We have beaches…but they’re not very polluted, which doesn’t make bathing much fun at all.

You got beaches in Melbourne? I thought you just claimed the one’s in Geelong….

I wish I was joking. I really, really do.

Its a good thing I’m in a swimming team then!

Australia will have no capacity to house refugees when our own cities will be underwater.

Where there’s a will ($), there’ s a way.

Provided resources are allocated according to the anarchy of the market then your’e absolutely correct Nic.

However, with a little contingency planning….

And maybe spending some of our $22 Billion defence budget that we use to defend ourselves from…an Indonesia that uses three quarters of its defence forces on internal policing…or from New Zealand…or from…

$22 Billion!

I don’t see how that conclusion can be realistically rejected. It’s certainly not a “received truth in the green/left political sphere”, as Nic has so patronisingly asserted, but it is one of the logical outcomes of climate change. That is, if you believe in ACC then you pretty much must believe there will be refugees resulting from it.

Unless you start with the Peoples Front of Judea routine…

:-)

Green Left Weekly is the paper of the Democratic Socialist Perspective faction of the Socialist Alliance.

The ‘Socialist Alternative’ magazine is the publication of …Socialist Alternative!

These guys are studying it exclusively: http://www.each-for.eu/index.php?module=main

I await their findings.

The Greens article wouldn’t load on my third world internet. As for the 150 million figure, I totally disagree with that. Like I do with a lot of what he has to say.

The first and the fourth links that I posted expressly use the term millions (being 150 million and 10 million said by Bob Brown himself).

Bill seems to be a believer in climate change and has made repeated comments on it.

We need GM crops to cope with climate change:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/GM-crops-need-rethink-Heffernan/2007/03/07/1173166737789.html

Climate change threatens our security:
http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2007/s2050326.htm

Personally, I think that if you can ascribe a view to each of the main political parties on the left, you can say that it a view of the Left, even if it is not held by every single person who is leftwing.

I describe the ALP as a left wing party, but even if you exclude them I’ve shown that it applies to the Greens and Greenleft Weekly (the paper associated with Socialist Alternative).

None of which are organisations I belong to. And none of those links claim it will create “millions of refugees”. Yet another troll with an imagined view of “the left” making shit up.

I’m not going to get into a discussion on whether Labour is Left Wing or not, but you’ve entirely missed my point. Even if that’s the view of political parties with Left factions, or that are Left Wing, you still can’t legitimately ascribe that view to every single left-winger.

Moreover, it’s not a climate change issue as far as I’m concerned. It’s about bigots like Heffernan using something they probably don’t believe in anyway (ie climate change) to scream bloody murder about the reffos “swamping our country”. It’s the underlying prejudice disguised as “logic” and/or “reason” that I have an issue with.

I’ve provided links to show that it is the view of the Greens, Labour, Greenleft Weekly and a NGO. If that doesn’t cover the left in Australia, I can’t say who I have missed out. Happy to be corrected though, but I think that I’ve at least established that it is view of the political representatives of the majority of the left in Australia.

Nic, you can’t ascribe a view ad-hoc to an entire “grouping” of people and then a la Bertrand provide a few links and hope it stands up. Because one contrary view would knock it down.

The Watermelon left:
http://www.greenleft.org.au/2008/777/40054

The Greens
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,24553193-2682,00.html

Oxfam
http://www.oxfam.org.au/media/article.php?id=487

Labor
http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/we-must-plan-for-climate-change-refugees-labor/2006/01/05/1136387564679.html

The left don’t all think alike – but it seems to be a common enough view that millions of refugees will result from climate change.

Ah yes, because we all think alike. Are you going to do what Blair’s commenters do when they come here and crap on about how we “hate AmeriKKKa”, and then accuse us of being “immersed in American pop culture”? There are some more right-wing truths of the left for you.

Wah, I completely disagree. He would have let in the ones good at cricket.

Bolt, Blair et al must be gnashing their teeth in frustration. A perfectly good opportunity to dog-whistle on race and they can’t take advantage of it!

I think a more pertinent question might be, “Does Bill Heffernan really believe that climate change will create millions of refugees?”

Right-wing morons can’t read. Mostly, they just look at the pretty patterns the letters make, jab their fingers at a keyboard to make some pretty patterns on their ownsome, have a dribble in their drool buckets and go outside to chase the pigs.

It’s a simple life, but they sure gots a a talent for it. Yes’sum.

Howard had already lashed out at Asian migrants in the 1980s.

He took on the jingoistic rhetoric of Hanson, especially post-Tampa (i.e. ‘We will decide who comes to this country…).

His ministers, including Peter Costello and Fisher Price man Kevin Andrews both opined on the inability of migrants to ‘integrate’ and ‘assimilate’.

At the same time, yes, immigration into the country continued steadily, as cheap labour was needed to sustain Australia’s period of economic growth.

Don’t you believe that climate change will create millions of refugees? I thought that was received truth in the green/left political sphere.