http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/asylum-seekers-die-in-christmas-island-boat-crash/story-e6frg6n6-1225971477218

Since Labor's relaxation of immigration policies, for most asylum seekers the easiest way to get Australian residence is to come by boat. As with the Pink Batts debacle, the consequences were predictable, and only a matter of time before there were significant fatalities.

Julia, you now have blood on your hands. What are you going to do to stop the further loss of life?

Dear Shadow,

Agreed. While we continue to take only 50 a year from the refugee pool in Indonesia it gives very desperate people very little hope, forcing them into risky actions that will bring deaths. A more generous intake of these blighted people will certainly help.

You hit the open seas, you take your chances.

If these people knew that their attempts at illegal entry would actually reduce their chances of free welfare for life in Australia then they wouldn't be encouraged to risk their lives.

Australia should have a zero tolerance policy on destination shoppers.

Mr Howard's policies are looking far more compassionate everyday. Shame on Labour for playing politics and caving into Green dogma. I noticed some leftist already blaming our own coastguard. How deceived can one be?

You have fans SM, good to see runners CHRISTIAN concern for the dead.
I feel for them and for Australian politics.
It saddens me.
To see so many from your side of the fence use such a tragic event to try to under mine a government.
No proof exists this would not have taken place under your side.
Mate I only intend one post in your threads, others at least debate in openness and can see wrong on both sides you seem not to have that skill.
Runner ,what if every one of the dead are Christians?
Is that different?

Belly

'Runner ,what if every one of the dead are Christians?
Is that different?'

No it would make no difference. What sort of event will it take to wake the Government up? It is not the first lot of drownings and won't be the last unless they stop playing politics.

<< Mr Howard's policies are looking far more compassionate everyday. Shame on Labour for playing politics and caving into Green dogma >>

Spot on runner.

Prime Minister Rudd’s weakening of Howard’s border-protection policy had to be one of the bluntly stupidest political moves of all time.

Now Foreign Minister Rudd is reviewing and expanding our international aid programs. Good! Oh but if only he had done that in the first place and left Howard’s very effective solution to the onshore asylum seeking issue alone.

We could have had much-improved humanitarian programs without all this terribly emotive and damn dangerous onshore asylum-seeking carry-on, with many times the number of people being assisted as are now being assisted after arriving on rickety boats.

If one is to blame anyone or protocols regarding Assylum seekers and these vulnerable families seeking safety and a better way of life in our country - blame their people and governments, break it all down to the three key historical factors: greed, power, religions, that exist in every country, however Western countries, including Australia, make the effort to uphold Humanitarian Rights and/or assist other countries' people during their crises times.

Australians are not at fault regarding the sudden arrivals of these innocent families on to our remote Islands; blame it squarely and firmly where it [the blame] belongs: back to the Assylum seekers' government.

You hit the open seas, you take your chances.

If these people knew that their attempts at illegal entry would actually reduce their chances of free welfare for life in Australia then they wouldn't be encouraged to risk their lives.

Australia should have a zero tolerance policy on destination shoppers.
Posted by Proxy, Wednesday, 15 December 2010 6:30:43 PM

Well said Proxy. For every one you let in........that's one less job for your child, one less for you and everything that our war boys died for. Australia is one of the last places on earth that will make it through this over-population explosion that the planet is crumbling under...........

When rats are leaving the ship..........this is true and clear evidence that the world has serous people problems.

Look........give this country away! Your all too silly to see how lucky you are.

......and No infrastructural plan to cater for it.lol

This is the DUMB country.

Shame,Shame,Shame.

BLUE

Dear CSTEELE...you say:

"A more generous intake of these blighted people will certainly help."

mmm...help...what? Does it occur to you that once you start to assist or be more generous of that particular 'way in' that it will encourage MANY MANY more to think "Oh...this is the way for me" and we will end up with proportionately more 'desperate people' in Indonesia all thinking they deserve to come to Australia?

Do you really honestly deep down think that making it easier will not increase numbers? (creating the same situation, but more of them)

If a Christian came by this method...they take their chances like everyone else...and if they are successful, at least they will be compatible with our society and values rather than those who hold to the idea they should usurp our Government and replace it with Sharia law OR use Australia as a home base for nourishing separatist nationalist revolutionary ideas for Tamils in Sri Lanka.

Anyone noticed the thinkrefugees add running through the middle of these posts?

Runner,
A tragedy like this is no reason to run scared back to a racist hateful policy. it is a reason to move further to a compassionate one. Your lack of true christian disposition never ceases to amaze me.

