"You cannot escape the truth that many people USE the whole refugee situation for political purposes at any cost. "

Well it got the current government re-elected thats for sure.

BOAZ,

If you have a look at the statistics you will see that never in our history has there ever been anything like a "flood" of asylum seekers, especially when compared to the load other countries closer to the trouble spots have had to bear. There are refugee camps with more people in them now than we have ever admitted in total. This is just scarist propaganda.

Sure, invalid asylum seekers should be sent back (but do not inflate the number - it is actually quite small) - but we should not be mistreating people who have proved their refugee status, like those on Nauru Island now. We have our heads in the sand if we think being cruel to these people, who, by definition, have suffered enough, is acceptable behaviour for a civilised country that is a party to the relevant UN conventions. If our political leaders don't have the guts to withdraw from the conventions they should comply with them.

HUMAN Life MUST COME FIRST - I am inspired by Australian's who see the urgent need to hold their heads up high as they SPEAK OUT on the truth.

I am proud of all who MARCH with Burma and focus on the core problems which connect the daily livelihood of all of us. Burma is part of APEC and ASEAN and is a population of people struggling under our own pacific sky.

I ask that Mike Keelty become involved in the BURMA crisis as a person who understands the core problem - boarder safety and it's relationship to CRIME PREVENTION (Alma Ata) and Village interests, income and basic needs for survival.

The first principal in development is JUSTICE but to get it we need more than the LAW.

I also hope the Liberal government can come clean, pull some resources out of its pocket to put on the table for Burma.

I also do not want to see abusive governance during these elections as was distractive over the TAMPA. We as citizens are crossing boarders and through party politics.

It is people who produce leadership and the pluralism of all statements made only helps to flush out the representations of all voices to get to the knowledge and truth.

Sick Politics makes for a Sick Party. The Days of SPIN is OVER!

I dispise mis-representation - red-hearings and porkies.

The truth is now due to capital interest and world conflicts we have MILLIONS + MILLIONs + MILLIONS of people displaced - homeless - in dire poverty - they are our global political, envirionmental refugees. (just like the many other during and after WWII)

I want a GLOBAL MARSHALL PLAN + I want the talks to begin NOW.

Move over Australia, we have work to DO.

http://www.miacat.com/
.

I CALL MIKE KEELTY to help with AUSTRALIA's role in BURMA.

I ask that Mike Keelty become involved in the BURMA crisis as a person who understands the core problem - boarder safety and it's relationship to CRIME PREVENTION (Alma Ata) and Village interests, income and basic needs for survival.

The problem is complex and we need an alternative solution to the way we handled our perceptions over IRAQ.

I believe the UN requires some solid support. We make up the UN as regional nation states/economies. The UN can do little if nation states fail to come clean and utilise their POLITICAL WILL TO ACT.

Common Sense. This is NOT A GAME for BANTA in POLITICS.

I believe business is not the enemy. Leadership in any platform be it in Government - Business or Community undermines the mindful beauty we can create by being honest, if the truth loses ALL capacity - is intimidated or is blackmailed because the guardians fail their RESPONSIBLITIES by going grey and soft.

http://www.miacat.com/
.

Bronwyn,
You critisized someone earlier for stating that the majority of illegal immigrants were actually just economic migrants shopping for a better life. You stated that this was a sign of gross ignorance and that it was offensive to suggest that the overwhelming majority of asylum seekers were doing this. Yet reading from the Australian Parlimentary Library, Current Issues Brief 13, it clearly states that "The UNHCR has acknowledged that by the early 1990s the VAST MAJORITY of asylum seekers in Western countries were economic migrants" The reference for this is UNHCR Note on International Protection. A/AC 96/830.
I suggest that your statement is offensive because you are trying to mislead people and cover up the truth. How long will people like you be able to get away with lies?

Have a read of that reference before you make further ill informed comments.

Bronwyn, you critisized the following comment

"We are already taking a larger proportion of refugees per head than almost any other country."

by stating

This is incorrect. We have an annual quota of 12 000 and in fact rarely get anywhere near that number. Of the eight countries that have a quota, Australia's per capita intake is indeed second. Of over 70 countries who accept refugees however, Australia on a per capita basis is ranked 38th. Of the 29 developed countries accepting refugees, Australia ranks 14th. When considering we are bringing in about 160 000 immigrants a year, our refugee intake is miserly to say the least. As a member of the Coalition of the Willing, we have helped create 4 million Iraqi refugees and yet we are spending billions of dollars to keep them out of Australia. Huge numbers of these are professional people who could help alleviate our skills shortage. Not only are our policies mean and self-centred, they actually make no economic sense.

Yet I feel your comments are again misleading. According to the UNHCR 2006 Global Trends dated july 2007, the following figures are quoted for the top few refugee resettlement (developed countries) countries USA 41,300, Australia 13,400, Canada 10,700, Sweden, 2,400, Norway 1000.
I think this justifies the above statement that you have critisized. This places Australia right up there 2nd only to the USA in absolute numbers of refugees. I could not find the stats for per capita, however most people can see that again we would be right up there with the top countries, Considering that we take 1/4 the intake of USA yet we have a population less than 1/10 of the USA. We took 5 times that of Sweden yet we have a population of just over double Sweden. We took 10 times Norway yet only have a population of around 6 times Norway. We took equal numbers compared to Canada yet Canada has a larger population. Thus considering just the top 5 countries in absolute numbers we beat them all on a per capita basis.