Twittering about minor aspects of our migration policy ignores the very large and nasty beast in the room.

This beast is that we have already overpopulated this dry land of ancient infertile soils by about 10 million and we are continuing to do so,courtesy of Rudd&Co's Big Australia migration and breeder welfare policies.

Have you not heard of the concept of exponential growth?

"There is nothing more dangerous than a shallow-thinking compassionate person" - Garrett Hardin

“…had failed the health requirement”.

Our immigration policy has a health requirement; end of story. There are all sorts of requirements for migrants (except for illegals, of course, which is wrong) and health is just one of them. Health is a costly business; many Australians wait months, even years for treatment. It makes sense not to add to the burden of health provision.

Evans, as usual, made a political decision on the German doctor and his son. That’s typical of politicians where there is only on case to deal with. He should not have done it, and the doctor should not have come here in the first place if he intended to apply for residence. His action could be seen as being as underhanded as those of the illegals coming by boat.

Start thinking about Australia and our needs; not those of shysters, cheats and any foreigners trying to pull a swifty over our stupidly indulgent politicians. Our softness is a laughing stock world-wide, and that’s why there are always people trying it on.

Manorina,

Your quote about shallow thinking compassionate(?)people is right on the mark.

I agree with the posters before me. We have a health policy, my family and I had to jump that hurdle when we migrated.

However, I question the love and compassion of the families who do decide to migrate to Australia and leave disabled children behind.

Whilst I did not have to face such a challenge myself, I can see how I would find such a movement impossible and whilst anyone with a handicapped child has my personal sympathy (there but by the grace of God etc etc)I am pretty sure if I were a parent of a handicapped child and migration was conditional upon health, I would opt to stay where I was and deal with my responsibilities, to love and nurture all my children, as best I could.

Anyway Manorina, we have a socialist government for the time being, so get used to seeing a lot of “shallow thinking”, like the “dimulous” spending and other fatuous exercises in social engineering

I accept that it seems many readers agree strongly with policy that excludes the potential cost to ratepayers of pre existent conditions. I however do feel sad to see the arguments expressed in broad brush moral terms against people seeking to leave their places of residence to make Australia home. What sense is there in an argument suggesting folks should just stay right where they live and 'face responsibilities'. That is so too sad.

Chistina “arguments expressed in broad brush moral terms against people seeking to leave their places of residence to make Australia home”

How would you like it expressed?

Fact, government applies broad brush policies, we do not and never have lived in an environment where government treats people are as “individuals”. Such a process would be impossible to administer and conflict with the notion, which underpins many legal values, of “Equal under the Law” (government is there primarily to enact law).

As for “leave their place of residence to make Australia home”… I had to wait several years before my professional qualifications were back in demand and I was “acceptable” for migration. Australia does not and never has had an open borders policy. What you seek is something which has never existed and will never exist.

It is not Australia’s fault if I happen to have a communicable disease, a criminal record or a disability sufficiently serious to disqualify me from entry.

It is not and never should be an entitlement of the disabled to impose their burden upon Australian taxpayers, when that disabled individual has never met any obligation or contributed to the “commonwealth”.

Re “What sense is there in an argument suggesting folks should just stay right where they live and 'face responsibilities'

We all have to live and face our “responsibilities”.. regardless of our circumstances.. it is a common fact.

I see no argument to support the notion that anyones “responsibilities” will or should be lessened and “shared more widely” (with the wider Australian community) if they migrate to Australia.

As a migrant, my motive was not to “benefit” from the Australian community/commonwealth but to contribute to it, through my personal skills and capacity to pay tax. The “benefit” I anticipated I would receive had more to do with better weather and future for my children than any personal, monetary or welfare gain
and guess what – my “responsibilities” did not lessen due to migration, they increased.

Re “That is so too sad.”

And life is never fair…

So what, ‘tish’ happen