+ Reply to Thread
Page 18 of 80 FirstFirst ... 816171819202868 ... LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 791
  1. #171
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Adelaide foothills
    Posts
    753
    Thanks
    462
    Thanked
    426
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    I think it sets a dangerous precedent when one starts leveraging asylum seekers above those who are already here with the assumption that they are lucky to be here. There are many destitute and poor inthis country and whether they happened to end up in Australia as the offspring of an immigrant or swam here it doesn't matter and the inference that those already here are the "haves" and those who are yet to arrive are the "have nots" is an unfortunate and inaccurate projection. While I have no doubt that some refugees have suffered, that doesn't mean that we forget that this country is not immune to suffering either. There are many, many, many Australians who live well below the poverty line and in deplorable conditions in this country who do not have wealth to share and for whom the system does not serve which is why I never bring these comparisons into theonshore processing argument as this, to me, is clearly a separate (anddomestic) issue.
    In addition, there are many, many Australians whose first language is not English and survive very well. But there are many more who do not. This is a huge problem that will present direconsequences if not adequately addressed as part of any infrastructure plan for increased intakes and something I view as a social priority.
    Inundation is not my main concern. Fatality at sea is. As the government’s implementation plan has yet to be released I can’t comment on what might or might not happen but will simply wait to read how it proposes to transport and process applicants. However, I think there needs to be a clear understanding of what constitutes a refugee and a determined immigrant. It is an established reality that many people choose Australia as their preferred destination over other countries that are easier to reach. It is also an established fact that Australia does not have a harsh immigration regime. Offshore/onshore linking is but one method of intake control. To say that Australia is the only country does not mean that such a method is cruel. A lot of other countries are much harder - some refuse any intake point blank or severely curtail their quota. Others, such as Canada, do not provide anywhere near the welfare assistance or visa types that this country does and is the reason why approvals for that country are not taken up. This country is widely viewed as being one with a softer touch and when you compare what occurs here and in a lot of other countries it is easy to see why. To this end I certainly do give a stuff about where people claiming asylum have come from and how their decisions have been made. Given that the highest number of people claiming asylum this year were Iranian economic migrants is further reminder that we do need to be diligent about how we apply our compassion. It is for this reason I would liketo see an expansion of our Refugee and Humanitarian Visa program (visa subclasses 200, 201, 202, 203 and 204). While I would concur that there is indeed a queue, I think it is wrong for us to speculate on what constitutes a fair place in that queue. There are many people still in detention for years waiting to be processed by Australia (be they in country or on any of our offshore designated centres) and to complain about who we perceive to be queue jumpers is in my view a disgraceful attitude. Just be grateful that you are here.
    While inundation is not a main concern for me it remains a concern nonetheless and it is a reality and a responsibility we must address. As we have seen in the past years since the Howard policies were dismantled, the boat numbers have grown and a regular migration wave has now been established. I am very mindful of the difficulties other countries are facing, such as England, Lebanon and France for example, who have taken large numbers of refugees in but have not had the infrastructure to support them and have had chronic social and financial challenges as a result. This is a frightening outcome I don’t want to see repeated in Australia. At present, there is because the intake is so small and while I support a higher intake I do so onthe basis that this is matched with an increase in creation of additional infrastructure (which means additional and extensive funding). Should the government taxcorporations more heavily than it does? Absolutely. Should there be a tariff applied to foreign land sales? Absolutely. Should there be a new taxation regimen enforced on traditionally exempt organisations such as churches and charities? Absolutely. But will this government do that? No. Rudd has stated that the new policy will be “budget neutral” which begs the question, where he is going to pull the money from? Foreign aid? Defence? Education?
    At present, there are roughly 40,000 people arriving by boat per year. Increase that by 100 and you have four million. Add this number to the present immigration number of around 300,000 and you have 4.3 million people a year. Housing is already at crisis point and numbers of homeless are increasing every quarter not tomention the increasing burden on hospitals and schools. Do we have the infrastructure to support such a large influx? Not by a long shot. Consider then the thousands of low skilled, predominantly Muslim migrants with limited or no English coming with no funding to provide them with adequate services and you have a devastating crisis happening in Australia. Previous generations did not face anywhere near the challenges that are present today. So while I accept that we have a legal andmoral responsibility to allow those who seek asylum in Australia to make their claim onshore, I am also mindful that we also have the same obligations to those already living here, be they citizens or residents. That said, I hasten to add that I am leery of this new policy even though details of which have yet to be released. On the face of it, I feel that redirecting asylum seekers to another country is immoral and unjust and it is not a solution that I, as an Australian citizen, am comfortable with putting my name to. I don’t see it lasting. But then again, I don’t see anyone elseproffering any other solutions either.
    Last edited by Caviar; 20-07-2013 at 23:47. Reason: spacing!

