It won’t be a popular decision with globalists.
But Prime Minister Scott Morrison stood firm on the need for Australia, and Australia only, to determine who comes into the nation. And so Australia joined Austria, Switzerland, Italy and Bulgaria to abstain from voting as the UN General Assembly endorsed a sweeping accord on migration.
Not the unanimous approval the UN was hoping for
As AP reports, the UN-led Global Compact for Migration is the first international document to be dealing with the current worldwide migration issue.
It sought to provide more flexibility for migrants in the hopes that it would improve their likelihood of finding work.
But at the same time, the compact pushes an authorial crack down on illegal and dangerous people-moving that’s still a major concern for asylum seekers across the globe. Human smuggling has indeed become a worldwide industry.
That certainly sounds like two different birds that can’t be taken care of with just the one stone…
And yet, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres is willing to accept the compact with open arms, believing it moves the world closer ‘toward humane and sensible action to benefit countries of origin, transit and destination as well as migrants themselves’.
‘It calls for greater solidarity with migrants in situations of appalling vulnerability and abuse.
‘And it highlights the imperative of devising more legal pathways for migration, which would also help to crack down on trafficking and exploitation.’
Ultimately, the compact was endorsed by 152 votes in favour. However, thankfully, it isn’t legally binding.
And it didn’t get the same level of approval which the first stage of the compact received, at a conference in Marrakech, Morocco, earlier this month.
The US, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Israel and Poland were the five countries who voted against the compact.
Scott Morrison placed Australia alongside the other four abstainers in the vote, refusing to sign the agreement which his government helped draft, for the final product appeared too vague for ScoMo’s liking.
He said back in November this year:
‘It doesn’t distinguish between those who illegally enter Australia and those who come the right way.
‘I would never allow something to compromise our borders, I worked too hard to ensure that we weren’t in that position.’
Luckily, our Prime Minister also spotted those two conflicting birds, and the inability of this compact to sort them both out. And a few others have spotted some inconsistencies as well.
Inconsistencies in compact lead to scepticism
Guterres revealed at the migration conference that ‘more than 60,000 migrants have died on the move since the year 2000’ and that this troubling statistic is ‘a source of collective shame’.
And yet, as AP reports, the compact insists that ‘the majority of migrants around the world today travel, live and work in a safe, orderly and regular manner’.
So understandably, there’s been audible scepticism from some countries, including our own, as to the exact intentions of the compact.
The US believe that the compact is trying to ‘globalise’ the migration process. And this in turn would penalise the sovereignty of individual countries — a reality that Trump and ScoMo are equally insistent on avoiding.
Of course, those who support the compact reiterate its non-binding nature, and that every country remains sovereign and in charge of its borders and migration policy.
But we only have to look at recent history to see how naïve such acceptance is.
UK’s divorce deal — and the never-ending trouble coming from that agreement — is just one of many that comes to mind.
Or, closer to home, us Aussies had the economic blackmail from Brussels over the Paris climate agreement.
Free Report: Why Australia’s three-decade, recession-free ‘miracle economy’ is nothing more than a ticking timebomb. Download now.