Border control gulags have had their time

A heartfelt assent from me to everything Frank writes here. surely Turnbull and Shorten can have a quet cup of tea together and end this miserable, shaming busiess soon.?

And for the love of Mike, can we get above the pathetic whinge of accepting just 20,000 refugees as if that is the biggest number anyone can come up with? That message tells the other 60 million displaced people they are unworthy of any rights and that is depraved.

A "gulag" is a forced labour camp used punish and control political dissidents and others. Many prisoners did not emerge alive. It was intended that they should not. There is no excuse for using such a word in connection with any Australian prison. Ethics ?

Two years ago, Malcolm Fraser, said Australia's detention centres were "Soviet-style gulags" and called for a royal commission. "What has happened on Manus is not new, it has been going on for months and months," he said. "The [immigration] department has known that, and it's only public exposure that has brought it to light."

Never, ever will I allow anyone to get away with the lie that stopping refugees getting to real protection is a good thing like old white men do. It's a legal right for people to sail anywhere they please and ask to land, it's not up to us to impose our lies on the neighbours to out source our responsibilities.

I very much support the idea of more community sponsored refugees. This accurately reflects the community's true generosity instead of the government and opposition trying to outbid each other's compassion. What follows in this scenario is that the burden is lumped on to an unwilling, and potentially resentful, community. Fr Brennan has called Angela Merkel generous. However, neither she nor parliamentarians nor European bureaucrats are the ones who have to bear the brunt of this government largesse. It is the average German people who find their cities inundated with masses of people, ill-equipped to live let alone flourish in an alien culture. They do not have endless resources to clothe, feed, educate and care for the migrants. Better that people decide for themselves how many refugees they can settle. Yes, Marilyn, some of those 60 million displaced people will not find a place. But the citizens of host nations can only do so much or are only willing to do so much. Like it or not, that is the case.

Where can I access the full text of Fr Frank's address?

Nowhere in this piece did I see any attempt at compassion for refugees. Refugees from harsh and dangerous circumstances are not "summuglers." They ar people who risk their lives to survive and start over. Have you not seen the statistics that immigrants raise the economy because they are so eager to start over? This is a cruel attitude and disappointing.

This statement echoes my personal attitude to the whole detention issue. The use of the term "gulag" and the horror overtones that it conveys is very appropriate. Politicians who support this way of dealing with people who are victims of war and political upheaval should be ashamed of themselves. What do they think they have achieved? The whole approach was a legalistic way of dealing with people who did not meet specific entry requirements: go back to Square One and start seeing them as desperate people in need.

Totally agree. Come on Aussies and other immigrants let your government know how you feel about it. Australia was settled by immigrants and they should be sympathetic to other hopeful immigrants. Yours is a beautiful country and should be full of compassionate people not rednecks so prove it.

a cynical afterthought: It would be wonderful to see all the politicians and other vocal supporters of detention camps standing together and singing Frank Sinatra's song "I Did It My Way."

If not gulags, David, the fact that your fall-back term is 'prison' is in itself deeply disturbing, though unfortunately accurate. Perhaps no forced labour, but It's pretty clear that even our local centres are designed to 'punish and control '. It is sickening that this is how our government treats the most vulnerable people in the world-community who have come to us seeking refuge. The most appalling thing I've experienced of late is walking through the reception doors of our local 'prison' into the visitors' centre to the sight of a young mother, her six month old baby on her lap, and her six year old daughter skipping in childish play around her fully accepting this 'prison' as her reality. Don't stop with Nauru and Manus. Close the bloody lot!

Thank you Frank Brennan, this is what most people I speak to agree. Now that the boats have been stopped, why haven't those in detention been processed. Every church or person should be standing up for these individuals and sharing what we as a nation are proud of.

With Turnbull and Shorten and their cabinets apparently united in joint defence of the cruel status quo, it is really vital that community leaders like Frank Brennan, Julian Burnside, Rosie Batty and many others continue forcefully to point the way to our better selves. And Turnbull and Shorten must agree a plan to go forward together. Maybe they can summon back a followup report by Houston, Aristotle and L'Estrange to give them political cover to move forward together?

High time for an element of compassion to come into the way Australia treats refugees. Putting people in prisons/gulags/detention centres simply for the "crime" of wanting to live in Australia is simply cruelty and must end. We need to see other people as people and end our isolated island mentality (witness the disgraceful way that Troy Newman was treated by the government).

Like many other readers, I support the approach called for by Frank Brennan. There is no justification for continuation of concentration camps in Manus Island and Nauru for asylum seekers seeking refuge in Australia.

Couldn't agree more, Fr Frank. The time is long overdue that the detention centres were closed. The time to assess those seeking refugee status properly is also long overdue. Nobody, however, seems to offer a solution as to how those seeking genuine asylum and those seeking a better lifestyle under the guise of refugee status should be treated. They should certainly be treated with dignity and compassion and should be resettled in safety as soon as possible. The costs and resettlement program I believe should be an international effort, shared by all. To close our "gulags" why not transfer all current inmates to the international agency refugee camps in exchange for equivalent numbers of already assessed refugees awaiting placement in any one of a number of countries participating in refugee resettlement programs? Our financial outlays could then be redirected to housing and caring for the needs of those we take for resettlement. I suppose that would all be too easy though!

