Asylum seekers may be housed at Inverbrackie (Woodside)

Anything!

Re: Asylum seekers may be housed at Inverbrackie (Woodside)

Postby cripple » Fri Nov 05, 2010 8:07 am

Squawk wrote:
cripple wrote:If it is really such a big issue, most commercial buses are licenced to carry 50+ passengers. I am sure the appropriate authorities could rustle up the 8 buses needed to evacuate the centre and drive the 30 mins out of harms way.


Cripple - no personal offence is intended here but that is the wrong attitude.

No one should expect that in an emergency such as a bushfire, help will be there when you call. Everyone has a responsibility to be prepared for any emergency - as best they can. The threat of bushfire is forseeable, as are many other threats. If you think it's as simple as "the authorities can just rustle up 8 buses", not only are you adopting a simplistic approach but the reality is, to do this requires resources being directed away from other priorities.

To see more about what I mean, check out this Kiwi campaign - it says it all.
http://www.getthru.govt.nz/web/GetThru.nsf/web/BOWN-7HG6JA?OpenDocument


I agree with what you are saying, especially in regards to people being prepared for an emergency in the best way they can be. Obviously for someone in a detention centre, the best way they can be prepared is limited by the circumstances they find themselves in and as as a result they probably should be handled in the same way as schools and hospitals are in such a situation. Who knows some bright spark at the CFS might look at this as an opportunity and train up some of these asylum seekers to be ready to help out in a fire and everyone wins.
Wherever you put these centres, there are going to be these issues and IMO they dont really give a valid reason not to locate the centre in that location.
cripple
League Bench Warmer
 
 
Posts: 1261
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:21 am
Location: Mexico
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

Re: Asylum seekers may be housed at Inverbrackie (Woodside)

Postby Sojourner » Fri Nov 05, 2010 10:22 am

The best way for the people that have to life in an asylum centre to be prepared for a bushfire, is not to be placed in an area that is at serious risk of it happening in the first place. Why place people in that situation that dont have the means to remove themselves from the path of a bushfire and to have to hope that a bus is sent for them? What bus driver should be expected to drive into a bushfire area under the condtions of a bushfire to remove people to safety? Why not simply house them in a secure area first? People seem to be forgetting all to quickly about what happened in Kinglake, we should not in any cirucmstances be exposing asylum seekers to that type of risk. Go and build a proper centre and do it properly for a change instead of always trying to take the cheapest and nastiest option as was done with the so called Southern Expressway for example.
Steamranger, South Australia's best ever Tourist Attraction, Treat Yourself, Let your Money Buy you Happiness!!!
User avatar
Sojourner
Veteran
 
 
Posts: 3745
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 7:25 pm
Has liked: 7 times
Been liked: 3 times
Grassroots Team: Ovingham

Re: Asylum seekers may be housed at Inverbrackie (Woodside)

Postby Gingernuts » Fri Nov 05, 2010 10:34 am

I'm sorry guys, but I'm not buying this argument.

It seems to me like you're trying to justify your "not in my backyard" attitude with feigned concern for their welfare.

"But they might die in a bushfire"

How very considerate and caring of you all.

Give me a break.
User avatar
Gingernuts
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 2823
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 2:39 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time
Grassroots Team: Langhorne Creek

Re: Asylum seekers may be housed at Inverbrackie (Woodside)

Postby Psyber » Fri Nov 05, 2010 10:39 am

Sojourner wrote:The best way for the people that have to life in an asylum centre to be prepared for a bushfire, is not to be placed in an area that is at serious risk of it happening in the first place. Why place people in that situation that dont have the means to remove themselves from the path of a bushfire and to have to hope that a bus is sent for them? What bus driver should be expected to drive into a bushfire area under the condtions of a bushfire to remove people to safety? Why not simply house them in a secure area first? People seem to be forgetting all to quickly about what happened in Kinglake, we should not in any cirucmstances be exposing asylum seekers to that type of risk. Go and build a proper centre and do it properly for a change instead of always trying to take the cheapest and nastiest option as was done with the so called Southern Expressway for example.
True enough - at least when the army were there they could be expected to fight the fires or truck themselves out.

