Let’s leave Rupert Murdoch out of it. What possible advantage accrues to him from commenting on illegal immigration? We’ve already had Murdoch being blamed for bringing down the Australian Labor Govt in the recent election, rather than blaming the entire Govt. for incompetence and in-fighting.

You should indeed be glad that your so called research remained “hitherto unpublished.” Frankly, your informal publication via these public domain will likely bring you to rather dreadful ridicule. Let me explain.

First, you say “the results of our rapid assessment reveal that the principal motive behind migration (both legal and illegal) is poverty (denoted by “family circumstances”), lack of (livelihood) opportunities, or lower income among the people who are most susceptible to migration abroad.”

Sarvan – before coming to the conclusion that “poverty” is a significant driving force for Sri Lanka’s to emigrate, did you wonder why is it that it is almost entirely Tamils who are driven to emigrate despite the woeful choice of taking the “suicide boats?” Are Tamils so distinctly more poor than the other segments of the population? For you conclusion here is some basic arithmetic you could do to pre-test at the most basic level. Of the Sri Lankan families in the bottom, say, 5% income level, what is the count of Sinhalese families versus Tamil families? Compare those two numbers and then see if that ratio suggests any resemblance to the ratio of Tamils versus Sinhalese among the Boat people trying to escape from Sri Lanka. Can you provide that comparison? Can you show us if that ratio indeed is reasonable enough and does not outright refute your conclusion on this count.

Second, it is no secret that these Boat people pay anywhere from $20,000 to $40,000 to get a standing-space
in the now famous death traps. What do you think is a reasonable income stream that can be expected from an asset that large? With that asset and that income-stream potential at their disposal (whether own wealth or offered to them by a relative abroad, this is an asset available to them), would you still consider that the Boat people are truly at the bottom rung of poverty level of Sri Lanka?

Third, your research method and conclusion for your following statement is laughable. “Even the former combatants and sympathisers/supporters of the LTTE (who were the bulk of the respondents to the rapid assessment) did not adduce insecurity as the reason for their intention to migrate abroad. Hence, it is evident that bulk of the refugees fleeing Sri Lanka is economic migrants masquerading as asylum seekers.”

Take a bigger picture of where you are conducting your study. You identify LTTE-linked persons in Jaffna and ask them if they have concerns about military insecurity. You did this in 2010, in the rather immediate
aftermath of the war. The region is still swarming with military and Sinhala officials, semi-drunk in power and victory-adulations even as a vast segment of the local population is the neighbouring district is herded and trapped in open prisons. The Tamils all over the island are silenced and are being watched eagle-eyed
by the security establishment for any transgressions, oppositions, or any discontent, in an attempt to nip any faltering LTTE-rumps at the very slightest of suspicion. You, a Government agent, conduct a survey and ask these targeted, known LTTE-linked persons, if they have any “security concerns” about their
presumed guardians that might induce them to emigrate. You truly expected them to answer honestly? Honestly?!

Here is an easy mental challenge for you Sarvan – a kind of counter-research proposal, if you will. Could you do an identical research in Australia? Identify LTTE’ers now settled in Australia and ask them the same
questions – whether security considerations affected their decision to emigrate? Would you consider that approach to be an appropriate survey method? Would you expect their verbal responses dependable enough to draw conclusions? Do you understand why that would be an absurd research methodology? Do make the point even clear – do you think it will serve any purpose asking the same question from the refugee-claimants
held up in Christmas Island or elsewhere. What percent do you think will ‘adduce insecurity as the reason?” Give me a guess? Would that be worthwhile data to draw conclusions as you did? Think, Sarvan, Think! That is the necessary first step for any useful research effort.

[Edited out]

Sarvan, it is true there is a necessity to follow specific methodology in conducting research. One also perhaps needs to follow some recipe-book type steps. But, those alone do not yield worthwhile research results, if it is wanting in basic intelligence to guide the design, to conduct the study, and to draw valuable information. I think your research as an excellent testimony of what is a misguided research!

Murdoch might have an unhealthy control over sections of the Australian media but to suggest that he doesn’t exercise similar influence in Britain and the US is simply not true.