SPQR,
You are wasting your time, the likes of Bronwyn cannot see the difference between genuine refugees and the shonks that fly into Malaysia then pay toget to Aus illegally. If they were genuine they would fly all the way, but we could then establish their identity and send them back.

You know this and I know this, but to Bronwyn the 'poor stricken boat people' are a religion and no amount of practical evidence that they are con artists and gate crashers will change her mind.

But you are doing well as some other open minded persons might just read this thread.

*A frequent comment from the Iraqis who arrived here in the early 2000's was they'd never heard of Australia.*

Err Bronwyn, we have moved on 10 years. Saddam and his boys are
dead long ago. Now they ring up our emergency services on the
sat phone and suggest they be picked up.

Yes, lots of people would like the good life in Australia, but
given the present terms of the Convention, which is 60 years
out of date, economic migrants can slip through the loopholes,
tell their story and gain asylum. Sadly its those Burmese
women and children missing out.

Our gullibility is amazing.

Silence on the SERCO question, typical.
Would the "Bleeding Hearts" countenance the proposition that perhaps the transnational people smuggling business is actually a racket run by governments and QUANGOS like SERCO?
The money to be made in this industry is staggering, not to mention the political capital for those still in office and subject to declaration of their financial interests.
One of the criticism levelled at SERCO is "When is a government not a government?",I've read articles suggesting that 80% of SERCO and Group 4 management are former UK government staffers, as of that reading they were the fifth largest private employer in the world.
Remember folks, the Atlantic Slave trade was the most profitable business enterprise of it's era, the basic infrastructure which facilitated that evil business is still in place and the elites are positively ADDICTED to trading in human beings, it's just one of their perverse "appetites".

Jo Coglan states that the majority of asylum seekers who have reached Australia by boat have been found to be genuine refugees.

The reality is that the classification of an asylum seeker as a refugee is a very subjective process. In the end it often comes down to whether an asylum seekers claims are to be believed or not believed, and in most cases without any real evidence. As very few stories from dysfunctional third world countries can be conclusively and individually verified and disproved, the asylum seekers get the benefit of the doubt and so gain refugee status.

Most asylum seekers getting on a boat to Australia discard identity and travel documents and present a prepared story that effectively distills the stories of previously successful applicants. The story has to be moving enough to engage the 1951 Convention protection obligations, but at the same time vague enough to be uncheckable and unverifiable. Asylum seekers know the questions that will be asked during interviews and also know the required answers, being informed by people smugglers or relatives that have already come via people smugglers.

While the law says the onus of proof in a refugee status application is on the applicant, this has in practice evolved into applicants challenging the Australian Government to disprove their stories. It is a matter of telling the right story for asylum seekers to obtain permanent residence, they may or may not be genuine refugees.

Banjo

<< You know this and I know this, but to Bronwyn the 'poor stricken boat people' are a religion and no amount of practical evidence that they are con artists and gate crashers will change her mind. >>

I'm always persuaded by hard cold evidence, Banjo. You start producing some.

Yabby

<< Err Bronwyn, we have moved on 10 years. Saddam and his boys are dead long ago. Now they ring up our emergency services on the sat phone and suggest they be picked up. >>

Don't patronize me Yabby, I'm up to date and across this issue in a way you'll never be. I simply mentioned that by way of example.

Talking about moving on, you've been rabbiting on yourself for the best part of ten years about the Refugee Convention being out of date, sounding like a cracked record if ever there was one. The Convention will be out of date when there are no refugees left to make it relevant, which isn't going to happen any time soon.

I'm no more gullible than you are, Yabby. I know there are asylum seekers who play the system, but most do not. The vast majority of boat arrivals in particular are consistently proven genuine. Figures for different groupings over the years have ranged from 70% to 98%, and typically sit between 85% and 90%. And this is coming from a government doing everything it can to send them anywhere but here. It's pulling out all stops to tighten up the criteria, but in the end has to admit that most of them are indeed bona fide refugees.

Browyn,

Not being able to prove that someone is not genuine, does not automatically make them genuine.