As for cheapest and nastiest options, the desalination plant is the latest.
It is running on very expensive, but politically correct, so-called "green" electricity - so called because it is all mixed with "unclean" electrical energy and the only difference is the price you pay.
They could have built a Thorium fission plant on site that could have later also extracted Hydrogen for fuel from the water as part of the operation.
EPIGENETICS - Lamarck was right!
User avatar
Psyber
Coach
 
 
Posts: 12247
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:43 pm
Location: Now back in the Adelaide Hills.
Has liked: 104 times
Been liked: 405 times
Grassroots Team: Hahndorf

Re: Asylum seekers may be housed at Inverbrackie (Woodside)

Postby Sojourner » Fri Nov 05, 2010 1:18 pm

Gingernuts wrote:I'm sorry guys, but I'm not buying this argument.

It seems to me like you're trying to justify your "not in my backyard" attitude with feigned concern for their welfare.

"But they might die in a bushfire"

How very considerate and caring of you all.

Give me a break.


Ever been to Kinglake?
Steamranger, South Australia's best ever Tourist Attraction, Treat Yourself, Let your Money Buy you Happiness!!!
User avatar
Sojourner
Veteran
 
 
Posts: 3745
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 7:25 pm
Has liked: 7 times
Been liked: 3 times
Grassroots Team: Ovingham

Re: Asylum seekers may be housed at Inverbrackie (Woodside)

Postby Gingernuts » Fri Nov 05, 2010 1:32 pm

Sojourner wrote:
Gingernuts wrote:I'm sorry guys, but I'm not buying this argument.

It seems to me like you're trying to justify your "not in my backyard" attitude with feigned concern for their welfare.

"But they might die in a bushfire"

How very considerate and caring of you all.

Give me a break.


Ever been to Kinglake?


Ever been to Afghanistan?
User avatar
Gingernuts
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 2823
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 2:39 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time
Grassroots Team: Langhorne Creek

Re: Asylum seekers may be housed at Inverbrackie (Woodside)

Postby Rik E Boy » Fri Nov 05, 2010 1:41 pm

Gingernuts wrote:I'm sorry guys, but I'm not buying this argument.

It seems to me like you're trying to justify your "not in my backyard" attitude with feigned concern for their welfare.

"But they might die in a bushfire"

How very considerate and caring of you all.

Give me a break.


LOL. I was thinking the same thing Ginge. If you don't want em there because you reckon they are rag headed terrorists just come out and say so. There's a similar situation happening out at Northam (?) WA. One bloke reckons 'three metre fence, they are going to be jumping that fence, stealing my car and attacking my daughter and shooting through to Perth to blend in with their kind.

The last three words said it all. George W Bush would be very proud. War on Terror = I hope I've covered up the fact that my family's business assocaties don't get tied in with 9/11. And we all lapped up it big time.

regards,

REB
User avatar
Rik E Boy
Coach
 
 
Posts: 28588
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 12:55 pm
Location: The Switch
Has liked: 1773 times
Been liked: 1887 times

Re: Asylum seekers may be housed at Inverbrackie (Woodside)

Postby Gingernuts » Fri Nov 05, 2010 1:48 pm

While we're being good CFS captains and talking fire danger, lets have a little comparison:

Here we have Inverbrackie:
Inverbrackie.JPG
Inverbrackie.JPG (68.73 KiB) Viewed 546 times


Here we have Kinglake:
Kinglake.JPG
Kinglake.JPG (61.99 KiB) Viewed 555 times


Now I'm certainly no Fireman Sam, but I would suggest comparisons between the two are just a tad far fetched.
User avatar
Gingernuts
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 2823
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 2:39 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time
Grassroots Team: Langhorne Creek

Re: Asylum seekers may be housed at Inverbrackie (Woodside)

Postby fisho mcspaz » Fri Nov 05, 2010 1:57 pm

The more discussion I hear on this subject (I mean in general, not only on SAFooty :) ), the sadder I am to think that Australia is such an ignorant and subsequently xenophobic nation. I think maybe we always have been and all these platforms about multiculturalism are just a way of patting ourselves on the back while covering up our perennial ignorance, because no one, especially not the government, wants to address it head-on.

