The headline’s a cheap shot (no pun intended) but as a naturalized Australian I think I can get away with it. Australians have something of a reputation as a hard-drinking crowd, but now it seems the wildlife are getting in the act. Darwin’s red-collared lorikeets are literally falling out of the trees exhibiting the classic symptoms of inebriation stumbling around on the ground and crash-landing when they attempt to fly. Subsequently, they then also exhibit hangover-like characteristic such as light aversion, grumpiness, a desire to sleep it off and a penchant for comfort food. Scientists are unsure if it is a certain ripened fruit that is causing the issue or a virus of some description, but in Darwin its raining lorikeets.

The staggering gait, the mood swings and the headaches will be familiar to anyone who has indulged in a big night out. But in Australia’s northernmost city it is not the people who are behaving like drunks, but the native parrots, which are falling out of the sky.

Darwin’s red-collared lorrikeets are suffering from a puzzling condition, with symptoms strikingly similar to those that accompany inebriation. Hundreds have been treated in animal hospitals, where they are fed sweetened porridge and fresh fruit – the avian equivalent of a hangover cure.

In recent weeks the brightly coloured birds have been observed falling out of trees, stumbling around the streets and crash-landing when they attempt to fly. Those recovering in hospital are said to be dishevelled, disoriented and grumpy. Above all, they seem to shun bright lights and to experience an overwhelming desire for a good lie-down.

“They sit on the floor of the cage and rest their heads on the side,” said Lisa Hansen, a veterinary surgeon at the Ark Animal Hospital in Palmerston, near Darwin. “Or they curl up in the corner and hide under the paper and block the rest of the world out.”

Out of their tree: virus blamed as drunken parrots fall from sky – Nature, Environment – The Independent

The recent Arizona immigration clamp down has divided the nation. There are those who favor labor mobility, globalization, racial sensitivity and employment supply-demand equilibriums. Of course, as in any argument, there are those who oppose – some rationally, some not. On both sides, there are also those who merely posture on partisan lines, and those who peddle fear-mongering for the sake of personal gain such as the extremist populist commentators like Michelle Malkin.  Regardless of where you fall in the immigration debate, there is a certain simplistic and cynical crassness to the way the debate is currently framed in the America media.

It is served as an ‘Us and Them’ debate, reminiscent of Cowboys and Indians games of childhood. This is a racist phenomenon quite common at times of economic and social stress, but in a nation formed in the crucible of immigration, self-actualization and freedom, it is a sad reflection on the current level of political debate. Ironically, the style of American immigration debate has gone international. The beauty and danger of the American experiment is that both its best and worst characteristics get exported. It is only the wisest of nations that can take the good and reject the narrow pettiness of American politics.

We have seen American style TV political debates enter into Britain, where the uncomfortable pairing of British stoicism and air-brushed-debate superficiality produced some truly cringe worthy moments. Now, it seems as though Arizona-style immigration rhetoric has infiltrated its way into another immigration dependent country, Australia. Whenever one sees base personal interest for re-election skew the debate in a primarily pluralist and open society, it is the day to identify a trend that needs curtailing. It is time to close the border, but not to immigrants but to crass simplification of a complex issue packaged for media bite-sized consumption. If there is a need for holistic reform, then tackle that, but don’t serve up slogans and sound bites and term it policy. That way is the road to hell, and an American playbook Australia does not need to copy.

KEVIN RUDD has started responding to myths and untruths about asylum seekers after being urged to do so by nervous Labor MPs who are in fear of losing their seats.

After Tony Abbott promised last week to restore the ‘Pacific solution’ and temporary protection visas, the Prime Minister told the caucus yesterday, “We will not be seeking to outflank the opposition on the right on either rhetoric or substance”

During the meeting about five MPs told of  ‘a sense of fear’ in their electorates caused by asylum seekers and urged Mr Rudd to help demolish the myths that were being circulated and feeding the fears.

These included the opposition’s advertisements with red arrows descending on Australia and a bogus email that claims asylum seekers receive generous welfare benefits and free housing.

Sources said the South Australian MP Nick Champion urged Mr Rudd to stop playing a ‘dead bat’  and to start hitting back. Others said that when they explained to constituents the facts, many of the fears disappeared.

David Bradbury, who holds the western Sydney seat of Lindsay, said it was more a sense of unfairness, rather than racism, that was motivating the fears.

With Labor haemorrhaging votes to the Greens, Mr Rudd agreed. After caucus, he used a media conference to declare he would not be engaging in a ‘race to the bottom’ with Mr Abbott.

Describing the misinformation and fear campaigns as ‘rolled-gold bucket of fea’, Mr Rudd explained, for example, that the country was not being swamped because each year Australia only allows in about 13,000 refugees. “What varies from year to year is whether they come by boat, whether they actually arrive by plane. But the overall number is about the same,” he said.

Backbenchers tell Rudd to tackle border myths