Shadow Minister,
I now have no doubt you are a liberal plant on these pages. I heard a journalist state that the opposition will wait till after christmas to start the open attack over this but to expect a lot of unidentified sources to start right away. Typical of the coalition to use human tragedy to justify hateful policy and make it look like they are doing the world a favour. That's how they gave us the Afgan/Iraq war and now they don't want to be responsible for the victims they created, instead we pull the national security line and make out we are all important. Weak, spineless and hateful policy.

Belly, Nairbe,

While I have made no secret of my liberal preferences, as Belly has made no secret of his labor preferences, the issues on the table are simple:

1 - Are the boats safe, - Answer No
2 - Is there a clear link between the number of boats and Labor's immigration policy - Answer Yes.
3 - Has Julia Gillard acknowledged that this dangerous and needs to be addressed - Answer Yes
4 - Is there a proven policy that will stop the number of boats - Yes
5 - Has Julia Gillard done anything to address the issue in the 3 months since making the promise - Answer No.
6 - Why Not? - Answer: she relies on the greens and Willie
7 - What is more important to Labor, clinging to power or saving lives: - Power obviously.

The suggestion that these cashed up refugees would get in via an Indonesian processing center over those more in need is a furfy, as there are hundreds of thousands more deserving.

The simple logic:

Boats kill people,
Labor's policy encourages the boats,
Therefore Labor is responsible for the deaths.

nairbe

you write
'Runner,
A tragedy like this is no reason to run scared back to a racist hateful policy. it is a reason to move further to a compassionate one. Your lack of true christian disposition never ceases to amaze me.'

your deliberate blindness on this issue never ceases to amaze me. How anyone could not hold the Government accountable for such foolish policies in encouraging people to risk their lives is astounding. And to think the supporters of this suicidal policy claim to be the compassionate ones is even more astounding.

The basic cause of this problem is that those looking for another
country are not prepared to accept NO for an answer.
In other words Australia has said this number this year.
They are not prepared to accept that they are not on the list.

I see that the kids overboard has come up again.
Well what do expect when a boat is scuttled, you end up overboard.

Shadow minister.
1 - Are the boats safe, -
A complete no brainer, no one ever said they were. Does this not indicate the desperation of the occupants to you?

2 - Is there a clear link between the number of boats and Labor's immigration policy -

That is a point of great question. It would be fair to draw a line and say that by removing the off shore detention and denying them the right to our court system we have again made it simpler for them to have their asylum claims processed. But we have other points to consider. the former policy had not been tested as in the cycle had not played out. since the policy changed we now know that almost all of the Nauru detainee's were accepted and the rest have won a legal battle to have their appeals heard by the courts. This would logically bring us to understand that the trade would have resumed anyhow just a couple of years latter than it did.

3 - Has Julia Gillard acknowledged that this dangerous and needs to be addressed -
And?

4 - Is there a proven policy that will stop the number of boats - Yes
No there is not. The previous policy has now been shown to not have made any difference as to ones final outcome so logic tells us the status quo would have resumed.

5 - Has Julia Gillard done anything to address the issue in the 3 months since making the promise -
Julia has begun to discover just how dysfunctional our relationship with Indo was left by the Howard Government. The real answers to this problem lie in co operative measures with our neighbours and harsh penalties for those who smuggle. Not punishing those who are already suffering.

6 - Why Not? - Answer: she relies on the greens and Willie
Now you are getting into bias irrational rubbish.

7 - What is more important to Labor, clinging to power or saving lives: -
Well really what is more important to all political parties? Be honest now.

Shadow Minister:

The question that needs to be asked is - why did this happen? Our border security people have radar and are trained (and equipped) to act in all sorts of weather conditions - so why was this boat not intercepted earlier? Surely it would have been detected via radar?
What the government needs to do now is have a full inquiry into this tragedy and ensure that the competent border-security staff can all learn from this incident of why it occurred and see to it that it doesn't happen again. Playing politics and the blame game achieves nothing constructive - finding answers as to why just may prevent such tragedies in the future.

Nairbe,

Before the policy change we had 4 boats per year and about 160 people. This year we have more than 130 boats and nearly 7000 people. The flood of boats started almost immediately after the policy change, and was predicted by the dept of immigration.

So whilst there may have been other push factors, the policy change was responsible for most of the new boats, and while you might be able to convince yourself that it wasn't the normal logic inherent to most of us leaves only one conclusion.

Lexi,

Why did it happen?

You keep children from being killed on the road by keeping them off the road, not by having crossing guards every 50m.

If the navy boat had stopped them in high seas, they might have hurt someone trying transfer them, trying to apply 20/20 hindsight does not detract from the simple rational that if the boat hadn't of sailed, the people would not have died.

Finally,

There are an estimated 150 000 "refugees" in Indonesia, how many should we grant asylum to, and if we do, how many more will come?

Nairbe mate...where in the wide world did you get

*a racist hateful policy.* from runners very sound argument?