I am making generalisations, I know, but I assumed that most of the people from the hills were educated and well-informed on issues outside their own spectrum. But I am hearing, with disturbing regularity, residents of Woodside and surrounds voicing concerns of terrorism, children being fitted with bombs strapped to their bodies, and so on. Refugees are not synonymous with terrorists. They're people, the same as white f***ing Australians are people, and they're coming to Australia because their own country has become unsafe for them. It is as simple as that. Why should they be treated as criminals? Give me one good reason (i. e. nothing to do with terrorism, or land prices) why they should not be treated with kindness and acceptance.

No, I don't live in Woodside, and if I owned the house in which I live, its value would not be affected by the establishment of the Inverbrackie detention centre. :roll: But I wouldn't care if I did live there, or if a detention centre was proposed for my suburb. I think that these people would be a welcome addition to the community and I would want to make them feel welcome.

I do think that the Labor government has conducted themselves appallingly over this matter - I am amazed that the Woodside community was not consulted prior to the decision. I can understand why - I doubt too many would have been in favour of it - but the consequence of this secrecy is that there is a context for the more extreme and bigoted views of people. I think some would be saying 'Burn the reffos' whether they'd been consulted on the detention centre or not, but at the moment it looks like this has been sprung on people, so they're angry (and rightly so), and thus such views can be excused to an extent if not justified.
Hey Goose, ya big stud! Take me to bed or lose me for ever.
User avatar
fisho mcspaz
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 3042
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 5:33 pm
Location: Happy Valley
Has liked: 84 times
Been liked: 111 times
Grassroots Team: Mitchell Park

Re: Asylum seekers may be housed at Inverbrackie (Woodside)

Postby Rik E Boy » Fri Nov 05, 2010 2:04 pm

The community should have been consulted no doubt.

regards,

REB
User avatar
Rik E Boy
Coach
 
 
Posts: 28588
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 12:55 pm
Location: The Switch
Has liked: 1773 times
Been liked: 1887 times

Re: Asylum seekers may be housed at Inverbrackie (Woodside)

Postby Pottsy » Fri Nov 05, 2010 2:07 pm

Gingernuts wrote:While we're being good CFS captains and talking fire danger, lets have a little comparison:

Here we have Inverbrackie:
Inverbrackie.JPG


Here we have Kinglake:
Kinglake.JPG


Now I'm certainly no Fireman Sam, but I would suggest comparisons between the two are just a tad far fetched.

Funny stuff Gingernuts. Humour and an annoyingly good argument for the win!!
User avatar
Pottsy
Under 18s
 
 
Posts: 552
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 6:24 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

Re: Asylum seekers may be housed at Inverbrackie (Woodside)

Postby cripple » Fri Nov 05, 2010 2:25 pm

Sojourner wrote:The best way for the people that have to life in an asylum centre to be prepared for a bushfire, is not to be placed in an area that is at serious risk of it happening in the first place. Why place people in that situation that dont have the means to remove themselves from the path of a bushfire and to have to hope that a bus is sent for them? What bus driver should be expected to drive into a bushfire area under the condtions of a bushfire to remove people to safety? Why not simply house them in a secure area first? People seem to be forgetting all to quickly about what happened in Kinglake, we should not in any cirucmstances be exposing asylum seekers to that type of risk. Go and build a proper centre and do it properly for a change instead of always trying to take the cheapest and nastiest option as was done with the so called Southern Expressway for example.


