What About The Children?

[the_great_she_elephant]

I am amazed and disgusted that in all the indignation over what Gillian Triggs should or shouldn't have done or who said or didn't say what to her, not ONE SINGLE POLITICIAN  except, finally, Malcolm Turnbull, has commented in any way on the contents of her report..

She found that  over a 15-month period from January 2013 to March 2014, spanning both the Labor and Coalition governments  there were 233 recorded assaults involving children and 33 incidents of reported sexual assault. 

If these findings are true - and as far as I know nobody has so far disputed them -   then what is going to be done about it? Who had the duty of care? who is going to be held responsible. What measures are going to be put in place to stop this abuse happening in future?

Both Gillian Triggs and George Brandis are astute and comparitively wealthy adults able to instruct top  legal practitioners to protect their reputaions - but who is going to protect the safety of these children? How many more children have been abused since March 2014? Is a child perhaps being abused in a detention centre  even while you are reading this post? 

Surely to goodness after all that was learned from the Children In Care Royal Commission this report cannot simply be put in a "don't want to know" basket while both sides of Pariament try to gain political mileage out the motives of the Human Rghts Commissioner or the behaviour of the Attourney General.

At some point -though probably not in the lifetime of this government  or even  the one that follows it - there will inevitably be a Royal Commission into the treatment of children in detention centre. what do you imagine its findings are likely to be?

[Anonymous]

because majority of the detainees are

illegal boat arrivals and they're the ones

who are detained the longest ???

[vicr3000]

---

@polksaladallie wrote:

Trickle?       50,000 a trickle?

---

50,000 was when your beloved Labor / greens cocked up the system and opened the flood gates.

Arrivals by aircraft are a trickle conpared to those that came by illegal boat.

[Anonymous]

---

@polksaladallie wrote:

Trickle?       50,000 a trickle?

---

what are you talking about?

there are currently 54 detained that

arrived by air with no immigration clearance.

1635 detainees  arrived by boats

[***super_nova***]

---

@vicr3000 wrote:

He should have just binned the report and got on with life.

It's not like he is going to do anything about it.

---

It is too good an opportunity to sling some mud and deflect attention from the fact that he is on his way out, unless he manages to stir up some bleep, and terrify us into stop looking at what he is doing to this country.

And by the way, do you stop to consider what happens to those people who are in Indonesia who planned to try to get on a boat, and now knowing that they would end up in Manus, are stuck without income and future in Asia?  The people who got on the leaky boat, knowing the dangers, obviously felt that going is better option than staying.  That says a lot about the conditions they were leaving behind.

[polksaladallie]

---

@polksaladallie wrote:

Trickle?       50,000 a trickle?

---

I amend that figure.

THERE are enough illegal immigrants living in Australia to fill a large regional city, and nearly all of these 58,400 people arrive by plane.

November 21, 2011 .

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/illegal-immigrants-arrive-by-plane/story-e6frea6u-1226200568050

[vicr3000]

Julia

He didn't know that, because unlike you and I, they hadn't done the research to find out.

Think of the saving in $$$$ is we only had to detain 54 ???

[polksaladallie]

---

@*julia*2010 wrote:

because majority of the detainees are

illegal boat arrivals and they're the ones

who are detained the longest ???

---

No they are not.

[punch*drunk]

Imagine the trauma the poor little mites went through while their parents dragged them across the seas on a leaky boat past many other safe havens. Personally I think that in itself constitutes child abuse and yet nobody seem to be up in arms about that. By all means take the children from camps and place them in foster care here, but dont return them to their parents until they have proved suitability.

Any Australian parent that willingly risked the lives of their children would probably have them removed from their care until they could prove themselves.

[polksaladallie]

---

@vicr3000 wrote:

---

@polksaladallie wrote:

Trickle?       50,000 a trickle?

---

50,000 was when your beloved Labor / greens cocked up the system and opened the flood gates.

Arrivals by aircraft are a trickle conpared to those that came by illegal boat.

---

Wrong again.

[***super_nova***]

---

@daydream**believer wrote:

So whats the answer then?

Anyone that arrives in Australia as a refugee, who has kids with them, should be just let into the community, given a house and welfare to live on?

---

refugees are NOT GIVEN a house.  They are allowed to stay in a government accommodation for limited time (couple of months).  They get small allowance, lower than dole, but that all is still only a fraction of what it costs to keep a person in detention center.   They should be allowed to work, if they can get a job.