What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Children Overboard issue develops

andrew flap

Bench
Messages
4,184
Source ABC on line today

Aide reveals children overboard advice

A former federal ministerial adviser has revealed that he told Prime Minister John Howard before the 2001 federal election that no children had been thrown overboard from a boat carrying asylum seekers in Australian waters.

Mike Scrafton, an adviser to then-defence minister Peter Reith, has written a letter to The Australian newspaper saying he had three telephone conversations with Mr Howard on November 7, 2001.

Mr Scrafton says he told the Prime Minister that a tape of the incident "certainly didn't support the proposition that the event had occurred".

He says he told Mr Howard "that no-one in defence that I had dealt with on the matter still believed any children were thrown overboard".

The adviser says he also told the PM that photographs released during the debate were not of children thrown into the water.

Mr Scrafton says he passed on the advice in three conversations with Mr Howard on the evening of November 7.

"During the last conversation, the Prime Minister asked me how it was that he had a report from the Office of National Assessments (ONA) confirming the children overboard incident," he said.

"I replied that I had gained the impression that the report had as its source the public statements of the then minister for immigration, Philip Ruddock."
Denial

But Mr Howard denies he was conclusively told before the election that the event did not happen.

A spokesman for Mr Howard says Mr Scrafton told him during two conversations that the video was inconclusive.

But he denies Mr Scrafton made any reference to the photographs or that no-one in defence believed the children overboard claims.

The spokesman also says Mr Scrafton made no mention of those two issues in a written statement presented to a Senate committee.

The day after Mr Scrafton says he spoke to the Prime Minister, Mr Howard told the National Press Club that his public statements on the issue were based on advice from his ministers.

He also quoted from the ONA report without revealing any advice from Mr Scrafton.

"On the 9th of October, I received an ONA report that read in part as follows: Asylum seekers wearing life-jackets jumped into the sea and children were thrown in with them," Mr Howard told the press club.

Another day later, the day before the election, Mr Howard told ABC Radio's PM program: "It seems to me that if it were definitely wrong, somebody from the Navy would have got in touch with my office or Reith's office or Ruddock's office some weeks ago and said, 'look fellas, it's up to you how you make this known but you should be aware that those original reports were wrong'."

Mr Scrafton says he did not testify to a Senate inquiry into the children overboard affair because he was not subpoenaed and because he was told cabinet had directed him not to appear.
 

millersnose

Post Whore
Messages
65,223
but this man claims they were not thrown into the water

perhaps they sent down divers to retreive them after the boat sank...
 

Anonymous

Juniors
Messages
46
Millers, generally when a boat is sinking, people end up in the water.
This is somewhat more plausible than people flying above the water.
 

Anonymous

Juniors
Messages
46
Usually when a boat is going down and another one pulls up nearby, it's usual for people to make a swim for it.

It's all speculation because we weren't there.

How do you think they got in the water?
 

mickdo

Coach
Messages
17,355
Trust Millers to completely ignore the new information and move the goalposts back to something he thinks he can argue about... never mind whole government lying about it thing :lol:
 

tommytomlin

Bench
Messages
3,238
That's a plausible scenario Millers. Pointless bickering though, because nobody was there.

But the fact is, the Government preferred to paint the refugees as evil child throwing queue jumpers to gain more public support for their expensive and short sighted Pacific Solution. The children were in the water. But they were in there because the boat was sinking, not because the asylum seekers/terrorists wanted them there.
 

millersnose

Post Whore
Messages
65,223
why was the boat sinking?

was it because they didnt want to be sent back?

or is boat scuttling impossible?

seems weird that the boat had its viniger stroke right when the Australian navy were right there

i think this is the salient point in this issue
 

millersnose

Post Whore
Messages
65,223
thats one point of view tommy

another is a bunch of queu jumpers scuttling their boat in a desperate grasp to get to australia
 

Jimbo

Immortal
Messages
40,107
A question for the left. Feel free to pass if you can't answer.

Do you agree that it is the kids' parents responsibility for them being in the water, thrown or otherwise?
 

mickdo

Coach
Messages
17,355
A question for the right. Feel free to pass if you can't answer.

Do you agree that the Government lied about children being thrown into the water?
 

Latest posts

Top