No matter what happens and where people go, there is always going to be some sort of dangerous risk coming from somewhere. With the buses i was just proposing a basic idea, sure there are problems with it but i feel it is better then saying "no thanks, go somewhere else"
cripple
League Bench Warmer
 
 
Posts: 1261
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:21 am
Location: Mexico
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

Re: Asylum seekers may be housed at Inverbrackie (Woodside)

Postby fish » Fri Nov 05, 2010 5:22 pm

saintal wrote:
fish wrote:
brother noompsy 11 wrote:I think its Fu*** crap that they cum over here and get housing then get visas and looked after like kings its a disgrace we should look after people in our backyard before we take on more other problems ...They bring there religious rights here which there trying to brain wash us with they get me so b loody angry rrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.give it 10 years and they will turn something like broome or another town into a barb wire surrounding and it will turn into the mexican border all these immagrants trying to escape soon they will be taking your kids employment then what will make us think leave us alone

Oh deary me - this is exactly the sort of racial hatred and intolerance that I have said all along is at the core of the opposition to the Woodside proposal.


You really have a thing for calling my fellow townspeople racists dont you Fish? Whack a "Detention Centre" in any other suburban area/town with no prior thought paid to logistics and you'll have the same backlash.

Saintal my comments not only referred to the residents of Woodside but also to those opposed to the proposal from across the whole state and beyond.

You only have to read some of the shameful comments on the AdelaideNow website and on this forum to realise that racial hatred and intolerance are at the heart of the opposition to asylum seekers in general and the proposal to house them at Inverbrackie.

Of course not everyone is motivated by racism but I reckon the vast majority are.

The opponents of the proposal have scratched around to contrive every possible excuse to not have asylum seekers housed up there, but in the same breath suggest that the homeless should be housed up there instead! What is the difference? Something to do with the colour of their skin maybe? :-?

The opponents of the proposal continue to call asylum seekers “illegal”, even though they have been told time and time again that they are not. This demonisation of asylum seekers exposes the deep seated disdain for these people. Furthermore they concentrate their wrath on boat people despite the fact that their numbers are dwarfed by the arrivals by plane. What is the difference? Something to do with the colour of their skin maybe? :-?

One last point - the opponents of the proposal fret about the fire risk to the poor asylum seekers in Woodside but in the same breath suggest that they be housed at Baxter with its atrocious long term effects on the mental health of the residents not to mention that it means kids are behind razor wire. :shock:

In a strange way I prefer the approach of brother noompsy (although I disagree totally with what he says) who is upfront about his motivations rather than hiding them behind half baked excuses and a newfound concern for the homeless.
User avatar
fish
Coach
 
 
Posts: 6908
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 10:28 pm
Has liked: 190 times
Been liked: 48 times

Re: Asylum seekers may be housed at Inverbrackie (Woodside)

Postby fish » Fri Nov 05, 2010 5:24 pm

Rik E Boy wrote:The community should have been consulted no doubt.

regards,

REB

I disagree - consultation would have given the bigots and fear mongers a platform and microphone. Consultation would also divide and polarise the community even more.
User avatar
fish
Coach
 
 
Posts: 6908
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 10:28 pm
Has liked: 190 times
Been liked: 48 times

Re: Asylum seekers may be housed at Inverbrackie (Woodside)

Postby fish » Fri Nov 05, 2010 5:38 pm

Gingernuts wrote:Now I'm certainly no Fireman Sam, but I would suggest comparisons between the two are just a tad far fetched.

Spot on Gingernuts - I reckon the fire danger excuse is another red herring.

Inverbrackie is not located in a high bushfire risk area like most of the Adelaide Hills to the west. As your maps show, the Inverbrackie facility is located in the middle of open fields, irrigated pastures and irrigated grape vines. I also note the presence of three large sports fields which could serve as a muster area in the event of a fire threat.

On the other hand Kinglake is surrounded by bush on all sides. Not sure about the terrain but it looks pretty inaccessible.

