THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS ANNOUNCED IT WILL NOT SIGN THE UN GLOBAL COMPACT ON MIGRATION AND REFUGEES!

The Australian government has finally decided to walk away from signing   away our national sovereignty and control of migration and borders to the UN.

We applaud this decision for many reasons which we will detail below.  However, the Shadow Minister for Defence, Immigration and Border Protection, Richard Marles MP, would not rule out signing the same UN Global Compact for Migration if Labor wins the next federal election.   Clearly, voters must decide whether maintaining a safe nation, strong borders and managed migration’’ is preferable to relinquishing control to the UN, and experiencing unsustainable, undetermined and incompatible migration.

The UN negotiated the Final Text of a Global Compact on Migration in June 2018.   The United States pulled out of the process, and since then, Hungary, Austria, Poland, Croatia, Brazil, Bulgaria and other countries are now saying they will not sign it at the scheduled ceremony in Morocco on 10-11 December 2018.

The proposed Global Compact is an outrageous interference by the UN in the sovereignty and cultural identity of Western nation states.

It will end controlled migration and national borders.  It declares essentially unrestricted migration to be a “human right” and expunges the distinction between legal and illegal migration.  It does not distinguish between refugees and migrants and by rejecting the very notion of an “illegal migrant,” it makes it impossible for signing countries to deport illegal migrants.  Illegal border crossings will no longer be considered a crime.

We have already seen the ruinous results of the infamous decision by Angela Merkel to allow unrestricted migration into Germany and the EU, to uncontrolled migration of third world people whose cultural values and practices are not only incompatible but hostile to western values and freedoms.  Emmanuel Macron in France is pushing the same policies.  Sweden, through the same globalist/socialist ideology, is committing national suicide, and subjecting its women to an unprecedented rape crisis.

Mass immigration and multicultural propaganda, as being pushed now by the political elites and the United Nations, are falsely portraying unfetted immigration as inevitable and desirable.  Mass immigration is not a spontaneous phenomenon, but the product of a plan conceived around a table and prepared over decades, to completely change the face of Europe and the West generally.   This globalist ideology implements the plan developed by the Austrian diplomat Coudenhove-Kalergi in the 1920s to ultimately destroy the separate national identities of European nations through mass immigration of people of different ethnic and cultural values from the native population.   A more recent development not specifically foreseen by Coudenhove-Kalergi is the specifically Islamic program of hijra – migration to spread the religion of Islam and eventually dominate, then destroy the West’s Christian-based civilization.

Let’s look at some specifics of the Compact.

The Compact says in the Preamble, para 8, that “the positive impacts [of migration] can be optimized by improving migration governance”.  There is no consideration of possible negative impacts, and there is an assumption that Big Brother UN knows better than national governments where their national interests lie.  German MP Markus Frohnmaier of Alternative for Germany (AfD) has described the document as “open-border propaganda on steroids.”

Para 9 of the Preamble says “the challenges and opportunities of international migration unite us…”  This is globalist nonsense.   Currently, the UN is ordering President Trump to admit the cavalcade of Central American invaders – a colossal effrontery!  Mass third-world immigration into Europe has been an unmitigated disaster and the UN, influenced by globalists and Islamists, seems hell-bent on destroying Western civilisation.

In Australia, John Howard said a decade ago, with great authority and moral force, that

“We will decide who comes to this nation and the manner in which they come”

Australia should under no circumstances give away our sovereign rights to an unelected body of nations that is not representative of our nation.

Commitments in the UN Global Compact fail to make clear distinctions between regular and irregular migrants and between refugees and migrants.  Australia already has 28% of its people born overseas.  The Compact’s principle that “migration should be lawful” disregards Australia’s record of building a nation on orderly migration and spits in the face of our non-negotiable need to protect our borders.   The Australian electorate strongly endorsed Tony Abbott’s policy to Stop the Boats at the 2013 election.

The UN Global Compact subjects the migration policies of signatories to a series of requirements and to biennial reports to the UN General Assembly that assesses the migration policies of signatory nations against the requirements set down in the document.  Australia’s ratification would confront the nation with the prospect of the UN demanding major changes to our migration system, including the current detention regime for illegal migrants.

The particularly obnoxious Objective 17 requires governments to

“shape perceptions of migration by sensitizing and educating journalists and withholding public funding and material support from publications that promote intolerance of migrants.”

This is blatant social engineering of public attitudes towards migration to make them more positive – even though the experience of external “migration”, especially in Europe, is of replacement of the native population by third-world, culturally incompatible peoples.

It is vital that Australians put maximum pressure on our government NOT to sign it in December.