What was 'racist' about Nauru ? Nothing. What's racist about 'racially neutral' border protection?

Where do you get 'hate' from ? ? ?

Next thing you will be telling parents who give their children 'time-out' for disobedience "Hateful"....

C'mon..you can do much much better.

Hi Lexi, over the past few days severe storms, high seas and lightning has inundated the islands and both tips of Australia, which hampered the ability to pick up and act quickly as customs and patrols normally do when assylum carrying boats approach Australia.

If the conditions were not present over the past few days, these families may well have moored safe and sound.

looks like justice to me.

Maybe this will put the hordes off from coming to 'soft touch Australia'.

Shadow Minister:

Let's look at the facts. England under Blair, Australia under Howard,
and the US under George W. Bush decided that they needed a war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Wars cause refugees who flee their countries to escape the inflicted terror. So what do you expect when asylum seekers in desperation seek safety and a life for their families in any country that will accept them. It is unfortunate that Australia happens to be so close to Southern Asia which is the only route they can take. So no matter what the government in Australia as long as the wars caused by the US and its allies continue the refugee problem will continue to exist. As for the claim that the Howard government stopped the boats from coming - that is a stunningly ignorant statement when we know full well that the situation in the war zones had slightly improved and there were not that many refugees heading in our direction. As for how many refugees we should take from Indonesia? That as you well know depends on our immigration policy.
Keep in mind that those escaping terror and persecution are not versed or educated on Australian government immigration policies. They just want to get away from the disaster zone. When there's a fire
the people in harm's way are not going to study fire-safety policies or manuals and follow directions where they should go. They will simply want to escape the fire. And those that hesitated as we well know during the last fires in Victoria died. These people are desperate people who are willing to risk their lives and those of their families to get away from the disaster. During the fires people have been burned in their cars while trying to escape. Should they have not been living in the bush?

The PM has issued a complete and thorough investigation of the Christmas Island tragedy. Despite the world publicity on the dangers at sea the refugees keep coming. Obviously the message doesn't get through - or is totally ignored by desperate people.

Shadow,
Yes the relaxing of the policy made the decision to resume boats easier but if you don't understand that the previous policy was a stop gap while the smugglers worked out the system then you are fooling yourself.

AL,
Yes a hateful racist policy.
We are Australians, we are on the whole people who have come here in desperation looking for a chance. A policy of segregation of those arriving in desperation and treating them as scum in off shore prisons while many who truly jump the que by flying in are free to wait it out in the community is appalling. Never forget we created their hell by starting unwinnable and uncontrollable wars in their countries. Iraq is destine for disaster and Afghanistan has never been conquered. The Afghan people must fear the withdrawal of the invaders and the inevitable over through of the puppet government to return to fundamentalism. Racist because i will not be swayed that if they were a boat load of white zimbabweans we would welcome them with open arms. A country that won't accept that it invaded and stole a country has no chance of understanding what racism is.

I don't see how we can blame anybody else for these deaths other than the people smugglers. I am sure the asylum seekers did not undergo these journeys with drowning in mind.

The people smugglers no doubt told them all would be well... and took the payment from the asylum seekers gladly.

My only hope is that the people smugglers on that boat are suitably shattered at the outcome of their disgusting trade- if they are alive.

I remember other threads on this forum, not so long ago, where many respondents carried on about the terrible policies of the Howard Government for dissuading boat people arriving on our shores, and how wonderful the Labour government were for relaxing the immigration rules for these boat people.

I remember saying that I abhorred the people smuggling trade because they put people's lives in danger.
I was howled down for being 'uncaring' towards the asylum seekers.

I truly wish now that I was wrong.
Very sad pictures of the boat tragedy haunt me today.

funny how people are demonizing the people smugglers. I wonder if they are any better off than many seeking refugee status. I doubt it. The bottom line is Howard put these 'evil' smugglers out of business and Labour playing politics and sucking up to the UN allowed these smugglers to be re employed. People have died and still those who contributed by policy consider it more important to be right than swallowing their pride.

Lexi and Nairbe,

All the boats are coming from Indonesia, where the asylum seekers normally stop off for a couple of months to a year. At the time that the policies were relaxed, there were articles in the paper warning that the people smugglers were broadcasting that the new policies were making it easier to get into the country.

Considering that the Afghan war started in 2001 and the Iraq war in 2003, perhaps you could point to the statistic below and indicate where the "push factors" played their role.

From where I stand, a sudden 3000% increase since Labor's policy is more than coincidence. Please explain to me how the Pacific solution did not work.

