Labor trying to wedge Libs? It’d almost be funny if the consequence wasn’t going to be an Abbott government

Wait, Labor’s not trying to be clever, is it?

Attorney-General Robert McClelland told ABC’s News 24 the Migration Act could be amended to allow offshore processing.

“We believe an amendment is appropriate. Obviously the cabinet and caucus have to consider these issues but yes we believe that an amendment is desirable to put offshore processing beyond doubt, we think that should be done,” he said.

Last week, the High Court found the Immigration Minister could not send asylum seekers to Malaysia, because Malaysia is not bound by international or domestic law to provide them protections.

Mr McClelland says an amendment could remove some of those considerations for the Immigration Minister.

I see. So they deport refugees at ridiculous expense to prove that they’re not “beholden” to the Greens, to please those morons who believe Murdoch’s rags and think that Bob Brown is “the co-PM”; and they dare Tony Abbott to vote against legislation to enable offshore processing. I think they think they’re wedging him. They think they can out-nasty and out-tricky the Liberals.

They’re going to thoroughly deserve when it inevitably blows up in their face. Unfortunately, we won’t all deserve the consequence – an Abbott government.

8 responses to “Labor trying to wedge Libs? It’d almost be funny if the consequence wasn’t going to be an Abbott government

  1. Well we need to ask ourselves is what being proposed is the best possible option, What we would like is immaterial at this stage.

    If we do not believe that Nauru is an option, we need to get behind the PM.

    Yes, I believe probably more than most that Mr. Abbott and the Coalition will be the worse thing that can happen to this country.

    Even so I am reluctant to support any policy that I do not believe in.

    There are two options the PM can choose.. Nauru and Mr. Howard’s solution is not one.

    We need an solution that meets today’s situation, not one that existed a decade ago.

    I do not believe we have the right to sit back and say nothing.

    If you do not want Mr. Abbott put your thinking cap on. The M cannot do it on her own.

  2. The PM not M


  3. What? There’s an obvious alternative – onshore processing, like we did prior to 2001. And end mandatory detention.

    And it seems likely the PM could actually pass that legislation right now. I suspect Windsor, Oakeshott and Wilkie would side with her and the Greens.

  4. What we need, is a country that is inhabited by people we can ignore and pretend they have no rights uninhabited; then we just ship ’em all there like the motherland did here. That whole terra nullis thing worked a dream here.

    [end sarcasm]

  5. What about Antarctica?

  6. narcoticmusing

    Good idea Jules – ice bergs would make for great temporary accommodation points. And for all those that complain about so called ‘human rights’ issues we can point to how deep under the water that ice berg goes – I mean, come on, that is quality real estate.

  7. NM, Antarctica has a real rock-based continent under the ice, unlike the Arctic. And if we do nothing about global warming then it really will become prime real estate.

    The real danger is that the cashed up descendants of the convicts … er … colonists, fat on money from their real estate boom, will then buy up the remaining parts of the mining pit called Australia and turn us all into sweat shop slaves turning out cheap goods to sell in the Antarctic.

    We have to deal with climate change now – it’s the only way to stop our future Antarctican overlords!

  8. Yes unique – hence i talked about ice bergs, not Antartica itself…

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s