John Howard did, Julia Gillard didn’t, Tony Abbott said, Malcolm Turnbull hasn’t…and there we have it – politicians are to blame, but why did they opt for cruel solutions? Sadly, they responded to voters – not the compassionate or the thoughtful but those who by our silence allowed the mean-hearted to dominate the discussion. We’ve had leadership from Fr. Frank Brennan and Bishop Van Nguyen, who wrote “we seem to have come to believe that harshness and rejection will be enough to deter desperate people from their flight to safety.” However, how prominently have local churches sought a changed mindset about desperate refugees? Are church-goers challenged to stand up and be counted. I want to believe many clergy have made such demands, but how many have failed to do so? Inspired by today’s article, and encouraged by our clergy, let’s be heard in the pubs and clubs, the playing fields and picnic areas where voters – real people with real hearts – can hear us and challenge local Members to change policy. Wishful thinking won’t do it. Thank you, Fr Brennan, for your ongoing work – may its impact ever increase.

I agree with Frank. As a nation, we have prided ourselves on a 'fair go' for all people for many years. It is time to act now with compassion. Come on Malcolm, we need strong leadership. End these cruel camps of breeding grounds for mental illness. Restore our Aussie pride by doing the right thing.

Yes, as so many have commented, thanks! And thanks for [the great majority of] those who have backed Frank's stand. Those who have expressessed disagreement? Think again, slow, and hard, and perhaps do some close-up research by approaching those working with refugees still in detenttion, and their children, in our country. Also try to link up with people in communities - including those which are parish-based, and those already supporting those already released and stil-to-be-released into places near where we live, or where we have to travel a bit to do that connecting . Churches, in Australia - we need to hear a much stronger voice of support, and ecumenical and inter-faith backing for such efforts. I want to talk about it next Sunday, at my church - it doesn't need a CAPITAL 'C'!! - small one means we all take on some share in this challenge -to love, and show it! Lynne

I agree with you Fr Brennan. But aren't Manus and Nauru supposed to be part of the so-called deterrent? Therefore the fact the boats have stopped is no reason to shut them (on that perverted thinking). Isn't that why they will remain open?

If the boat arrivals and boat turnbacks are all 'operational matters' kept secret, why not resettle everyone in our offshore concentration camps in secret in Australia? Simpler and cheaper and win/win.

Well Nauru is supposed to be allowing detainees to go free to leave the centre. Hearing news from within the centre, however, a bus leaving the centre carries only 18 passengers to the township and it takes about 75 minutes to walk there. There is also a lot of paper work and delays in receiving permission to leave. Young female detainees have been raped outside the centre and may feel it is unsafe to leave. Many others can't leave because of disability and ill health. It seems they are just in a larger prison.

News Limited is reporting today: ‘The Federal Government is in final negotiations to send refugees from Manus Island to the Philippines, in a deal worth around $150 million.’ If the Philippines were to agree to take the 936 men from Manus Island, I would be pleased. I would be more pleased if they were brought to Australia, but neither the Coalition nor Labor is much interested in that solution. We keep talking about regional solutions and the importance of the Refugee Convention. Any regional solution has to build gradually, one agreement at a time. And the Philippines has always taken seriously its obligations as a signatory to the Refugee Convention. I think this is as good a result for these 936 as we could hope for at this time – far preferable to Cambodia.

So Frank, if you think the latest human trading crime is good for refugees when there are thousands of displaced people and refugees living on garbage dumps in the Philipines who pays for the whole of life mental health care after the mess we have created. The notion that racist old white men can trade and traffic brown people in the 21st century is sickening, or a member of the bar and the courts of our country to support the crimes is monstrous.

Marilyn, I have said that it would be better for the 936 detainees on Manus Island to be transferred to the Philippines out of detention, rather than remaining in detention on Manus Island. I have said that it would be better for them to be transferred to the Philippines than to Cambodia. I have said that I would prefer that they be transferred to Australia. But given that course is favoured by neither the Coalition nor by the Labor Party, I do not see any prospect of my first preference being met. So my preferences are: 1: resettlement in Australia; 2: resettlement in the Philippines; 3: resettlement in Cambodia: and 4: ongoing detention on Manus Island. Given that my first preference is unachievable, I opt for 2. What do you do?

How can we commit to taking 12,000 Syrian refugees with our present attitude to refugees/asylum seekers?

i don't think that a conversation about refugees can be separated out from a conversation about existing homelessness, abuse and poverty within Australia. I agree wholeheartedly with John Frawley's comments, and would add that actions to reduce Australian resentment on the refugee issue needs to be taken just as seriously. Otherwise, radicalisation from a sense of injustice will continue to occur within the underbelly of Australia by a seething swell of the "undeserving poor" born here. Perhaps talk/actions of help for refugees would be better received if accompanied by talk/actions of help for marginalised and under-served Aussies.