Fin Year..Arrivals by boat
1999–00.. 4,175
2000–01.. 4,137
2001–02.. 3,039 - Pacific solution introduced.
2002–03.. -
2003–04.. 82
2004–05.. -
2005–06.. 61
2006–07.. 133
2007–08.. 25
2008–09.. 1,033 - Pacific solution removed.
2009–10.. 5,609
2010-11.. 3,392 ytd

Given that the estimated number of people lost at sea trying to get to Australia (including those perishing in Indonesian waters) in the past 2 years is now over 200, the grim statistics are that about 1 in 50 boat people perish on the journey.

Julia Gillard can stop the deaths, she just lacks the political will.

About the dead illegal’s, my heart goes out to the children and women who were lost.

The men took their shot and paid a price, bad luck, goodbye, abide well.

I disagree with Gillards open arm policy because it leaves legitimate refugees lingering in camps. But Gillard is not culpable in regard to the people drowning, people die through misfortune everyday but she is culpable of ideologically driven stupidity in every decision she has been a part of over the past 4 years.

runner:>> The bottom line is Howard put these 'evil' smugglers out of business and Labor playing politics and sucking up to the UN allowed these smugglers to be re employed.<<

Just so well said runner I had to repeat it.

runner:>> People have died and still those who contributed by policy consider it more important to be right than swallowing their pride.<<

Sorry runner I think you got it askew there, polliies have no pride, to have pride you must have conviction and the current lot have a conviction wind vane that is readily redirected to accommodate the circumstance.

There are two levels of blame here.
The first level is the master of the boat.
In that sort of weather he took his boat to the winward side of the island.
I understand that the harbour is on what was the leeward side.

So why did he do that ? Either he was totally incompetent or he had
intended to land his passengers on the winward side out of sight and
return to Indonesia for another load or avoid a term in gaol in Darwin.

The 2nd level of blame of course is the government's in that they have
done nothing to stop the boats, especially as we approach the cyclone
season.
I just find it hard to believe that Indonesian fisherman take these
low freeboard boats to sea in cyclone seasons. I suspect that the
people trafficers buy the boats and employ anyone who will take the
job. Whether they know there is a gaol term in Darwin's holiday camp
awaiting them is another matter.

One measure that would reduce but not stop the boats would be 20 years
in gaol without parole for the crew.

http://www.immi.gov.au/media/fact-sheets/61asylum.htm

There is a lot of spin on this issue on both sides of politics and I don't think the Coalition with their "turn the boats around" policy would save lives than the current situation which is similar in other than small detail from the Howard government with the exception of TPVs.

The fact is most asylum seeker cases are processed reasonably quickly once in Australia, those left in detention are where there are difficulties in assessing refugee status through failure to provide adequate or legitimate identification. Not every asylum seeker is a legitimate refugee but the first priority should be in quickly establishing status.

The real problem is the processing of immigration and asylum seeker applications out of Australia ie. in refugee camps or in country of origin. Some immigration applicants tire of waiting, many choosing the boat route, especially after being resident in Indonesia for months or in some cases years - often having freely flown into Indonesia of free will and in full possession of ID.

There is no easy solution on this one, and it is sad to see both political parties using this tragedy for point scoring.

It is a complicated issue and there is a lot of BS and myth surrounding asylum seekers on both sides.

What is the solution? How do you stop people making the risky journey by boat? The simplest response should be faster refugee application processing at point of origin where possible or from point of arrival in another country (other than Australia) where there are no UN obligations and for those who seek asylum in Australia.

That means more resources which can only be achieved if the government gets rid of the inverted pyramid structure of Commonwealth Government and puts more workers on the ground.

Pelican writes

'There is no easy solution on this one, and it is sad to see both political parties using this tragedy for point scoring.'

It is more sad that those responsible for totally flawed policy that contributed greatly to these deaths are not held to account (unless of course they are conservative). The national broadcasters are a disgrace.

Shadow Minister:

Considering the fact that boat arrivals are a minute percentage of refugees, whereas the majority of refugees as well as visa overstayers arrive by plane - wouldn't it be wise to direct your concerns at the latter group of people? Because they cause more problems to our authorities than a few hundred coming by boat. The Pacific solution as practiced by Howard was a major drain on government finances requiring boat people to be taken by plane great distances, to the middle of the Pacific, and housed on an island that was sinking into the ocean. These people eventually ended up in Australia anyway. So what's wiser? To tow a boat to an island (Timor) off Indonesia, or tow the boat to Christmas Island and then fly them to Nauru? The Gillard government is in the process of negotiating (as
I've said previously many a time) to process the people in Indonesia or Malaysia and until we have the consent of those governments we have to cope with the problem. No amount of speculation on this forum is going to solve anything. And we well know that negotiations take time.

Actually Lexi,

Boat refugees are approaching 50% of asylum claims.

