Quote:




"Here’s Gemma’s list of complaints, with retorts that should be obvious but apparently (based on the gullible readers in the comments) aren’t. (The Tele of course publishes nothing but the most generic responses from the Government, leaving readers guessing as to the explanations.)

    “Food hampers… of bread, butter, milk, eggs, other “essentials” and cleaning products.” – you mean that when they arrive there’s food for the first night since they are starting with nothing and might arrive too late to buy food or might not have received any monetary assistance yet? What else are they supposed to do?
    “Everything from beds” – is that even considered optional in a dwelling fit for human habitation? I suppose we could make the refugees buy their own beds and then move them in, rather than the beds being fixtures of the accommodation for future tenants as well, but I doubt that would be cheaper.
    “fridges” – what are they supposed to use? An ice-chest?
    “mattresses” – I love that this is listed separately from “beds”
    “and lounges” – THERE ARE PLACES FOR SITTING?!?!
    “to an alarm clock radio” – Wow.
    “clothes hangers” – Good thing this one was buried in the middle of the list, eh Gemma?
    “and containers for biscuits” – if these are the best examples of “luxury” and “waste”, Gemma’s really reaching. It only works as a long list in the hope that the reader will want at least one of the items on it and therefore feel envy at it being GIVEN to someone else.
    “It includes a television at a minimum size of 53cm.” A big TV is 52 inches. 53 cm is less than 21 inches, and can you even buy them smaller than that? Meanwhile, what homes don’t have a television? Even if you were to go bankrupt, you would be allowed to keep a television set.
    “Families with a baby can access a $750 pack of basic supplies.” How’s that made up? From Gemma’s efforts so far, I don’t think she’s earned any kind of suspension of disbelief.
    “Phone and electricity connections are also paid for.” Like at any rental property.
    “free doctors’ visits” – they’ve got no money, what exactly are you suggesting? That if they get sick they shouldn’t get medical care? And every DT reader is also entitled to free doctors’ visits.
    “dental care” – as above, except that in this country we still haven’t managed a national dental care scheme, and if DT readers keep voting for the Liberals, it doesn’t look like we ever will. Not “aspirational” enough.
    “pharmaceuticals” – you mean like anyone else with a healthcare card who needs medicine but has no money?
    “education” – is Gemma suggesting that we should stop educating poor children?
    “payments of up to $433.25 a fortnight” – “up to”. So $216 a week, maximum. I’m not sure which Centrelink payment that is, but (a) it’s available to Australians, and (b) it’s less than the already below-subsistence NewStart.

Basically, a list of basic items beaten up to sound luxurious in order to provoke envy and resentment from people who haven’t thought how their own lives could be misrepresented in exactly the same way, if the tabloid wanted to smear them.

You might hope that any reasonably intelligent adult with a modicum of common sense would be able to see through the manipulation.

If you have managed to maintain this hope, this confidence in the good sense of your fellow Australians, I’d suggest not reading the Daily Telegraph comment thread to Gemma’s beatup. Retain your faith a little longer."


http://blogs.crikey.com.au/purepoison/2012/02/17/dt-exclusive-government-providi...

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Feb 17^th, 2012 at 1:00pm:


I have no problem accepting you are telling the truth if you can provide some proof.....What Minister for instance and where did he get his or her information.....Surely this must be reported somewhere besides 2GB???

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 17^th, 2012 at 1:07pm:


Didn't hear the program myself Phil.
I knew that this was old news because 6 months ago I saw a program on the ABC where they were interviewing sailors from Border Protection Command in Darwin, who spoke about the money belts wrapped around the waists of boat arrivals when they come aboard the patrol boats.
The money is counted, logged and handed back.
I have no reason to believe naval personnel were lying to the cameras.

Whole journalistic article by Gemma Jones is full of Misinformation. Beware of the Heartless. Shame her article didnt include that Surely it’s better value for money to invest on a once-off basis less than $10,000 per family  housing asylum seekers in the community- than to spend each year a minimum of $70,00 as a detainee !




Mistake- $137.317  a detainee.

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Feb 17^th, 2012 at 1:18pm:



Surely the Daily Telegraph the Australian or the Bolt would be all over a story like this if it was true.....If asylum seekers are coming to Australia with tens of thousands of dollars strapped to their bodies I am sure it would be reported somewhere!!!

I will have a search.......i

No nothing???

philperth2010 wrote on Feb 17^th, 2012 at 1:32pm:

OK, just sit back in the corner then... i'll get you cookies and milk.

Yes the Libs started the project, back when we had border protection. Pacific solution.. the boats stopped coming. But that's not the case now is it? the government has grown the people smuggling industry into a multi billion dollar industry. All at Australia's expense.. Yet we do not even look after our own.
You know we have supplied more new beds to boat people then we have our own public hospitals??

Criticism should be based on fact !