The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > The crazies are running the country

The crazies are running the country

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
Dear Phillip S,

The tribunial Labour stacked? What an ignorant and asinine comment. The Abbott government packed the thing so tightly with has been or failed Liberal candidates listing the ship so far to the right it is lucky to be afloat.

Most of these were the appointments made by Brandis to the Administrative Appeals Tribunial a week before the last election was called. All appointed for between 5 – 7 years on hundreds of thousands of dollars per year.

Theo Tavoularis who represented Brandis' son in a court matter in 2013. He was a substantial Liberal Party donor. Brandis has refused to disclose if he had received discounted fees.

Anne Brandon-Baker who was former chief of staff to Scott Morrison. Appointed for 5 years.

Dr Denis Dragovic, failed Liberal Senate candidate for Victoria. Appointed for 7 years.

John Sosso, another Queensland lawyer and former departmental head under Cambell Newman.

Tim Wilson's former senior advisor Louise Bygrave who is in for 7 years.

Michael Manetta, failed liberal candidate in the SA 2015 election.

Saxon Rice, former LNP MP in Queensland who lost her seat in the QLD 2015 election.

Former Liberal candidate Peter Vlahos.

Judith Troeth who is a former Liberal Senator.

Lawyer Justin Myer who was advisor to two Liberal premiers in Victoria and who donated over $11,000 to the party.

Former ACT Liberal leader Bill Stefaniak.

Dr Bennie Ng who served as the head of social policy in Abbott's office.

Anne-Marie Elias, who was a former senior policy adviser to NSW minister Andrew Constance and self described as 'chief disrupter' within the NSW government.

He appointed Helena Claringbold who was a former staffer to Abbott and who donated $45,000 to the party.

Nick McGowen another failed Liberal candidate.

David McCulloch a former staffer to Amanda Vanstone.

Michael Cooke who was an advisor to Tony Abbott.

Karen Synon, a former Liberal Party Senator.

Bruce MacCarthy, who was a NSW Liberal MP.

Gary Humphries, one of Brandis' former colleagues in the Senate who got the job of deputy head of the tribunal for 4 years at $450,000 per year.
Posted by SteeleRedux, Wednesday, 17 May 2017 2:47:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Des Houghton writing for The Courier Mail,

"...Six Iranian boat people have made a mockery of our strict border controls by gaining residency and then travelling back and forth to Iran on holiday.

Peter Dutton moved to deport six Iranian boat people who have holidayed at home despite claiming to be sent home would be dangerous.
Immigration Minister Peter Dutton did the right thing and moved to deport them, only to have his decision overturned by the Administration Appeals Tribunal.

In fact 39 per cent of Dutton’s decisions or those by delegates have been overturned by the AAT in the past year.

Dutton has done a mighty job protecting borders and showing the door to undesirables.

He chose his words carefully yesterday saying some “infuriating” cases make you “shake your head”. So the courts, once again, usurp the powers of the democratically-elected Cabinet minister responsible for our welfare.

The left-wing Greens and Labor pretenders don’t like me mentioning it but “refugees” pay $10,000 to people-smugglers for places on boats to Australia. So they are not genuine refugees. They are queue jumpers.

Polls show a majority of Australians support immigration. But the majority also favours entry of only genuine refugees who have been carefully assessed.

Now isn’t the time for Malcolm Turnbull to go soft.

He should remember that strife surrounding unvetted immigration has smashed European Union and delivered Donald Trump the White House."

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/opinion/opinion-immigration-farce-shows-pauline-hanson-was-right-all-along/news-story/81e38ed77a00742f7c81c53b0d892c58
Posted by leoj, Wednesday, 17 May 2017 2:50:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
STEELEREDUX states in his last paragraph; '...That is not to say people shouldn't become accountable for what they put on their applications for refugee status because it remains a vulnerable system open to fear mongering by our less then ethical right wingers...'?

See if I understand you correctly? You imply the crime here is 'fear mongering' by right wingers, not 'falsifying or uttering' an official document is that right? Do those of the 'left' ever resort to fear-mongering I wonder?

Your comments apropos the qualifications and quality of those who preside on the Tribunal is correct. I think the mistake for many lies in it's nomenclature. Perhaps remove 'Tribunal' and insert 'Court' might do it? Many ordinary folk who are unaware of the various strata's of our Justice system, recognise 'Court' but less so 'Tribunal' - Just a thought?

