Writing in The Punch, CPD fellow Kate Gauthier criticises the narr0w-minded policies put forward by both parties on the asylum seeker issue. A fair and equitable debate is being called for.
The two major parties both propose harsh deterrence as a way of stopping the boats. Public debate is then focusing on evaluating only on those narrow options put forward by Bowen and Morrison.
Even worse, it is suggested that if you do not agree with deterrence, you have asylum seeker blood on your hands. This is simplistic to the point of stupidity, because there are more policy options than those being offered by our politicians.
Try this for an analogy: There is a hospital with life-saving treatment, but sick patients are being killed trying to cross the busy road to get there. In order to ‘save their lives’ there is a proposal to build a fence around the highway. Sounds both heartless and pointless, since in a matter of life and death people will just climb the fence to cross the road.
There are other policy choices than just building bigger fences
Continue reading the article in The Punch here.
Help us fill public debates about refugees and asylum seekers with good ideas not more fear and misinformation – Become an Ideas Sustainer.