We already have enough interference in our migration policy by activists in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal who regularly overturn deportation decisions by the Home Affairs Minister, Peter Dutton.  This problem can be fixed by changing the composition of the AAT.  But if Australia signs the UN Global Compact, judges and magistrates will have open slather to rule in favour of undeserving migrants.  The corrupt UN community will also certainly press us to further increase our intake of refugees beyond the marked increases which have already taken place and put further strain on our infrastructures

The fact is, the overwhelming flood of refugees is coming from the Islamic world.  The UN Global Compact does nothing to redress the conditions in that unstable and unsafe region of the world; it merely relocates the problems, to the West.  This is incredibly dangerous to us.

The agreement sets up four yearly global refugee forums, with the first one slated for next year.  The forums will enable states to make pledges of financial and technical assistance during refugee crises, as well as commitments about refugee resettlement places.

One issue we already have is the wilful destruction by asylum seekers of documentation certifying their identity – a key element in control of migration.  Objective 4 action f  prescribes that absence of migrants’ nationality will not be a constraint.  So how are we going to check whether a claimant has a terrorist background?

Objective 5 of the Compact is “Enhance availability and flexibility of pathways for regular migration“ Indiscriminate migration is presented as an absolute good and the human rights of the native populations totally ignored.

Objective 7, action a  calls on signatories to “review relevant policies and practices to ensure they do not create, exacerbate or unintentionally increase vulnerabilities of migrants, including by applying a human rights based, gender- and disability-responsive, as well as an age- and child-sensitive approach.”  In practice, this means that our existing legal framework will have to change to accommodate migrants ‘Sharia demands and put further pressure on our Health services

Objective 7, action b recognizes Islam (“members of ethnic and religious minorities“) as a religion and therefore requires protection of Muslims’ human rights to be done according to Sharia.

Anti-discrimination law has already become a major problem for the human rights and freedoms of our own majority – as experienced with the Australian Human Rights Commission and 18C of the Racial Anti-Discrimination Act attest.  The Compact’s Objective 11, action f requires us to “review and revise relevant laws and regulations to determine whether sanctions are appropriate to address irregular entry or stay and, if so, to ensure that they are proportionate, equitable, non-discriminatory, and fully consistent with due process and other obligations under international law.”  This means “discrimination” becomes a tool to argue in favour of any migrant.

Objective 15, action e facilitates Sharia-compliant health service: “Incorporate the health needs of migrants in national and local health care policies and plans, such as by strengthening capacities for service provision, facilitating affordable and non-discriminatory access, reducing communication barriers, and training health care providers on culturally-sensitive service delivery …”  Sharia practices like refusing to scrub with alcohol are a menace to health and hygiene in hospitals – as is the refusal of Muslim men to be treated by, or respect female doctors and nurses.

Objective 16, action c secures family reunification, thus enlarging migration still further over time. Our migrant intake is already at unsustainable levels and this puts further pressure on an already over-loaded’ system.

Objective 17,  para 33 forbids any critical thinking towards migrants’ behaviour, and strongly condemns criticism:  “We commit to eliminate all forms of discrimination, condemn and counter expressions, acts and manifestations of racism, racial discrimination, violence, xenophobia and related intolerance against all migrants in conformity with international human rights law.”  This is particularly dangerous to both women and girl’s safety, and national security. Too bad if you don’t like female genital mutilation, polygamy, child marriages, forced marriages, violence toward women and gays, intolerance of non-Islamic religions, violence as the way to solve conflicts, and rejection of Western pluralist democracy!

It gets worse.  Objective 17, action a targets and condemns free speech, making migrants by default innocents, and victims.  This obliges signatories to “enact, implement or maintain legislation that penalizes hate crimes and aggravated hate crimes targeting migrants, and train law enforcement and other public officials to identify, prevent and respond to such crimes.”  This is exactly the sort of excessive overreach we already see in the United Kingdom with the persecution of political activists like Tommy Robinson and Jayda Fransen who defend the cultural identity and community safety of the native British.

And now, shades of Orwell, Objective 17, action c calls for government control over mass media, censorship in reporting, and requires no facts to be reported, but migration to be portrayed as only positive, while leaving other media with no support and funds.  This objective reads  “Promote independent, objective and quality reporting of media outlets, including internet based information, including by sensitizing and educating media professionals on migration-related issues and terminology, investing in ethical reporting standards and advertising, and stopping allocation of public funding or material support to media outlets that systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants, in full respect for the freedom of the media.”   Freedom of speech is already under threat in many Western nations. Who is to judge what constitutes intolerance, xenophobia and racism? The control of the media is characteristic of totalitarian regimes, in this case encouraged by a totalitarian UN.

Objective 17, action g requires migration to be promoted in the context of electoral campaigns!  “Engage migrants, political, religious and community leaders, as well as educators and service providers to detect and prevent incidences of intolerance, racism, xenophobia, and other forms of discrimination against migrants and diasporas and support activities in local communities to promote mutual respect, including in the context of electoral campaigns.”

It is vital that Australians keep maximum pressure on this and any future government to NEVER sign such a dangerous document. We believe Australia has dodged an uncontrolled and unsustainable migration bullet!

 

 

Author:

David Truman