Record number of days with rain...

Well, almost.
From what the news said last night that so far of the 23 days this month, 22 of them have had rain. It has also been one of the coldest Septembers in about 50 years, definitely the wettest in almost 100.

So, here I thought it was just me, and my imagination that there was so much rain, well it isn't. They are announcing 3 days in a row of sunshine though! I'm very excited about that as it is going to be a long-weekend here in Western Australia, the only one while I'm here. It is also the Perth Royal Show starting this weekend. I am happy to report I will be going on Saturday to watch the sheep sheering competition and see the cute cuddly alpacas and the cat show, rather than stay home and watch the Footy Finals with Mrs L. As much as Aussie Rules Football is interesting, I think the Perth Royal Show will captivate me a little more! :)

In regards to my research, I am most definitely feeling overwhelmed. I'm still at the beginning stages, trying to sort through the history of the issue, the different countries' stances, what current practices are in theory and practice and what it all means.

I am reading up on some articles that were written in the past 3 years about the subject here in Australia. The one I'm currently reading is about the values that the governmental decision makers hold to when deciding on the laws which govern immigration.

At the base of their values is the well being of the Australian people. So from a big picture or macro level, they are interested in keeping the people safe and happy. It is their belief that when there is plenty of work to go around, the Australian people don't mind immigrants coming in, though when jobs are slim, they're not so happy. So the powers that be feel they must walk a tight line, controlling the flow and type of people that come into the country. It is in Australia's economic interest to bring in people who are qualified in fields of demand here. That makes sense.

I do have a question though, aren't general labourers almost always in demand? I say this because further in the article, it talks about how refugees usually tend to make excellent employees due to their desperation. They have a lack of options, and so they have to make the best of their situation here and end up throwing "their heart and soul into anyone who will take them and they'll do their best to integrate [because] they are people who don't have a choice".

So if that's true of asylum seekers, then why is the perceived public opinion of them so bad? I don't know.

Another thing that was brought up by the ministers questioned for the article was the idea of limitations. They seem to feel that only a certain number of people can arrive into Australia and that if more money is diverted to asylum seekers, in particular boat people, less places or finances will be available to help other immigrants coming through other ways. I don't understand this logic, myself. Sure I can see that there is likely a budget for the immigration department and it can only go so far. That would bring me to want to use what resources are available more effectively. It is apparently costly to house people in detention centres. I'm wondering if it would be less costly to provide them with accommodations within the urban areas and grant them the ability to work while waiting for visas to clear. This would have them become tax paying productive members of the community, help ease the burden on the mental and physical health care (as being locked up in detention centres has been proven to cause mental health deterioration, as well as physical health problems)and the people could then afford to buy their own food, rather than costing the tax payers, yet again. With this kind of savings, and the lack of need of such elaborate detention centres, a great savings could be made to thus allow more people in, without costing the Australian people any more money. Eh, just a quick though, though it does nothing to work out the question of safety, and the principle of "queue jumping" and "fairness".

So I'm trying to figure out at the moment if I should take a big picture look at the situation, or if I should take a more micro stance and look at the treatment of the individuals in question.

I have a distinct feeling that what policies are written at the top level may get a bit altered by the time they get down to the individuals concerned. It sounds like the members of parliament are interested in everyone's best interest, in fairness and security for everyone, but it just sounds like playing telephone, the message gets jumbled somewhere in between.

Eh, to continue my research, if anyone has any comments, thoughts or suggestions, I'm eager to hear them as I feel it could only help me with my research, growth and knowledge!