Australian PM sparks controversy after posting pics of Sri Lankan curry

Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison has sparked controversy with an innocent photo of his Saturday night kitchen creations.

The Prime Minister shared a series of snaps of a Sri Lankan lamb baduma with godamba rotis he cooked up at The Lodge in Canberra.

‘Girls and Jen loved it,’ he wrote of his wife Jennifer and daughters Abbey, 12, and Lily, 10, whom he cooks curries for every weekend.

‘Still thinking of everyone in Melbourne. Hope you’re finding ways to make the best of it in lockdown. You’ve turned the corner.’

The weekly insight into his family life is a benign attempt to humanise the national leader, but is frequently hijacked by politics.

Mr Morrison’s choice of a Sri Lankan dish quickly drew comparisons to a Tamil family who have spent the past two years in immigration detention.

Priya and Nades Murugappan and their two young daughters lived in the small Queensland town of Biloela where they were beloved by locals.

Left-wing activist and director Sally Ruggs pointed out that the same curry Mr Morrison made for his family was a staple of the Murugappan household.

‘Before the Morrison Government raided her house before sunrise, bundled her husband and babies in separate vans and detained them for the last 2.5 years, Priya would make Sri Lankan curries – the homeland she was forced to flee from – for the local hospital staff,’ she wrote on Twitter.

Instead of feeding beleaguered health workers during the pandemic, they are the only people detained on Christmas Island at a cost of $20,000 a day.

Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton wants them to go back to Sri Lanka – where they fear persecution – and claims the parents are being ‘unfair on their children’ for fighting deportation.

He also accuses them of ‘wasting’ $10 million of public money in court costs and detention fees.

‘This case has gone on since 2012 I think, and it must have cost now… probably over $10 million,’ he told 2GB radio last month.

‘That’s money that should be going into… communities and helping Australian citizens.

‘They are not refugees and they have used every trick in the book to make sure they can stay.

‘This is a situation of their own making, it is ridiculous, it’s unfair on their children, and it sends a very bad message to other people who think that they can rort the system as well.’

Their lawyer Carina Ford said it was actually Mr Dutton who was costing the taxpayer by refusing to let the family come back to the mainland while their case is pending.

‘Can you justify spending this amount of money on keeping a detention centre open that no-one else is using?’ she told Daily Mail Australia last month.

‘I don’t think you can. Maybe that’s something the government can re-consider.’

Mr Murugappan was gainfully employed at the local abattoir and the family was not receiving any significant welfare benefits while living in Biloela.

Priya was last month flow to hospital in Perth to be treated for severe abdominal pain, as she needed a CT scan which doctors could not carry out on Christmas Island.

Refugee advocates claimed she was told she would be returned to the detention centre after being monitored for two additional days in a hotel.

However, Tamil Refugee Council spokesman Aran Mylvaganam said she wasinstead  forcibly removed from the hospital two days earlier by as many as 15 Border Force personnel, and flown back to Christmas Island. (Courtesy Daily Mail)


  1. @ sugandh T

    Let me sum up your criteria for refugee status.

    If a person holds an imaginary or contrived belief of persecution, then, the holding of such belief renders that person psychologically debilitated. Therefore, should be subject to the protection of the United Nations refugee conventions worldwide.

    Furthermore, the protection of a foreign passport renders a person immune from the dire threats of the ubiquitous “white vans” in Sri Lanka (A land of human rights violating barbarians).

    I am also surprised that you have not read an Australian government document that claims up to 75% of people granted refugee status on the basis of claiming persecution, and holding a “grave fear for their lives” visit Sri Lanka within two years of obtaining refugee status.

    The gullibility of nations like Australia is laughable.

  2. @Shiran de Sousa

    You have dared to speak the truth. Your breaking of the shackles of political correctness will have you labelled a bigot.

    Unfortunately, the quest for a better life necessitates the tarnishing of the reputation of the Sri Lankan government.

  3. Please check Mr Muruggapan movements before getting on the boat to Australia. He went for employment to the middle easy, not once but twice , travelling on a Sri Lanka passport and travelling legally. No problems. He then suddenly is “persecuted “.
    Mr Dutton , check now many of these asylum seekers visit Sri Lanka as soon as they get an Australian passport.

    • You’re not making any sense Shiran de Soysa. Were SriLankans being persecuted in the middle east? No? Then?
      Persecution of an ethnic group was well documented and evident in SriLanka. So a person belonging to the persecuted community is subject to persecution indirectly, if had not experienced persecution directly, and was at grave risk of direct persecution. In other words, the particular ethnic group was targeted, persecuted, and greatly disadvantaged and has been in peril; the person in question belonged to that ethnic group and hence faced threat to his life. So he sought asylum in a safe country.
      Were you expecting him to be a sitting duck or roll the dies, take a chance that the prevalent danger evade him?
      Australian citizens are not persecuted in Sri Lanka. Hence the former SriLankan citizens return under the protection that the newly acquired foreign citizenship offers.
      Common sense and logic are not so common. Surely, those are at great deficit in SriLanka. Keep making fool of yourselves.

Comments are closed.