Sorry I must not have explained myself properly, I'm not saying I begrudge the situation as it is now. But the small numbers coming in may be as a result of the hard stance we have now? Which allot of PPs have stated is not right or fair as it is - not even taking into account Rudds new policy.
A few have said along the lines of 'open the borders, let anyone claiming asylum in no questions asked' at the moment I think it was established 10% are not genuine asylum seekers - how many do you think that would turn into if the process becomes simple and question free.
I guess I'm saying I don't believe in making it easy and question free for the reasons I highlighted earlier but i genuinely want to see the genuine refugees helped. so what is the answer?
I don't think I agree with Rudds policy and I think it is more about re-election than genuine concern over boat asylum seekers safety but I really would like to hear some ideas from a politician that actually shows compassion but also considers the economic impact. Maybe it doesn't exist??? In not sure.
Whoever said Lebanon takes in more refugees, I have been to Lebanon and I dont think their standard of living (and that refugees would ultimately be exposed to) is really something we want to aspire to. Though I do get the sentiment of people with little showing more compassion than us.
And I don't think all asylum seekers are dole bludgers, maybe I have been a bit put off by a news report I saw about refugees granted asylum and two years later no one in the family knew a scrap of English. How have they been supporting their family for over two years? The report stated they hoped To 'one day' learn English - so they hadn't even begun. Realistically how many teaching or doctor jobs could they get with no English skills in Australia? Maybe this is what has me questioning the economic sustainability of any asylum policy?
Would anyone who would like to take in more refugees object to maybe more clauses in refugee status. Say for example free English lessons however a certain level of English must be met by a certain amount of time? Or a work for the dole sort-of-thing where they can learn new skills?
Do you think tax payers may become more empathetic or consider asylum seekers less of a burden if this happens? This is a genuine question by the way.
Thanks for not jumping down my throat BTW - it's annoying having genuine questions but being afraid of being labelled if I ask them.