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Caviar For This Useful Post:

    mrsoptomistic  (21-07-2013)

  3. #172
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    19,776
    Thanks
    5,212
    Thanked
    7,063
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 posts
    I'm not certain there is a quick, easy 'solution'. This is a humanitarian issue that will never go away unless something drastic changes with the world. I'm beyond annoyed that human lives are being used as a political bargaining chip in what is meant to be a lucky and peaceful country.

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Benji For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (20-07-2013),Busy-Bee  (21-07-2013)

  5. #173
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,516
    Thanks
    432
    Thanked
    3,246
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    One wonders why the government picked PNG. Of all the countries to send them to. He picks the worst one that's the easiest to corrupt and control by the Australian government. Hmm.

    Sent from my GT-I9505 using The Bub Hub mobile app

  6. #174
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Adelaide foothills
    Posts
    753
    Thanks
    462
    Thanked
    426
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    I didn't say quick or easy If you look at the political landscape, the coalition is silent, the Greens are in fairyland and the independents don't seem to know what is going on. Nobody is coming forward with any suggested solutions or even alternative ideas that would offer an antidote to what is presently on the table. Jennaisme, a one word answer for you - CHEAP!
    Last edited by Caviar; 21-07-2013 at 00:04.

  7. #175
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    19,776
    Thanks
    5,212
    Thanked
    7,063
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 posts
    The Greens have their plan quite clearly outlined on their website.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Benji For This Useful Post:

    Atropos  (21-07-2013)

  9. #176
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,516
    Thanks
    432
    Thanked
    3,246
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Caviar View Post
    I didn't say quick or easy If you look at the political landscape, the coalition is silent, the Greens are in fairyland and the independents don't seem to know what is going on. Nobody is coming forward with any suggested solutions or even alternative ideas that would offer an antidote to what is presently on the table. Jennaisme, a one word answer for you - CHEAP!
    Upon further investigation since he regained the PM position he's met with the PM of Indonesia and the PM of East Timor. He also dealt with the PM in PNG in his position as foreign affairs minister last year.

    I wonder how long he's been planning this particular way to deal with refugees.

    Eta: He was also in PNG on the 11th allegedly working out strategies for their hospitala and gas networks.

    Sent from my GT-I9505 using The Bub Hub mobile app

  10. #177
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Victoria
    Posts
    1,914
    Thanks
    6
    Thanked
    23
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by beebs View Post
    But fairyfloss, as much as it might not seem like it you - were one of the lucky ones. 50% of people in refugee camps will never get out.
    I am fully aware of how lucky I am and very grateful to have come and have the blessing to live here.the fact that I am alive and have a family of my own, is testament to how lucky I was; I know a lot of people who never got the chance. May they all rest in peace.
    Ch

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Fairyfloss For This Useful Post:

    Meld85  (21-07-2013),TimeForWine  (23-07-2013)

  12. #178
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    7,878
    Thanks
    3,397
    Thanked
    5,160
    Reviews
    8
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Fairy Floss, there are some inaccuracies in your post that need clarifying..

    FACT: Asylum seekers who arrive here by boat DO NOT take places of asylum seekers in UNCHR camps.

    There is no queue or processing system accessible to asylum seekers in their home countries. By definition, to be considered a refugee you must be outside your country of origin.
    Fact

    Very few countries in our region are signatories to the Refugee Convention. Asylum seekers who arrive in countries that have not signed the convention, such as Malaysia or Indonesia, are subject to anything from neglect to abuse, tortureand indefinite imprisonment.


    Fact

    Only 0.5% of the world’s 15.37 millionrefugees will have access to a queue in 2011.With only around 80 000 places allocated eachyear for resettlement, if all of the world’s refugees were to join a queue, the wait would be 192 years.

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to babyla For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (21-07-2013)

  14. #179
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    7,878
    Thanks
    3,397
    Thanked
    5,160
    Reviews
    8
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Atropos View Post
    http://www.sbs.com.au/goback/about/f...-queue-jumpers

    Do asylum seekers take places away from refugees in overseas camps?

    The myth that asylum seekers take places away from refugees who are resettled from overseas does have some basis in truth. However, this is not because asylum seekers are trying to rort the system or “jump the queue” – they have a right to seek asylum and Australia has a legal and moral obligation to process their claims. Rather, it is the direct result of Australian Government policy.

