The laugh till you cry election

The rate of boat arrivals and sinking vessels, may have slowed for a while, but as a nation we are sinking deeper into the morally dank waters of a cruel policy. Perhaps we all need to ask, how many votes the lives and souls of persecuted people are worth? How many men women and children can be sacrificed on the altar of our quest for a sense of security, or, in election speak: certainty?

Kevin Rudd has revealed that they are worth a lot to him on the market of sacrificed ideals, and that he would do almost anything to get re-elected. He has bartered their well -being and human rights for the hope of regaining his own tenure. However Tony Abbott is now demonstrating that no matter how low the ALP go in their asylum seeker policy, he can go further into the mire

Abbott is prepared to do 'what ever it takes'. Not only will he stop the boats and turn them back, he will get tougher upon the 30,000 asylum seekers currently in Australia on bridging Visas. In the first debate Abbott has claimed on behalf of the coalition. " We invented offshore processing" Which is rather like claiming to be the master of diabolical methods.

The implication is. Don't try to outdo us, in 'the tough on refugees game'.

When I first came as a psychologist to Woomera Reception and Detention Centre and observed the situation, I found myself laughing hysterically in disbelief. I was struggling to describe what I had experienced to pro bono lawyers, in my first days in the detention, and as I called it the deception centre. I was in a Kafka novel; as though it wasn't happening in reality.

Some of the world's most vulnerable people are now hearing that they will be placed on three year protection Visas at best, if they are found to be genuine refugees. They are to be assessed by a single immigration department bureaucrat. There is to be no right of appeal. In three years time the countries they have fled can be 'deemed' to be safe for return. There has been evidence that many sent back in the past, to supposedly safe countries of origin, have been returned damaged and to dubious safety.

But this latest aberration in refugee policy, only exposes the absence of moral platforms in this current bid for the prize of government. There has been an outcry from human rights advocates, but these have probably been factored in as 'increasing cut through' and spreading the message. But as Tim Costello chief executive of World Vision reminds us. Our own humanity is a casualty of repugnant asylum politics.

Electioneering is seldom pretty. The tradition of identifying marginal electorates, the ones your party can't afford to lose, and the ones you need to regain, then throwing shameless bribes flattery and incentives, in their direction, is old hat. A hospital refurbishment here, a tax cut there, money for an industry that employs a lot of crucial voters, paid parental/mummy leave.

And for the last decade and longer we have witnessed that old standby strategy of demonising or putting down a group such as the poor, the homeless, the unemployed, migrants and refugees, and others supposedly living off the hard work and good nature of true Australians. Ah yes it has all been done before.

Anglican Agencies have taken an unusual step, of commenting on the latest Coalition announcement on refugee policy. They have declared "It is not our habit to comment in the middle of election campaigns, but today's announcement is so appalling in its lack of compassion that we cannot remain silent."

But the ALP and LCP electioneering protagonists seems unmoved by such protest. Scott Morrison has retorted that he won't be put off by threats of High Court Action that will challenge the new processing regimen he defends so vigorously.

But should we be crying or laughing ? This week's summary of political gaffes, show that we can laugh at, if not with, our Politicians. The coverage in week two ranged from malapropisms such as Abbott's "suppository of wisdom", to inappropriate and ludicrous comments that reached a world wide audience. Perhaps the electorate is not listening, just laughing.

Walkley Award winning cartoonist First dog on the moon offers us the consolations and wisdom of satire and has dubbed this the "we're not them and they're not us election" He declares "I've known deep fried eggplant with more compassion than any of these petulant robots" Exposing the rhetoric as "Just trust us we're not them and they're not us"

This paper thin espoused policy difference was evident in the 7.30 Report as Tony Burke and Scott Morrison 'debated' with Leigh Sales, who asked rhetorically. Given so much common ground, what is the single biggest point of difference between you on refugee policy?

To this observer, the Coalition seem meaner, but look far more zealous [although it should be noted, this does not give them sex appeal] There was a detectable difference in the body language. Morrison managed his characteristic thin smile and Burke appeared distinctly less enamoured, enunciating refugee policy, than Morrison. Burke failed to look at his opponent, perhaps not enjoying the mirror image analogies.

Only the Greens dare to be different and to stand for compassion for refugees and the implementation of the recommendations of the Houston Panel on Asylum Seekers

But the crowning comedic achievement of The 2013 Election must be its recognition on the American Daly Show

But should we be crying rather than laughing ? Early in the campaign the Government and the Opposition seemed to agree that this election would not be fought on moral humanistic or justice imperatives. The word compassion was expunged, and Rudd as though imploring the opposition leader to behave like a gentlemen, declared that he wanted to make nice with politics. Notably Abbott has since challenged Rudd to 'be a man' and not preference the Greens. The campaign thus got off to a puerile beginning. In such a barren terrain, what hope is there for any real scrutiny of policies, or for the interrogation of intent?

Tony Abbott has signalled that if current funding of his policy of Direct Action on emissions fails to meet the modest and inadequate targets currently in place,[5 per cent reduction by 2020] he won't go over his budget. So the future of our children and the planet is a concern outside the scope of this election for the old parties ? Shadow Climate Change Minister Greg Hunt has regected The Climate Institute's findings on the Direct Action funding shortfall as, 'silly' Oh surely he jests. But no he is deadly serious while ignoring the shortfall of $ 4 billion in the LCP budget for Direct Action

There is a distinct difference between the main parties on Climate Change, at least the ALP has a viable policy, to reduce emissions by pricing carbon,but this reality has been drowned out by the latest attack on refugees and the flurry that this engenders. Nothing to see here folks, move on, it's just the planet dying by the wayside.

Laughter and satire are psychological and emotional mechanisms that can help people cope with difficulties. Gallows humour has been a defence mechanism for oppressed people who have lived though, or who are facing a horrible reality.

Oscar Wilde is reputed to have said on his deathbed. "This wall paper and I are fighting a duel to the death. One or the other of us has to go." Pretty damn witty.

But although this election has been shaping up as ludicrous and ridiculous, there are important life and death outcomes at stake. The satirists are warning us to pay attention.

Meanwhile refugees are being made to suffer [unnecessarily], in our name.

There is no purpose in this other than the desire and egos of certain people seeking to get elected.

Abbott who doesn't believe in climate change [ all that much], kisses the very babies whose collective future he is betraying. There is a joke in the irony of that somewhere, but it feels more appropriate to weep.