Your commentary concerning the 'bed wetting' etc, seemed to have piqued your finer sensibilities and moral awareness somewhat STEELEREDUX? An unusual happenstance for a gentleman from the measured 'Left' I would've thought.

Whether these people left their homeland because they were in fear of their lives, notwithstanding they returned there later for their holidays...?

It would raise the following questions; (i) While at home, did something happen that was so grave, they honestly believed they were in serious peril of suffering serious injury or death, it necessitated they immediately flee their homeland? (ii) And now that immense risk had apparently abated and diminished sufficiently enough, for these people to return home on holidays. And the erudite members of AAT were duly persuaded by the veraciousness of the appellant's impassioned testimony?

From purely a humble policeman's view of such things, I'd say these people, both individually and collectively are veritable liars and are simply taking the Members of the AAT together with Australian Taxpayer's for a very long and expensive ride. I reckon deep down, you also know it, STEELEREDUX.
Posted by o sung wu, Wednesday, 17 May 2017 3:00:16 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I remind you of the UNCHR’s Rules.

CHAPTER III – CESSATION CLAUSES
A. General
111. The so-called “cessation clauses” (Article 1 C (1) to (6) of the 1951 Convention) spell out the conditions under which a refugee ceases to be a refugee. They are based on the consideration that international protection should not be granted where it is no longer necessary or justified.
113. Article 1 C of the 1951 Convention provides that: “This Convention shall cease to apply to any person falling under the terms of section A if:
(1) He has voluntarily re-availed himself of the protection of the country of his nationality;

B. Interpretation of terms
(1) Voluntary re-availment of national protection
Article 1 C (1) of the 1951 Convention:
“He has voluntarily re-availed himself of the protection of the country of his nationality;”
118. This cessation clause refers to a refugee possessing a nationality who remains outside the country of his nationality. A refugee who has voluntarily re-availed himself of national protection is no longer in need of international protection. He has demonstrated that he is no longer “unable or unwilling to avail himself of the protection of the country of his nationality”.
119. This cessation clause implies three requirements:
(a) voluntariness: the refugee must act voluntarily;
(b) intention: the refugee must intend by his action to re-avail himself of the protection of the country of his nationality;

Refugee status is not granted to;
3) Persons considered not to be deserving of international protection
Article 1 F of the 1951 Convention:
“The provisions of this Convention shall not apply to any person with respect to whom there are serious reasons for considering that:
(a) he has committed a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity, as defined in the international instruments drawn up to make provision in respect of such crimes;
(b) he has committed a serious non-political crime outside the country of refuge prior to his admission to that country as a refugee;
(c) he has been guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.”

Cont.
Posted by Jayb, Wednesday, 17 May 2017 3:19:21 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Cont.
122. A refugee requesting protection from the authorities of the country of his nationality has only “re-availed” himself of that protection when his request has actually been granted. The most frequent case of “re-availment of protection” will be where the refugee wishes to return to his country of nationality. He will not cease to be a refugee merely by applying for repatriation. On the other hand, obtaining an entry permit or a national passport for the purposes of returning will, in the absence of proof to the contrary, be considered as terminating refugee status.16 This does not, however, preclude assistance being given to the repatriant-also by UNHCR--in order to facilitate his return.
123. A refugee may have voluntarily obtained a national passport, intending either to avail himself of the protection of his country of origin while staying outside that country, or to return to that country. As stated above, with the receipt of such a document he normally ceases to be a refugee. If he subsequently renounces either intention, his refugee status will need to be determined afresh. He will need to explain why he changed his mind, and to show that there has been no basic change in the conditions that originally made him a refugee.
154. A refugee committing a serious crime in the country of refuge is subject to due process of law in that country. In extreme cases, Article 33 paragraph 2 of the Convention permits a refugee's expulsion or return to his former home country if, having been convicted by a final judgement of a “particularly serious” common crime, he constitutes a danger to the community of his country of Refuge
Posted by Jayb, Wednesday, 17 May 2017 3:20:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
SteeleRedux - Quote "The Abbott government packed the thing so tightly with has been or failed Liberal candidates listing the ship so far to the right it is lucky to be afloat."

Now that is to quote you "an ignorant and asinine comment" if that was the case please explain 39% of the ministers decisions reversed?
Posted by Philip S, Wednesday, 17 May 2017 3:43:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy