Turnbull doesn't need a policy - the dog-whistle is working very well for him right now.

And so the demonisation of boat people continues on this topic. Isn't that right "BANJO" dear boy!

They are called cheats, bribers and liars with the repeated innuendo that they are NOT fleeing any persecution. It's NEVER said that only a miniscule percentage fit that stereotype, or 20% or 50% or 60% of them. No siree, the implication is that they ALL are suspicious, they ALL should be rejected and they ALL want to deprive us of our security and our good life.

Under the Coalition government, "almost" ALL of the boat people detainees, after lengthy investigation, were found to be REAL asylum seekers and were granted entry into Australia and given asylum. I think the figure has been historically around 95% or more, year after year after year.

Still the myths continue, perpetrated by a minority of Australians.

Every decade we have well over a million migrants settle here. Out of this large figure there's been several thousand boat people granted asylum. The scare mongers would have you believe we're being FLOODED by boat people and Australia's in danger from them.

The entire world needs to share the load of resettlement of displaced persons. It needed to do this a hundred years ago, it needs to do it now, and it will need to do it in a hundred years time.

What's happened to our humanity? Did we ever possess it in the first place? Did our ancestors and early settlers come here only after seeking permission from the aboriginal people? Some of us are scared witless that the boat people are trying to do to us what we did to the aboriginal people. Sad.

Australia needs to know if the Coalition has the answers. It seems they have NO answers, and all they can do is snipe at the government with the aim of trying to gain political advantage. That's ALL they're interested in. They have ZERO policy. What are their answers? Heck, even THEY don't know. They don't "really" give a stuff about people risking their lives (UNLESS they think there's a political advantage for them). Sad.

Horus

<< Talking of "show us your sources" how about you show us your sources? I have been searching high and low on the internet for “NeutralHQ.com.au” with no result. >>

Very funny.

I've accessed many sources, but some writers I consider particularly credible on this issue are internationally recognised expert on refugee law, James Hathaway; author of 'Conflict in Sri Lanka' and 'Stalemate: Refugees in Asia', David Feith and OLO contributor and former Sri Lankan diplomat, Bruce Haigh.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/contributors/tamils-horrific-treatment-makes-them-desperate-to-leave-20091030-ho18.html

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2714668.htm

Shadow Minister

<< On top of that it scrapped the requirement for manditory detention or deportation of asylum seekers or visa overstayers already in Australia. >>

Wrong, the Rudd Government is still forcibly deporting asylum seekers.

In fact, not a lot has changed, apart from the abolishing of Temporary Protection Visas, the 45-day rule and the requirement to repay detention debt. Yes, the Pacific Solution has been abandoned, but the practice of offshore detention and paying poor nations to do our dirty work remains firmly in place.

Banjo

<< Why destroy their papers before getting to Aus? >>

As stated in Article 27 of the Refugee Convention, it's not a requirement that asylum seekers carry papers.

There's often no UNHCR office or Australian embassy for them to go to, and even when there is, things like roadblocks, curfews and travel restrictions frequently prevent access. Purely expressing a desire or intention to leave, let alone visiting a UNHCR office, can expose asylum seekers to enormous risk. The majority who leave without papers do so for safety reasons, not to deceive.

CJ

<< Turnbull doesn't need a policy - the dog-whistle is working very well for him right now. >>

Exactly. As Malcolm Fraser reminded us this morning, Turnbull's actions are a sorry contrast to those of the Whitlam Opposition in the seventies. When the Fraser Government granted asylum to boatloads of Vietnamese, Whitlam steadfastly refused to whip up hysteria and score political capital as he well could have. It was his bi-partisan statesmanship that was largely instrumental in the public's acceptance of the decision. How different it is today.

Robp, says: “The thing about people coming here by boat is that they self-select in a number of ways. Firstly, they take a risk which shows they're having a go (this attitude was lauded John Elliot of all people on the Q&A program) and secondly, the fact they get through the Migration Department's screening process as well as the defence shield put up by many Australians means that the refugees who settle here are the most resourceful and hardy types of migrants”

Maybe we should also encourage DRUG PUSHES & DRUG BARRONS too, aye!
They show resourcefulness, they’re risk takes & entrepreneurial
And, they can earn revenue, big revenue for the nation ---what better citizens could you want?

*We have spent, what, 5 or so years trying to do just that. So far no one from either side of politics has managed to pull it off.*

Nonsense Rstuart. We never stopped offering first prize, to those
who sail to our mainland. The whole point of the i-pod story, was
just how cushy people get it here,compared to the third world.
Our 50 bucks a week for piss up money, is a huge amount in the third
world. When you offer, first prizes like that, of course people
will risk their lives. Mexicans rush to the US, Africans rush to
Europe, economic migrants who want more money!

The way to solve it is to offer no first prize for people who sail
here in boats. Take all regugees from refugee camps. If Australia
announced, that only our direct neighbours would be granted asylum
directly, (that cuts out all this country hopping), the problem
would be solved.

The UN Convention is out of date and should be updated. If the
rest of the world won't get off its arse, Australia can go it
alone, for it is a Convention, so basically voluntary compliance
and is not mandatory by international law, for there is no
international court that enforces it.

If the law is an ass, its time to change the law.

The point is, huge numbers of economic migrants around the world
are stealing the places of genuine asylum seekers, by conning
the system.

Horus, you beat me to it, Franklin's figures on the other thread
were quite enlightening. UNHCR appovals in 2001 in Indonesia,
around 20%, ours in the 90s. What a gullible mob we are, but then
it is tough to sort out, due to the convention being out of date.

Never mind throwing your papers away, the Convention never even
considered that people would do that, so its fine according to
Bronwyn. Suckers we are.

Bronwyn,
Come on, you know that if a person flys from Pakistan or Sri Lanka to say Malaysia they need at least a passport and possibly a visa. Even to live in those places they require some form of idenity. Once there they then make their way to the South coast of Indonesia.

You also know that because a person is intending to apply for asylum does not give that person right of entry to any country. They must comply with the countries laws. It is illegal to attempt to enter Australia without a valid visa.

The sole reason they destroy their docs, before arriving here is to make it difficult for us to check on their story and prevent them being sent back, because their own country will not take them back without verification regarding their citizenship.

TZ,
Get real, These people pay smugglers thousands of dollars. Qantas has return fares to Singapore for $916 and Delhi for $1215, add a couple thousand for expenses while here, or stay with relos. Then why would anyone pay a smuggler far, far more. Simply because they know that if they come legally and apply for asylum here they will not meet the criteria and be sent back. Or if they apply to UNHCR in Indonesia they likely be rejected or have to wait 9 years or so.

So yes they are ALL under suspicion and trying to pull a swifty. They will do anything to get their to come here.

Like those that hijacked the Tampa, the 78 on the 'Oceanic Viking' have vitrually hijacked it. There are laws covering the situations where persons will not obey a lawfull request of the vessels master. Now more intimidation, by threatening self harm, and claiming ill treatment by the crew.

What is really needed here is to fly in a contingent of AFP officers and forcably remove them to Indonesian soil. Then proceed with charges against them, Making sure they are informed that they will NEVER get to Aus.