Nearly all visa over stayers return to their country of origin and don't make any claim against Medicare, unemployment, or schooling.

The boat people cost the tax payer more than all others put together.

<Considering the fact that boat arrivals are a minute percentage of refugees, whereas the majority of refugees as well as visa overstayers arrive by plane - wouldn't it be wise to direct your concerns at the latter group of people? Because they cause more problems to our authorities than a few hundred coming by boat.>

This comment shows a lack of understanding of the issue. What is of primary concern is that people put their lives at risk for the sake of gaining asylum. What it has in common with those arriving by plane is the belief that the action will increase the chance of gaining asylum. And the problem is a direct result of government policy.

Why should engaging the services of organised criminals and undertaking perilous voyages give you an advantage over other people seeking asylum? It should not, but thanks to government policy it does. For as long as it does we will continue to needlessly and cruelly kill refugees, and at the same time fill the pockets of organised criminals.

Ok Folks, let's look at things realistically.Australia spent about a billion dollars processing 1637 boat people on Manus and Nauru Islands. (Do the maths: it's a horrifying $600,000 per head). The boats stopped coming, but it took five years to clear the islands. As David Marr points out in his article in the Brisband Times, Sept. 18, 21010 - "Pacific Solution no real answer,":

"The detour to Nauru was never, in itself, much of a deterrent to people smugglers. What helped killed the trade was leaving refugees to rot there for years. We can stop the boats. That's the ambition of both sides of politics and it isn't hard if we are willing to be cruel. We can order the navy to force them back to Indonesia - operations the navy loathes - or send their human cargoes off to island prisons for indefinite detention. Those strategies work. But they leave a humane country facing a hard question - how brutal are we willing to be?"

Lexi writes

'those strategies work. But they leave a humane country facing a hard question - how brutal are we willing to be?"'

How brutal are we to the other 2 billion people who would like a better life in Australia. Should I tell my Tamil friends who have been waiting for years to immigrate here to jump on a boat?

Well said, Runner. How brutal can Australians be if they treat all refugees equally? What is definitely brutal is the way refugees died attempting to reach Christmas Island. Why would they attempt suicidal voyages if it gave them no advantage over millions of other refugees?

If there is any brutality it is in the current policy. Equality of treatment for refugees is essential if further brutal and senseless deaths are to be avoided.

...and cutting the engines Bazz as to appear 'stranded'in the face of authorities they were expecting from the outset of their trip.

The wild seas buffetted them into the rocks as we all know [cutting the engines previously would never have given them a hope in the world near rocks].

I was stranded in between large boulders out at sea 12 years ago with a 75 little motor [4 metre swell] with a southerly blowing a gale late in the afternoon [the weather forecast that morning did not forecast the change].

The motor was useless bogging and the boat heading towards the waves banging up against the boulders; a couple of sharks would be happy that evening.

My praying went into overtime that the motor would move us in a hurry against the strong winds and high seas as we moved closer to the boulders and rocks within the small enclosed area.

The motor stopped bogging [for 15 minutes which seemed like an hour] it had not moved us from the area at all.

For the next 2 hours I thanked God and vowed I'd assist as many people, on as many occasions, throughout the life He gave me.

Lexi,

The present cost of processing and resettling boat people is more than $2bn p.a.

Considering that an estimated 200 have drowned this year, how brutal is the existing policy.

There are nearly 150 000 refugees in Indonesia awaiting placement, and 400 million world wide. How many do we take? The people get on boats to jump the queue. Taking more in Indonesia would make no difference.

Lexi and those of similar persuasion annoy me.
What on earth do they think is the alternative ?
Just let in all who turn up anywhere by any means ?

The world is overpopulated by many billions.
How many billions would you let in ?
Eventually they will stop coming in old fishing boats and start coming
in old freighters with one or two thousand on board.
Lexi will now say I am being ridiculous, well I have news for Lexi and
others, that is just waht has happened in Canada.
Three feighters were bought by a Tamil organisation, loaded up and
finally docked at Victoria on Vancouver Island.
Make no mistake that is what we are facing, and the latest disaster
will prompt it to happen sooner as the market will demand larger
ships than the clapped out fishing boats that have been the standard so far.
It will solve the Christmas Island crowding as they will dock in Darling Harbour.

Shadow Minister:

The verdict of the world is: they're heading your way, so they're yours. This was a lesson that was learned after the knockback from Norway, in July 2003. It marked the start of a long, slow retreat by the Howard government as everyone left on Manus and Nauru Islands were gradually brought here. Some rotted on the islands for more than five years some went mad waiting; but in the end the largest single group of people fed through the Pacific Solution ended up where they were always heading: Australia. Yet somehow there survives as David Marr points out: "an unshakeable hope that if we process boat people elsewhere, then someone else will take them." Marr tells us that a
"Nielsen poll conducted for the Herald in early June found that despite the sad unwinding of the Pacific Solution, 62 per cent of Australians continue to support "the Howard government's policy of processing asylum seekers in countries outside Australia."