The fire safety of the residents and staff at Inverbrackie certainly needs to be planned but it is clearly not the showstopper that the opponents of the facility want it to be.
User avatar
fish
Coach
 
 
Posts: 6908
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 10:28 pm
Has liked: 190 times
Been liked: 48 times

Re: Asylum seekers may be housed at Inverbrackie (Woodside)

Postby saintal » Fri Nov 05, 2010 7:16 pm

If the townspeople had kicked up a similar fuss when the military personnel were living there, then there would be no issue. However, to kick up a fuss when asylum seekers arrive and not when the military were there does make it sound like it is based on racism

Interesting point made yesterday. A few things spring to mind

A) The military personnel are doing a service for our country.

B) They contributed to the local sporting teams, drank at the local pubs, shopped at the local supermarket etc. I can’t see the 'imprisoned' immigrants having this opportunity. Serco are the mob running the centre. They are responsible for all procuring. I can’t see them utilising local services when they get things much cheaper in bulk from their existing suppliers. I do however acknowledge that the staff at the centre will be utilising the town’s services to a degree, hence growing business somewhat.

C) Few children lived in Inverbrackie, hence the impact on schooling was not significant. 80-200 will now be housed there. (the govt is still not sure how many?!)This has been a huge cause of concern for the local parents, and my gut feeling is that the original idea of sending them all to Woodside PS will not happen. It is not feasible.

D) The tiny town was obviously not branded a “Detention Centre”. Rightly or wrongly, there is a significant stigma attached to this. What do you think of when somebody mentions the suburb Villawood? If it stays out of the press and people outside the hills area forget it’s there this will be beneficial. The last thing we need (and I doubt it will happen given we’re talking about families) is protests, riots etc and constant negative media focus. (which is happening now due to the towns attitude..yes I see the irony)
SAFC- 60 years...
StKFC- 58 years..
User avatar
saintal
Coach
 
 
Posts: 5818
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 9:31 pm
Location: Adelaide Hills
Has liked: 371 times
Been liked: 464 times

Re: Asylum seekers may be housed at Inverbrackie (Woodside)

Postby Squawk » Fri Nov 05, 2010 10:24 pm

This discussion is going around and around in circles.

I posted a link earlier to "facts and myths" about assylum seekers.

IIRC I also posted some considerations about the security risks, comparing the visa overstayers who arrive by plane with those who arrive by boat. They are differing risks and threats that need to be weighed up.

As for comparing Kinglake and Inverbrackie in terms of bushfire risk, its another case of apples and oranges. The bottom line is that the greatest threat from a fire is not the fire front, but ember attack. When a large fire burns, embers are carried by the wind ahead of the fire front. After the fire front has passed, residual embers can ignite a building. So even if there are clearings directly around Inverbrackie, the threat of bushfire is not necessarily significantly reduced. The threat depends on a lot of things at any one time, including size of the fire, resources available to combat the fire, the terrain, the wind speed and direction, air and fuel moisture contents, etc.

Mustering the detainees in adjacent open space IS an option, but only a last minute, last gasp one. Again, it requires resources to facilitate - Serco, CFS, SAPOL, whomever.

Rather than look at individual considerations in isolation of one another, we need to see the big picture. In simple terms, it's something like this:

The Cwlth didn't consult. Why? Because the outcome wouldn't have been any different; because Baxter and Nauru are not politically palatable options for the current govt; and because the boats keep coming Christmas Island looks like a scene from the Vatican during a papal mass - ie thousands crammed in and no room for any more beds or tents. So they have to go somewhere, and because the Cwlth own Inverbrackie their view is that is a viable option and they will use it. (Same as Northam).

The other side of the coin is the risks that have been weighed up in making this decision. It comes down to likelihood and consequences. Terrorism? Bushfire? Community reaction? Health Needs? Education needs? Needs of the detainees? State Govt and Local Govt concerns? (And on the terrorism thing, you can be sure most of the Sri Lankans are Tamils, affiliated with the Tamil Tigers).

