sort of action.  Instead I have seen an already closed and secretive community close even tighter.  You have disappeared from the streets.  You have posted armed security guards at your facilities.  You have threatened lawsuits.  You have screamed for protection from reprisals.

 

The very few Arab/Muslim representatives, like CARE, that HAVE appeared in the media were defensive and equivocating.  They seemed more concerned with making sure that the United States apologize and take responsibility for actions defending our own people.  They seemed more concerned with protecting their fellow Muslims from violence directed towards them in the United States and abroad than they did with supporting our country and denouncing 'leaders' like the late Khadafi, the late Hussein, Farrakhan, and the late Arafat.

 

If the true teachings of Islam proclaim tolerance and peace and love for all people, then I want chapter and verse from the Koran and statements from popular Muslim leaders to back it up.  What good is it if the teachings in the Koran are good, pure, and true, when your 'leaders' ARE teaching fanatical interpretations, terrorism, and intolerance?  It matters little how good Islam SHOULD BE if huge numbers of the world's Muslims interpret the teachings of Mohammed incorrectly and adhere to a degenerative form of the religion.  A form that has been demonstrated to us over and over again.  A form whose structure is built upon a foundation of violence, death, and suicide.  A form whose members are recruited from the prisons around the world.

 

A form whose members (some as young as five years old) are seen day after day, week in and week out, year after year, marching in the streets around the world, burning effigies of our presidents, burning the American flag, shooting weapons into the air.  A form whose members convert from a peaceful religion, only to take up arms against the great United States of America, the country of their birth.  A form whose rules are so twisted, that their traveling members refuse to show their faces at airport security checkpoints, in the name of Islam.

 

We will NEVER allow the attacks of September 11, or any others for that matter, to take away that which is so precious to us -- our rights under the greatest constitution in the world.  I want to know where every Arab Muslim in this country stands and I think it is my right and the right of every true citizen of this country to DEMAND it.  A right paid for by the blood of thousands of my brothers and sisters who died protecting the very constitution that is protecting you and your family.

 

I am pleading with you to let me know.  I want you here as my brother, my neighbor, my friend, as a fellow American...... But there can be no grey areas or ambivalence regarding your allegiance, and it is up to YOU, to show ME, where YOU stand.  Until then, "YOU WORRY ME!"

 

{Greg writes}  “If you are not with us then stay in the country that you do pledge allegiance to !”

My response: 

I guess this is America, rejecting the concept of "innocent until proven guilty" in favour of "guilty by association", or even worse, "guilty on account of religion".

It's America saying that freedom of religion is okay, but I'm still gonna be suspicious of everyone practising *this* religion because once, some extremists hurt them. 

It's America choosing to remain ignorant rather than pursuing knowledge, understanding and friendship.

It's an educated, articulate American man admitting that the terrorists got exactly what they wanted.

It's America choosing to be afraid.

Any decent therapist will tell you that to get past a traumatic incident, to heal, takes time, but it also takes effort. This American airline pilot can choose to be discomforted every time he sees a Muslim (how does he recognise them, by the way?) or he can choose to stop blaming the 99.97% of Muslims who are innocent. He can choose to meet with them, sit and talk and eat with them, FLY with them. Or not.

He can show some leadership. Or not.

Final thought: the number of Americans killed on September 11, 2001, plus the number of Americans who've died while serving in the Middle East since September 11 is still less than half the number of Americans who were killed last year, on home soil, by guns. 

If Americans need to write long, emotionally fraught letters about things that make them uncomfortable, perhaps they should revisit their priorities.

Acts of Force

The debate continues.

In the wake of a new survey which suggests that around 90% of Redlands residence support same sex marriage, state Member for Queensland appears to oppose same sex marriage, particularly as it may force ministers of religion and others to participate in or supply to same sex marriages, even when it is in conflict with their personal values.

I was going to reply on FB. This blog seems more appropriate.

Legalising gay marriage doesn't force anyone to be "gay married", or to participate in gay weddings. In fact, if you refer to the Qld Anti-Discrimination Act (1991), the laws which protect people from discrimination on the basis of sexual preference or religion (or many other characteristics) already exists. See below.

To use the cliched scenario, it's already illegal for a baker to refuse to bake a cake for someone because they are gay. Do you really want to change the Anti-Discrimination Act to legalise discrimination against same sex fiancées by service providers? Do you really want to dismantle the Queensland Anti Discrimination Act?

ANTI-DISCRIMINATION ACT 1991 - SECT 7

Discrimination on the basis of certain attributes prohibited:

The Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of the following attributes—

(a) sex;

(b) relationship status;

(c) pregnancy;

(d) parental status;

(e) breastfeeding;

(f) age;

(g) race;

(h) impairment;

(i) religious belief or religious activity;

(j) political belief or activity;

(k) trade union activity;

(l) lawful sexual activity;

(m) gender identity;

(n) sexuality;

(o) family responsibilities;

(p) association with, or relation to, a person identified on the basis of any of the above attributes.

But in case you're still concerned about members of the clergy being forced to officiate at same sex weddings against their will, Labor's proposed bill on same sex marriage (2015) has considered the potential conflict. The Labor model includes the stipulation that ministers of religion will not be required to solemnise marriages where both parties to the marriage are of the sex.

The majority of Australians support same sex marriage and the number is rising. As legislators, it's your job to ensure that while ensuring the law reflects the values of the majority, the various special interest groups have their rights protected too. 

And don't be so anti-protest! It's the sign of a functioning democracy. 

We have to talk about Dutton

Peter Dutton - the Brussels Sprouts of Australian politics

Aside from Peter Dutton’s personality, his disloyalty, his resemblance to common vegetables and his propensity to say unbelievably stupid things when presented with a microphone, there is another problem facing him during this election campaign. He cannot defend his record, nor his government’s record on asylum seeker, refugee and immigration policy. Not because it’s bad, although it is; the problem is that for almost three years, there has been a deliberate absence of information about one topic: stopping the boats. 

And when there’s no credible information, the vacuum sucks in anything and everything, filling with void with a mishmash of nonsense that would make the boys on Mythbusters cry. Who knows what the hell is going on inside the Department of Immigration and Border Protection? 

From the earliest days of the Abbott Government, we learned that the Minister – Scott Morrison at the time – would not discuss “on water operations”. It’s meaning was a little broader than that; there would be no discussion of asylum seeker boats approaching Australia, leaving Australia, landing in Australia, breaking up, breaking down, being boarded, being evacuated, being towed, being torpedoed…if it involved a boat that might have asylum seekers in it, expect it to be classified. The weekly press conferences with Scott Morrison and LTGEN Angus Campbell, now Chief of Army, were precise to the point of farce. We were told, via those weekly press conferences, exactly what the Government wanted us to know, and no more. “On water matters” became a cynical catchphrase for anything mysterious, secretive or hidden.

So while Scott Morrison was busily not talking about on water matters, and the Murdoch tabloids were trumpeting Prime Minister Abbott’s success at stopping the boats, the Guardian was reporting that representatives from the UNHCR had released a report that suggested that boats were still leaving and people were still dying. They can't both be right. 

According to the UNHCR report on Irregular Maritime Movements in South-East Asia, over 50,000 people set sail just from the Bay of Bengal area in January-November 2014. The smugglers operating in the region move people who are trafficked as well as those paying for passage outside of legal migration channels.

The only avenue left to Minister Dutton is literally the party line – that the boats have stopped and everything is honky-dory. We know it's not because people have set themselves on fire.

Unfortunately for the Turnbull team, Mr Dutton has about as much credibility left as those vegetables he's often compared to. This ex-cop has perfected the art of shoving of both of his feet in his mouth at the same time, while continuing to talk nonsense. Into a live microphone.

In his latest headline-making gaffe, he suggested that asylum seekers and refugees are likely to be illiterate and innumerate. It’s worst-case-scenario cultural stereotyping, it's unforgivable ignorance…or in smaller words, it’s just plain wrong. Some, like the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, have stood behind their self-embattling Minister for Avoidable Gaffes. Most have not. It’s never easy to defend the indefensible.

The good people of Dickson, Mr Dutton’s electorate, would do well to remember that his gaffes are not one-offs, nor are they always accidental. Consider these classics from his greatest hits album:

• ·      He was the only Coalition front bencher not present during Kevin Rudd’s apology to the Stolen Generations.
• ·      He was unhappy about a redistribution which made his seat less safely Liberal, so he tried for pre-selection in a neighbouring seat, and lost. He had to return to Dickson, tale between his legs, and hope Dickson was desperate enough to have him back.
• ·      During the Gillard-Rudd parliament, he was Shadow Minister for Health and Ageing, yet infamously asked only one question about health during that time.
• ·      He was appointed Minister for Health during the Abbott Government, and was subsequently named Worst Health Minister of the past 35 years in a poll run by a trade magazine for doctors.
• ·      He was caught by an open mic, making jokes about climate change and how it will effect low lying Pacific islands.
• ·      In response to an unflattering article by Samantha Maiden about former minister Jamie Briggs, Dutton wrote a text of support to Briggs, in which he described Ms Maiden as “a mad fucking witch”. He then sent the text to Ms Maiden instead.
• ·      He denied that Greens Senator Sarah Hanson Young was spied upon while on Nauru – a claim which was contradicted by his own department, as well as Wilson Security, the company which had done the spying.
• ·      He described refugees as “illiterate and innumerate” and suggested that would be unemployable, clogging unemployment queues while simultaneously taking jobs meant for real Australians. 

And that’s without the “creepy internet meme” fiasco, which wasn’t really his fault at all – blame someone in his crack media team.  

I wonder if it’s the same media team that brought us “on water operations.”

HOAX ALERT - Part 2 (Anyhow...have a Winfield)

Just two months or so after his recent nontroversy about Cadbury removing the word Easter from its seasonal chocolate eggs (they hadn’t), Senator Glenn Lazarus has been caught out again, embroidering some Murdochrian “truth” and failing to check the facts before posting his outrage on his Facebook page. This time, it's a new variant of that old chestnut about refugees receiving all manner of luxurious benefits.

The insinuation is that if we didn’t give the cursed asylum seekers so much extravagance, we’d be able to afford to look after our veterans and pensioners.

His Facebook post from this afternoon has the following to say:

Why are asylum seekers on Manus Island being treated like kings and being given free cigarettes and other perks at the expense of Australian taxpayers when we have Australian veterans who have fought for our country living on the streets, families who are struggling to live week to week and pensioners who have worked all their life and paid tax and can not afford to buy bread and milk.

The RUBBISH needs to STOP!

I have had enough of the major parties. We desperately need politicians who are prepared to put Australians and our country first.

But it’s true, I hear you scream from all four corners of your flat earth. It says so in the email!

Ahh yes. Let’s deal with the email. This one has been around so long that the government had to post an entire debunking on their own website. The Gillard Government, that is, in 2012. 

So infamous is this email that it’s been also been debunked by Hoax Slayer, snopes.com, the Refugee Council, Wikipedia, the Australian Government, CPSU, Sunrise host David Koch, and me. I’m not even going to link to each of these articles; they are summarised quite well on the APH website.

As for the Senator’s claims today about detainees on Manus using their taxpayer funded ciggies to barter for alcohol and drugs, we know exactly where that came from. Enter the News Corp tabloids. Late last night, the Herald Sun published an article by Peter Michael, under the cracking headline, “Manus Island asylum seekers trading taxpayer-funded cigarettes for booze, marijuana”.  Other News Corp titles picked up the piece not long after.

And what a cracking piece of journalism it is. The article, peppered with emotive yet vaguely inaccurate terms like “illegal” and “sources”, tells us that Aussie taxpayers are supplying detainees with packets of cigarettes as a reward for good behaviour. And that's accurate - we are. 

Before going gazebo all over our Facebook pages, let’s introduce some perspective.

Two years ago, the cost to accommodate, feed and guard one asylum seeker detained on Manus Island for one year was around $400,000, or $1095 per day. Add a pack a day of Winfield Blue 25s at $26.25 per pack (that’s RRP – the government would be paying far less) and the cost balloons out by quite a bit less than $10,000 per year, or less than $9 million across the facility.  The truth is that Australia would save money if we abandoned the cruel offshore detention policy and place asylum seekers - with their cigarettes - in community detention. 

Closing Manus Island now, and bringing the 900 asylum seekers into Australian detention centres would immediately save the government more than $150 million dollars per year on running costs alone. Community detention is even less expensive, and tends to result in more positive human outcomes. The savings at the one-year mark for the population of Manus Island Offshore Detention Centre would be well over a quarter of a billion dollars. Sadly, that's only about an extra $100 per year to each of our aged pensioners. 

Senator Lazarus's fretting about a cigarette allowance as though it would make any practical difference to the living standards of veterans and pensioners is disingenuous.

Manus Island Detainees living like kings.

But what of the rest of Senator Lazarus’s rant? The compound on Manus Island bears no resemblance to the palace the Senator seems to think exists, in which a safe and luxurious lifestyle is provided at the expense of the wellbeing of honest, hardworking Aussies. It’s a stinking hot, humid cesspit, with a history that smells as much of desperation as it does of sweat. 

That there is anything luxurious for these men on Manus Island is a fabrication of the Senator’s own making. If we take away their cigarette ration, which many of them don’t seem to want anyway, the maximum annual saving would be in the well short of ten million dollars – hardly more than Bronwyn Bishop’s helicopter and limousine budget.

Senator Lazarus is right about one thing, though: this rubbish needs to stop. The Papua New Guinean Government might love the money Australia pays them to keep a few hundred unwanted men in a prison on one of their islands, but there is no love, little compassion and only unwilling tolerance of the men imprisoned there. There is simply no sane reason to keep Manus Island and Nauru Offshore Processing Centres operating. 

This merciless policy diminishes all of us.

Additional Reading: Penny wise, pound foolish: how to really save money on refugees