And as we know, and Marr confirms - " once more our diplomats are fanning out around the world seeking countries to take the problem off our hands: first, to find a client state where boat people can be processed, and then to enlist a few countries willing to give refugees processed there somewhere to start a new life. It's a unique ambition. No other country on earth has managed its refugees this way."

I really have nothing more to say on this topic. See you on another of your threads (or maybe not).

Lexi,

The hateful policy of encouraging people to die on ramshackle boats needs to be reversed.

As the statistics I showed above, the off shore processing combined with temporary protection visas slowed the boats to a trickle.

Australia has a quota for refugees. The question is whether we choose the most needy, or the more affluent risk their lives on boats.

The bottom line is that boats kill people. We need to stop the boats.

All this is a direct result of feelgood politics, encouraged by
our emotionally engulfed, like the greens and others.

We raise peoples expectations, spend a couple of billion $
a year, they risk their lives and blame us when things go wrong.

For the umpteenth time, the 1951 Convention is 60 years out of date.
Its encouraging anyone who wants a better life, to have a go and
sail here.

The Convention needs updating and changing. Australia needs to take
all its refugees from refugee camps. Or we will continue to have
the debacle that we face now.

None of our politicians seemingly have the testicles to make the
changes that are required, so we waddle on, hearts on our sleeves,
from debacle to disaster.

I told you so. I'll tell you so again, when we have the next
disaster. It won't be long.

Shadow Minister:

I appreciate what you're saying - "We need to stop the boats." But could you be specific and tell us exactly how you suggest that we do that? Do we order the navy to force them back to Indonesia? Or do we send their human cargoes off to island prisons for indefinite detention?

Yep. Well said Yabby.

How do you stop the boats?

By treating all refugees equally. Now if I were a refugee seeking asylum and someone said to me, "Hey, how about engaging the services of some criminals and taking a life threatening voyage to Christmas Island?"

I would respond with the question "Will this increase my chance of gaining asylum?".

Under the current policy the reply would be "Yes, it will greatly enhance your chance of gaining asylum.".

If all refugees were treated equally the response would be "No, it will give you no advantage over other refugees waiting for asylum.".

Why would I risk my life and engage the services of criminals if it gave me no advantage?

*By treating all refugees equally.*

Well there is your snag Fester. According to the UN 1951
Convention, its first come- first served.

So we abide by the convention, creating the expectation.
Not only for genuine asylum seekers, but for anyone who
thinks they might be able to jump through the hoops,
as their friend did too.

Even the UN concedes that now our system is clogged up
with people who have been rejected, but still won't go
home. Every one rejected involves hundreds of thousands
of costs. Nobody says boo.

So the system needs fixing once and for all. We are free
to change the terms by which we abide by the Convention.
We should change those terms, despite the outcry from
the hearts on sleeves brigade. For they have no better
suggestion to offer.

Yabby:

OK. Let's here your solution to the problem - and be specific!

*OK. Let's here your solution to the problem *

Foxy, there would be people in Govt who could word it far better
then I can, knowing all the legal ins and outs.

But basically that Australia stops being compelled to
take anyone who applies and happens to arrive here,
by one way or another.

Australia should agree to take whatever annual quota that
our parliament agrees on, all from refugee camps around
the world. The Minister for Immigration would be given the
power for special dispensation, in limited, unusual cases.

Short term there would be much squealing and howling, but
even countries like Indonesia would cooperate, as they know
its a problem that needs fixing.

Once it became clear that paying 10'000$ does not help to
get to the front of the queue, the boats would stop.

People won't spend money, unless they think that it is likely
to benefit them.

Yabby

Since when is an agreement legally binding if it causes harm to people?
Would a repayment contract be legally binding if it gave the creditor the right to remove digits for non-payment? Is "folllowing orders" a justification for war crimes? Do you keep killing people with faulty roofing insulation because that was what was decided? So why then can the continuing cruel and senseless killing of refugees be justified on the basis of a legally binding agreement? Clearly such an agreement is void if it is shown to be harmful. How many tens of thousands have died already? More than enough I think.

Lexi,

Simply reverse the policy changes they made to appease the greens.

As i showed, the relaxation lead directly to the increase in boats. the restoration of the off shore processing and TPVs will slow the boats considerably.

Yabby and Shadow Minister:

From everything that's said on both sides of the political spectrum regarding this issue it seems that no one has a solution to this complex problem. Scott Morrison )opposition spokesman on immigration argues that the outlook is brighter now that more countries are, like
Britain, signing up to refugee resettlement. However, when asked if he seriously expects Britain - where refugees are a huge political issue - to take people off Australia's hands? his reply was, "No."
"So what other country will?" His reply, "In government, I would approach the issue in a positive frame of mind." "And would those who could find no country to accept them end up in Australia?" His reply,
"There are too many hypotheticals in that proposition." The problem appears huge, if it was that simple, I'm sure that things would have worked out by now, but they haven't. Anyway, Thanks for your inputs,
I'll keep my fingers-crossed that an acceptable solution is found sooner than later - that will appease everyone. Before I forget- Have a Merry Christmas, and a Great New Year (you too Bazza, I'm sorry if I annoy you - frankly, I don't have the answers, I simply read and quote what the "experts" have to say on the topic and then I go with my gut feeling on the issue).

Fester, I agree with you. But right now, all that needs to happen
is for people to sail from Indonesia to Christmas Island and they
become our problem, due to us signing an agreement 60 years ago,
that was meant to deal with the Jews fleeing Germany etc.

At that time, the German Govt had declared war on jews. Today's
issues are more tribal and ethnic. Hazaras live in Afghanistan,
Tamils live in Sri Lanka, Kurds live in Iraq. Their Govts have
not sentenced them to death. Yet under the convention any of these
people can seek asylum due to the loopholes that exist.

So we create expectation, by what we have signed and agreed to.
There are formal processes in place, by which we can change that.

Its not just a problem here. Tony Blair and his Govt understood
the problem and felt it needed dealing with. But everyone in
Western politics is to chicken to address it, fearing all the name
calling from our feelgood brigade.

There are a whole heap of boats, trying to get from Africa to
Europe. Many sink, people die regularly.

Most of this would change, if the UN convention would finally
be brought up to date, and expectations were not raised, as they
are now.

Lexi et Al,

A final thought on the boats. Australia has a quota for refugees of 13500 p.a. so every boat refugee accepted displaces a far more needy person elsewhere.

As we clearly cannot accept all the millions of desperate displaced people, the choice is clear. Do we give preference to those that can afford the $15000 to get a boat place, or do we take back the agenda from the smugglers and give the most needy a place?

Shadow Minister:

To achieve any program with boat people takes considerable patience and time negotiating with our neighbours. I'm sure that eventually a working solution will be reached to the satisfaction of our politicians and the governments of the neighbouring nations. Look to the Korean Peninsula, after fifty years they're still negotiating. The boat smugglers operate from Indonesia and other Asian countries and we have no jurisdiction in those areas other than negotiation with the governments. And until the boat people are stopped at the point of departure, the problem I'm sorry to say will not only not go away, but will continue and may even escalate. Once the Australian government accepts the arrivals and takes them to anywhere in the Pacific or Indian Ocean, instead of returning them to their point of origin, it acts as a green light for the smugglers to sell their services and poor fishermen in Indonesia will continue to offer their boats for financial gain.

So tell me SM, why don't the liberals have the testicles to
renegotiate the UN 1951 Convention? The rest is just a sticky
tape solution.

Foxy, the Indonesians can rightly point out that these people
want to sail for Australia and as per our agreement of the Convention,
we are obliged to take them. That makes them our problem, not
their problem.

If Australia took all asylum seekers from refugee camps, the problem
would be solved. Gillard got it half way right with the suggestion
of building a refugee centre in the area. But people won't go there,whilst 10'000$ can buy them a ticket to the front of the
queue.

That won't change with all the negotiation in the world. Note the
risks that Mexicans take, in order to obtain a better life in the
US.

Yabby:

It's a universal problem. Mexicans cross the US border because of its proximity. In the Sudan, people fleeing from the fighting cross borders into neighbouring countries. Refugees flee into all countries in Europe. The problem has existed for centuries, and will continue to exist as long as there are conflicts, famine, drought, natural disasters, and a better life beckoning elsewhere. For some reason, we in Australia seem to think that we should be excluded from the problem.

* For some reason, we in Australia seem to think that we should be excluded from the problem.*

Not at all. Most of the time, genuine refugees flee over the
border, they fear for their lives. It is not as if New Zealanders
or Indonesians are fleeing here.

People travel halfway around the world, because their friends have
told them that we offer the cushiest benefits and the best lifestyle.

If we are going to throw 2 billion $ at refugees, it should be spent
wisely and should help genuine refugees, as much as possible. That
is simply not the case right now.

Fact is that most of that money is wasted on a programme which
helps those with the money to get to the front of the queue. That
is hardly fair on genuine refugees, stuck in refugee camps, with
not a cent to their names.

Its pure TV feelgood politics, to keep the emotionally engulfed
in line. Its not rational, or wise, or cost effective. Its not
fair either.

