‘Deporting refugees is not the Spirit of Australia’, crowdfunded billboards tell Qantas
A series of mobile billboards targeting Qantas have been launched today, calling on the Australian-owned airline to stop deporting refugees.
The billboards, which have all been crowd-funded by members of global consumer group SumOfUs, take aim at the airline’s ‘Spirit of Australia’ tagline, arguing “deporting refugees is not the Spirit of Australia.”
One of the mobile ads running in Brisbane and Sydney
Launching concurrently with Qantas’ AFR 100 Women of Influence Awards, the mobile campaign aims to get Qantas to say no to deporting refugees like many other airlines.
The billboards feature the Australian-born daughters of Tamil asylum seekers Priya and Nades, who were taken from their home in Bilolea, Queensland, to an immigration detention centre in Melbourne.
The ads, which have been created by a freelance creative and commissioned by SumOfUs, are set out as mock Qantas ads and use the brand’s logo and tagline.
“Deporting refugees is not the Spirit of Australia. Qantas doesn’t have to deport refugees. Other airlines are saying no. It’s time Qantas does too,” the ads state.
A Qantas ad
Nick Haines, senior campaigner at SumOfUs, said in a statement: “Qantas executives and shareholders have the opportunity next Friday to be on the right side of history. They should take it.
“Australia’s refugee policy has been condemned by every major human rights body in the world.
“Why Qantas would want to continue to be an active enabler of that policy – particularly when it has taken such strong positions in the past on issues like LGBT rights, is baffling.”
Responding to the ads, a Qantas spokesperson said in a statement to Mumbrella: “We appreciate that this is a sensitive issue. The Government and courts are best placed to make decisions on complex immigration matters, not airlines.”
Linkedin
Whilst it’s govt policy, it is the spirit of Australia.
If it’s not Qantas, it’ll be the army.
Play the ball, not the man.
User ID not verified.
I don’t think this issue is with Qantas. It seems more of a government policy issue in how they vet deportees.
If someone is a violent criminal/migrant deemed to be deported then in all rights they should be deported.
It seems to me that the issue here is that people aren’t happy with the less fortunate, non criminalistic people being deported however who are Qantas to declare who they seek fit to deport?
Right argument aimed at the wrong party.
User ID not verified.
While yes, it is a government issue.
The national airline making a clear statement that they refuse to play a part in these terrible deportations can play a big role in changing that law.
User ID not verified.
Good use of advertising. Maybe Qantas could trot out a wee video with Hugh Jackman on a beach at Manus Island…
Qantas needs to make a REAL stand.
User ID not verified.
QANTAS played a key role in the SSM debate and very clearly put forward their POV
The comment “We appreciate that this is a sensitive issue. The Government and courts are best placed to make decisions on complex immigration matters, not airlines.” could be have been changed in the SSM debate to:
“We appreciate that this is a sensitive issue. The Government and courts are best placed to make decisions on complex marriage matters, not airlines.”
But it wasn’t, so interesting to see how they don’t have a social conscience about this issue? Creates problems when you step out on one issue, but shirk away from another Alan Joyce & co…
User ID not verified.
What “other airlines are saying no”?
User ID not verified.
Plenty:
“In June in the UK, Virgin Atlantic said it would no longer assist the home office in deporting people classed as illegal immigrants, after growing unease over the wrongful removal of members of the Windrush generation to Caribbean countries, despite their status as British citizens.
In the US, airlines including American, Frontier, Southwest and United airlines have refused to carry immigrant children being separated from their families under that country’s new “zero tolerance” border policies. Pilots on Germany’s national carrier, Lufthansa, have repeatedly refused to fly asylum seekers to countries where they may face danger.”
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/aug/09/qantas-and-virgin-pressured-to-refuse-to-take-part-in-removal-of-asylum-seekers
User ID not verified.
Totally agree,Rob….a most logical opinion
User ID not verified.
This is a vexed question. People smuggling as a vile trade does need to be stopped and our government has achieved that. However, the price genuine refugees have paid in our governments fervour to make sure the world learns these people will never get to Australia, is appalling. In keeping children in the conditions of off shore centres, as I understand them, is the perpetration of another evil. It is well documented that children growing in situations of traumatic stress will, in the future, develop some form of mental illness and/or personality disorder. Moreover, they will be at a much greater risk of physical illness such as heart attack and stroke. If anyone does not believe this, just look up the ACE study on the internet. Those refugee parents were desperate and in danger and they tried to achieve a better life for their children. Instead, the children have had the potential of a good future, damaged, if not destroyed. I do not believe we can turn a blind eye. It is people power that may create change for these children’s future as the government remains committed to their insistence that they must never come to Australia or get a chance to come in through the back door of New Zealand down the track. I understand and respect their determination but should it be a little more flexible? As I said, the situation is vexed as we do not want to encourage the people smuggling business. I also believe deportation should continue to be available for immigrants whose behaviour is criminal or dangerous to our society. We need a compassionate framework that is selective, to assist those who are being harmed by our policy, especially children. Maybe that is where QANTAS can make a stand. We should never return people to danger, no matter what our policy.
User ID not verified.
. . there is enough
– if we were collectively (internationally) focused on it, we could feed
all the people on the planet over night.
– and the goodwill generated with such a gesture would reverse
climate change (we are more intimately connected with the weather than we realise).
. . the very same energetic applies to refugees.
Please put yourself in there shoes.
It doesn’t matter what the motivation or justification – sending them back is cruel.
. . The people of the world have good hearts & if you fear they don’t you are
responsible for creating it.
blessings & peace for your day
User ID not verified.
Your comments Gwenyth are worth reading and sums up all the dilemmas facing all of us. However we need to rectify the Nauru and Manus Island situations. We cannot continue to keep refugees and their children in detention for long periods of time, as the results to their physical, emotional and mental health are dreadful. Everyone needs to have a future that they can plan and live in – empowerment to make their own decisions. In essence these detained people are living in Australia’s Guantanamo Bay. I hope and believe that Australians and their governments, corporations will make humanitarian decisions to enable our detainees to have a future. QANTAS can make a decision not to be involved in deportation of non-criminal people.
User ID not verified.
Yum
User ID not verified.