For a non-Australian reader, it would have been nice to get an understanding of whether there are special circumstances in Australia that would make the Prime Minister's plan 'populist', as suggested by the European AIDS Treatment Group. What are the politics behind the statement?

Australia appears poised to join a list of about 15 countries including the US (Bush proposed easing US restrictions in December 2006) that prohibits HIV positive people from entry. Polls showing the sentiment of the populace on this issue would have been helpful, as would information about how other countries deal with this matter.

The story lists the PM's position and offers the opposing parties reasons why they dislike his position and want everyone to help overturn it. Nothing about why the PM has taken that position in the first place. Is it that immigrants are more likely to infect unwitting Australians? Or maybe that the costs of care exceed any likely benefit that is likely to accrue from their coming to the land of Oz. Or no more likely to infect, no more costly against the Aussie government supported health care system (ROFLOL) but simply more people possible to infect Austrailian citizens, and more bodies on the Aussie medical dole. This story does not even admit to any possible reason for not wanting more expensive-to-treat HIV ... More »