The bottom line is that the Cwlth has decided that whilst there are risks present, they believe the likelihood and consequences of those risks ever being realised is not far enough up the scale of their concern to warrant NOT using Inverbrackie.

IMHO I don't see this decision as a policy shift made with the needs of the detainees at the front of their minds. The reality is the govt cant cope any longer using existing resources, and had to find other options. Rather than fight the "Stop the Boats" campaign, these decisions of necessity have been cloaked as a compassionate approach that gives them a political 'point of difference' and aligns more closely with the Greens.

What would be interesting is if 400 Catholic people arrived by boat from Northern Ireland, where the IRA, INLA , Real IRA and Sinn Fein are all prevalent. Or from the Basque Region of Spain. I wonder if the current views of BOTH sides of this argument, and of the Govt, would be different then?
Steve Bradbury and Michael Milton. Aussie Legends.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRnztSjUB2U
User avatar
Squawk
Assistant Coach
 
 
Posts: 4665
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2006 3:00 pm
Location: Coopers Stadium
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 3 times

Re: Asylum seekers may be housed at Inverbrackie (Woodside)

Postby Gozu » Sat Nov 06, 2010 3:49 am

Tony Abbott has distanced himself from a renowned Holocaust denier after being photographed with him at a public meeting about the building of an immigration detention centre.

Fredrick Toben, who has been jailed in Australia and Germany for publishing anti-Semitic material and for declaring there were no mass killings of Jews during World War II, has claimed he and the Opposition Leader were close and "went back a long time".

Dr Toben was pictured standing with Mr Abbott during a community forum in the Adelaide Hills on Wednesday to discuss the building of a detention centre to hold asylum seeker family groups.


http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/wa ... ver-photo/
"The factory of the future will have only two employees, a man and a dog. The man will be there to feed the dog. The dog will be there to keep the man from touching the equipment" – Warren Bennis
User avatar
Gozu
Coach
 
 
Posts: 13852
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2008 3:35 am
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 681 times

Re: Asylum seekers may be housed at Inverbrackie (Woodside)

Postby Psyber » Sat Nov 06, 2010 1:41 pm

fisho mcspaz wrote: ... I am making generalisations, I know, but I assumed that most of the people from the hills were educated and well-informed on issues outside their own spectrum. ...
In the Hahndorf region it takes about 6 years to get accepted as local if your surname isn't German - well it did in the 1980s, and the Anglican Church is in "English St". ;)

Woodside and Inverbrackie are rural areas, not suburbs used to continuing change.
People in rural areas are generally less at ease with the sudden influx of groups of people whose family haven't been there for generations, regardless of where they are from.
So, some effort needs to be made to sell such ideas before putting them into action, unless your primary aim is to create a crisis and paranoia-fest, at which extreme views well be expressed by someone or other..
Any government Minister should know that.

I agree that fire risk in this region is less than that at Kinglake, or where I lived near Olinda, because in Victoria there is less cleared land as a buffer between the forests and the housing.
Nevertheless there is real risk - more than in urban areas, or in fully cleared pasture land.
I keep my home in the Stirling area well insured, and am prepared to lose the lot to save my life.
EPIGENETICS - Lamarck was right!
User avatar
Psyber
Coach
 
 
Posts: 12247
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:43 pm
Location: Now back in the Adelaide Hills.
Has liked: 104 times
Been liked: 405 times
Grassroots Team: Hahndorf

Re: Asylum seekers may be housed at Inverbrackie (Woodside)

Postby fish » Sat Nov 06, 2010 5:45 pm

Psyber wrote:People in rural areas are generally less at ease with the sudden influx of groups of people whose family haven't been there for generations, regardless of where they are from.
Why then are they so keen to get the homeless into Inverbrackie all of a sudden?
User avatar
fish
Coach
 
 
Posts: 6908
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2006 10:28 pm
Has liked: 190 times
Been liked: 48 times

PreviousNext

Board index   General Talk  General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

Around the place

Competitions   SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums   Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |