Gazan visa scheme is a sign of weak PM’s desperation
Asking legitimate questions about why we are letting Gazans into Australia without proper security checks isn’t racist at all – and anyone trying to claim it is, has something to hide, writes Peta Credlin.
Opinion
Don't miss out on the headlines from Opinion. Followed categories will be added to My News.
Be thankful you don’t have to watch parliament for a living like I do, because the past week has been a shocker.
We’ve got a weak Prime Minister who’s getting more and more desperate to hold onto power despite the real sense it’s slipping away from him. We’ve got ministers who are failing to get the basics right, like Health Minister Mark Butler who has allowed Australia to run critically low in essential IV fluids needed by our hospitals. And you’ve got those well-heeled Teals claiming misogyny because they don’t like the tone of political debate but, at the same time, are using slurs like “racist” against Peter Dutton.
What the Left don’t understand (and I include the Teals here as they are Gucci-Greens, not pseudo-Liberals) is that calling the Opposition Leader a “racist” because he wants security checks on people coming to live in Australia brands every one of us a racist.
Nearly every Australian has a migrant background of one sort or another. Migrants who’ve come the right way know just how rigorous the requirements were: the documents, the checks, the time taken before they got their visa.
So, when they learn that Anthony Albanese has granted 3000 tourist visas to people out of a terrorist-controlled war zone, they want assurances they were properly checked. Imagine their concern when they learn that these online applications were approved in as little as one hour, without a face-face-interview and that, once here, Gazans are already applying for permanent refugee status and all the taxpayer support that comes with it?
What’s more, the Albanese Government never actually told us they were doing this.
Australians only found out by accident when the story leaked out in the Muslim community. There was no official announcement, no transparency and no special visa class created, as done in the past, to properly vet any new arrivals.
What troubles me the most is the statement by ASIO chief Mike Burgess that “sympathy with Hamas” is not a deal-breaker when deciding the fate of these Gazans. Hamas is a listed terrorist organisation. That’s done under special legislation against a whole set of criteria that confirms it is the worst of the worst when it comes to the harm Hamas wants to do to countries like Australia.
In the past, we used to deport people that were sympathetic to al-Qaeda and Islamic State (both also listed terrorist organisations), so what’s changed? Was Burgess freelancing here or was he reflecting new government policy? Worryingly, when asked twice in parliament last week: “Does supporting Hamas pass the character test for an Australian visa?”, the Prime Minister completely evaded the question.
Can you imagine John Howard dodging a straight forward question like this? Instead of answering it, Albanese accused Dutton of being “divisive” and “negative”, but this is a big deal. Why is the Prime Minister and his government so reluctant to say that support for Hamas has no place in this country?
So, the question that must be asked, why is Albanese doing this?
Because Labor is under huge electoral pressure. In every major poll over the past eight months, they are behind and, at best, headed for minority government. They are facing a backlash in outer urban seats where cost of living is biting hard. The Greens have used the pro-Palestinian issue to drag young voters away from Labor and in a raft of seats in Western Sydney and Melbourne, Labor incumbents are vulnerable to a new pro-Muslim vote movement.
I don’t think they thought it would go like this. I know how the inside of government works, and I think this was something cooked up quickly last year by Albanese and then Immigration Minister Andrew Giles to trade visas-for-votes among the pro-Palestinian crowd. I think they thought they were being clever and used the backdoor (and fast) route of tourist visas without getting advice from our security agencies (remember at the time, the PM had thrown ASIO off his National Security Committee) or even the immigration department, as a former senior immigration official said last week. I doubt it even went to cabinet, there was no caucus debate, and certainly no public announcement, and it’s now all blown up in the government’s face.
As it should.
No one can call himself a leader and put at risk Australia’s national security. But that’s exactly what Albanese has done here. Hamas is deeply anti-Semitic; it also hates the West and thinks all westerners are evil. It exalts in depravity, slaughters women and children in ways I can’t even describe in print, and it won’t rest until it destroys Israel, or Israel destroys Hamas.
Not every Gazan is a supporter of Hamas but reputable polls say that the vast majority supported what Hamas did on October 7. It’s also an undeniable fact that Gazans elected Hamas as their government.
This is why asking legitimate questions about why we are now letting these Gazans into Australia without proper security checks isn’t racist at all. And anyone trying to claim it is, has something to hide.
BABY SURVIVING ABORTION HAS HUMAN RIGHT TO LIVE
On Tuesday afternoon in the Senate, there was a vote to agree in principle that every baby born alive after a late-term abortion should be given medical treatment. This is what happens in SA and NSW but in Victoria and QLD alone, over the past decade, 700 newborns have been left to die alone after surviving an abortion; on average, that’s one baby a week.
The vote was not about restricting abortion. The vote was not about a woman’s reproductive rights. The vote was about the human rights of the baby who had survived.
Whatever you think about abortion, and this is a deeply personal issue where there’s strongly held views on all sides, surely, we should all be able to agree that every child born alive in this country deserves the same medical care?
Coalition MPs could, but Labor and Greens all voted against this motion from Victorian Senator Ralph Babet. And, shamefully, so too did four Liberals – Senators Simon Birmingham, Jane Hume, Maria Kovacic and Andrew Bragg.
How can it be that in the same hospital we have medical professionals fighting to save the life of a premature baby and, in the room next door, another premature baby is left alone to die because this infant had the audacity to survive a late-term abortion? Elsewhere at law, we call this “infanticide”.
It is fundamental to our human rights that every one of us is given the same right to life, the same dignity, the same access to essentials like medical care. A child born alive after a failed abortion is no longer a cluster of cells in a women’s body, but a human being in its own right. And as a human being, that baby’s human rights – morally and legally – can’t be trumped because of any earlier intention of the woman. The woman’s “right” to determine the fate of the pregnancy is extinguished once she is no longer pregnant and that child is living and breathing outside her body.
This isn’t an easy issue to discuss but we can’t avoid the tough stuff just because it’s difficult or confronting. We need nationally consistent laws that treat all newborns the same based on their innate human rights.
Watch Peta on Credlin on Sky News, weeknights at 6pm
And the Bandt just keeps on braying
Adam Bandt publicly asking the Labor Party to share power with the Greens is making all of the right’s Christmas dreams – Peter Dutton as next PM – come true, writes Joe Hildebrand.
Parliament like a football team without skilled players
If you were picking our parliament like a football team, most would not have their job, as we’d be picking players who have never played the football of life before, writes Vikki Campion.