I see some silly refugee activist is making parallels between the Sri Lankan refugees and the Jews in Germany in the 1930’s

Two points

Sri Lanka has no expropriation laws, gas chambers, concentration camps or death factories.

These Sri Lankan are apparently “Tamils”, who having fought a war for the past 30 years+ have been defeated and are now trying to come to Australia

I would note, there is a significant “Tamil” population in India, a few miles west of Sri Lanka,

If these refugees are, as is claimed, in any “danger” why are they not shipping west (instead of east)?

Of course, if these refugees are “economic refugees” they would obviously seek to come here rather than India, where I am told “welfare benefits” are a little less benevolent than Australia.

But that is just food for thought really.

The fact is.. .Australia decides who comes to Australia, not a bunch of “Activist” pixies and not the refugees (economic of otherwise) themselves.

We have a humanitarian quota for refugee intake, these so called “refugees” should join that queue wait in line and be tested under its rules of acceptance… like so many others

instead of trying to jump the queue for their own economic advantage.

Bigmal makes some appropriate points on the response by a bunch of hypocrites who would seek to criticize Australia’s position for the purpose of their own political chicaner

TRTL,
I think it is far more than a few of the illegals are opportunists. I consider they all are, or at least the vast majority. I think the criteria on which we judge them is far too low. Many would not make refugee status if judged offshore by the UNHCR.

Also the policies of the previous government did work and the boats stopped coming. It took quite a while of progressively making it less attractive but the boats did stop. Look at the last few years.Once the measures were relaxed the boats started coming again and will continue to come until harsher measures are taken and the illegals know they cannot get here and obtain permanent residency.

I do not agree that these people are desperate. If life is so dangerous why would they leave their families back there. They know when they get here and obtain residency, they then can bring the family here by 747.

Mostly the illegals are males so why do they not join the government forces there and help secure their homeland. Our troops are there doing that while the illegals slink off and hide here.

In relation to the Sri Lankins, I wonder if they are economic immigrants or are they escaping persecution or prosecution from crimes committed during the civil war. I would expect any government to be ruthless in getting those responsible for crimes committed during the war. Many nazis fled after WW11 to escape their crimes.

In response to Keith and Horus who ask for my views on what might be a solution:

I've written and spoken about this heap of times over the years.

My latest example is here: http://andrewbartlett.com/?p=7298

It would happen if we recognise that Australia does still decide who gets to stay in our country. Amongst the many critiera we have set is one which says that people who arrive here and have a valid fear of persecution (as a result of some specified causes) are able to stay.

It would also help if we recognised that as a time of record levels of migration to this country, having a few thousand of those who are refugees arriving by boat doesn't actually cause any harm (unless we spend many millions of dollars and damege them in the process, as this hinders their ability to settle qucikly and inetgrate effectively).

Anway, some further thoughts are here:
http://andrewbartlett.com/?p=7298

*having a few thousand of those who are refugees arriving by boat doesn't actually cause any harm*

Andrew, thats fine if you are running a chook raffle, but when it
comes to the immigration policies of a nation, its simply an easy
cop out. We expect more consistency from Govt.

That is really how the whole Italian/Spanish situation started,
with similar views expressed. Eventually, when the whole thing
turned into a flood, there was a far larger problem to deal with.

The time to get these things in order and Govt policy consistent,
is before its a major problem.

According to a report in the SMH, 4 million$ changed hands
for one of these boats to sail here. 15K$ for a baby.

http://www.smh.com.au/world/hunger-strike-ends-too-many-have-died-20091017-h27r.html

That is hardly chicken feed.

What about those people stuck in camps, who don't have that kind
of money? Why should they not have equal consideration when it
comes to being accepted for Australian asylum?

There are points of principle at stake here which matter.

Well now it is the world refugee numbers have fallen..here we were thinking there were illegal economic migrants. So they were refugees. Thanks for clearing that up Phillip.

Afghanistan. We have sort of caused the people there a bit of inconvenience. You know starting a war and then having the hide to lose it. I'd rather think we can handle a little inconvenience as penance for our sins. We hear how much these refugees cost which is sort of bad mannered when all things considered.

Sri Lanka. I am not so sure. If people are making claims of being at risk then it is quite a huge charge against both the people and government of Sri Lanka now the war is over. We need to consider if the Sri Lankan government is able to extend to them human rights and protection. I do not know but would not like to discredit a whole nation based on an account by someone perhaps over stating fears for their own benefit. So I am not able to make a judgement one way or another. I am not even sure if they are denied a passport, so need to understand quite a bit more.

If they are credible claims then the easiest option is a temporary migration office in Indonesia. I would prefer myself to see refugees that have strong desire to come to Australia rather than resettlement of refugees that really want to stay close to home or familiar cultures. I have no issue with anyone entering the country and feel we need to take some responsibiity for their circumstance more than we do. If they check out with medical and security I can't too scary an issue. Up northern Australia we could probably accommodate some people from Sri Lanka as the white European does not seem to settle up here from fear of a little humidity.

Col Rouge

If I can just pick you up on a small point. The boaties are not all Tamils. There are, or have been, among them Singhalese ( the majority population of Sri Lanka ) .You see, under our namby-pamby refugee approach, both are equally capable of qualifying as “refugees”.Claiming discrimination from the other.

[ If it wasn’t such an important issue, you’d think it was a skit from Hey Hey Its Saturday]