Yabster:

Thanks for a robust discussion. Have a Merry Christmas and All the Best in the New Year!

Big hug.

Lexi,

At least you admit it is a problem. One that we did not have with the pacific solution.

Again:

Fin Year..Arrivals by boat
1999–00.. 4,175
2000–01.. 4,137
2001–02.. 3,039 - Pacific solution introduced.
2002–03.. -
2003–04.. 82
2004–05.. -
2005–06.. 61
2006–07.. 133
2007–08.. 25
2008–09.. 1,033 - Pacific solution removed.
2009–10.. 5,609
2010-11.. 3,392 ytd

How can you with a straight face claim that the flood of refugees is due to anything other than Lahor's policies.

Shadow Minister:

Playing the blame game is not very constructive and you surprise me that you continue to persist in blaming the government when the Liberal Coalition did no better at solving the problem during their time in office. As I stated to you earlier - the knockback from Norway, in July 2003, marked the start of a long, slow retreat by the Howard government as everyone left on Manus and Nauru Islands were gradually brought here. Some rotted on the islands for more than five years, some went mad waiting; but in the end, the largest single group of people fed through the Pacific solution ended up where they were always heading: Australia. I find it amazing that despite all these known facts and despite the sad unwinding of the Pacific solution you continue to support "the Howard government's policy of
processing asylum seekers..." while blaming the Labor government for their policies. To me that's not logical

cont'd ...

Shadow Minister:

Seeing as you're rather fond of statistics, kindly take the time to read the following website:

http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/bn/sp/boatarrivals.htm#_Toc233686295

It's given by the Parliamentary Library in Canberra. The statistics with the granting of Temporary Protection Visas are especially interesting as well as the global context in general. An interesting read.

Lexi,

In spite of your rhetoric, the link to the statistics on boat arrivals are the same as I published, which show that the arrivals in Howard's era ramped up to about 5000 p.a. until the pacific solution was applied, then fell rapidly to a tiny fraction. When Rudd dismantled the pacific solution, the boat arrivals rapidly ramped up to previous levels.

Irrespective of the approvals of TPVs or Nauru, they provided a level of uncertainty for asylum seekers that had the desired effect.

We now have the case of "refugees" on getting their permanent residence jetting back to the countries from which they fled "in fear of their lives" to visit their families. Considering that these individuals have taken places from those in real need, I think that this is disgusting.

Lexi,
Even though I have little time for the 'illegal entrants' they do not deserve to die. Whether you like it or not, the previous government reduced the boat arrivals to 3 per year. Now in just 3 years over 200 boats have arrived and at least 200 persons have died.

This is a direct result of the present government enticing these stupid and deceitful people to make the voyage.

Face facts Lexi, the boats stopped coming untill the promise of permanent residence was restored, with all that entitles them to.

Do not give the 'illegals' what they seek and they will stop coming and the people smugglers will go out of business.

This government created the current situation and now must wear the blame. Read the article below.

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/column_the_media_is_bound_by_blood_to_gillard/

Shadow Minister:

I get what you think, and of course you're entitled to think whatever you like. However, as the site that I quoted earlier clearly demonstrated, "Boat arrival numbers in Australia have fluctuated significally over the last 30 years in response to global events. Government responses over the years have included measures aimed at ensuring that those arriving by boat are genuine refugees, policies aimed at protecting our borders, including through co-operation with neighbouring countries and policies aimed at deterring unauthorised boat arrivals." While I don't doubt your "disgust" (this is an
emotive issue for many people), as the site tells us, "the
debate in both public and political arenas is likely to continue as governments seek to address the issues." Have a Merry Christmas and
perhaps the New Year will be a better one for us all. We can live and hope. Take care.

There were hundreds refugee deaths at sea in the *Howard era*. But shadow minister doesn't give 2 hoots about that, as it doesn't serve *his* politics. He's quite happy though to point out current refugee deaths, because it DOES serve his politics.

Shadow minister is using the deaths of human beings for what he thinks is a political point scoring gain. It says everything about the type of person he is.

Politics of death

Serve the purposes of those

Who divide and rule

Pay the boat's ransom

Families are abandoned

In a far far queue

The far queue excuse

Is a convenient ploy

That conceals hard hearts

With the news that there was a second ship with nearly 100 asylum seekers that has gone missing, this brings the total deaths to nearly 150 in one month.

There can be no doubt that the asylum seeker policy of the Labor government is indirectly responsible for these deaths.

Dear Poroit and Shintaro,

I'm not sure if it was employed intentionally, I'm assuming it was, but just letting you know the 'far queue' was delicious. How apt.

Thank you.

I see that we now have 10 000 boat people since mid 2008. Another record for the Labor Government.