    Australia’s refugee program has two components – the onshore component, for people who apply for refugee status after arriving in Australia; and the offshore component, under which Australia resettles recognised refugees and other people in need of protection and assistance. The onshore and offshore components are numerically linked, which means that every time an onshore applicant is granted a Protection Visa, a place is deducted from the offshore program.

    The linking policy blurs the distinction between Australia’s legal obligations as a signatory to the Refugee Convention (addressed through the onshore component) and our voluntary contribution to the sharing of international responsibility for refugees for whom no other durable solution is available (addressed through the offshore component). The perception that there is a “queue” which onshore applicants are trying to evade is actually created by a policy choice which could easily be changed. No other country in the world links its onshore and offshore programs in this way.

    All human beings have a right to seek and enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution, which makes refugee protection a universal and global responsibility. As a signatory to the UN Refugee Convention and as a member of the international community, Australia shares in this responsibility. There is no reason why Australia should be exempt from receiving and processing onshore asylum claims while expecting other nations to fulfil this responsibility. As a developed nation with well-established systems for refugee status determination and strong settlement support infrastructure, Australia is well-placed to play a leading role in refugee protection, both within our region and at a global level.

    A common misconception about refugee protection is that applying for resettlement from overseas is the “proper channel” for seeking protection. In fact, resettlement of refugees in third countries is the exception rather than the rule. In general, resettlement is only used as a solution for refugees in cases where it’s not possible for them to return home or settle permanently in the country where they first sought asylum.

    Out of the world’s 15.2 million refugees, UNHCR has identified around 800,000 (approximately five per cent) as being in need of resettlement in coming years. In 2011, 79,800 refugees were resettled through UNHCR with the USA receiving the highest number (51,500).

    Over the past 10 years, an average of around 81,000 refugees have been resettled annually. At this rate, it would take 188 years for all of the world’s refugees to be resettled. While there remains a significant gap between resettlement needs and available places, it is not necessary, feasible or even desirable for all of the world’s refugees to be resettled in third countries.
    Thank you for this accurate post.

  15. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to babyla For This Useful Post:

    Atropos  (21-07-2013),beebs  (21-07-2013)

  16. #180
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    7,878
    Thanks
    3,397
    Thanked
    5,160
    Reviews
    8
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by VicPark View Post
    I have come a long way in the various asylum seeker threads on Bub Hub. However you have hit the nail on the head with why I continue to feel a sense of unease about boat arrivals. Besides the unacceptable risk to kids lives, they are literally taking places from poorer refugees who are waiting for resettlement under the UNHCR. And why? Because they cant wait and they want their country of first pick.

    I think we need to do a better job of accepting refugees under the UNHCR process. Hopefully that is the direction the government is headed in if the manage to 'stop the boats.'
    You're right there does need to be a better process with under the UNHCR. The current wait time with the number of global refugees would be 192 years. Without Australia currently meeting it's obligations under the Refugee Convention this seems very unlikely. Maybe this would be a better discussion?

    We have come a long way VP - have you watched Go Back to Where You Came From? yet, I posted a link for you over a year ago in our last thread. It really does explain the confused notions people who have of "the queue", the camps and the actual reality for lots of people - views other than 1 person here on BH who you are choosing to take as correct when in fact a lot of what Fairyfloss has posted is inaccurate - namely boat people do not take places of other arrivals.

    I'm out, I want to spend Sunday with my family (actually DH is over it) and there are enough accurate links posted by people here for people to find out facts on their own without going around in circles with the same lines spouted which started with numerous governments every election - queue jumpers, illegals etc...

    The ASRC has the latest figures on everything: - on the left are the links to current statistics and information.

    http://www.asrc.org.au/resources/statistics/

    Kon Karapanagiotidis also makes for interesting viewing - 20 minutes.

    http://wheelercentre.com/videos/vide...so-frightened/

    Julian Burnside - Barrister and Human Rights Activist shares here how we have been misled in our understanding of asylum seekers arriving by boat as he puts it

    "The etiquette of the checkout at Coles is not how it works when you are running for your life"

    Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/federal-pol...#ixzz2ZcpYxFHp

    If you can't be bothered reading it, then watch the video.

    Lastly, I just want to add that I used to have many of the ill informed views that people have around people who seek asylum. It wasn't until I started working with families who had arrived by boat at my school that I educated myself on the issue and found out lots of what I had thought was wrong. Sometimes, you don't know what you don't know.
    Last edited by babyla; 21-07-2013 at 08:03.

  17. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to babyla For This Useful Post:

    Atropos  (21-07-2013),beebs  (21-07-2013),Busy-Bee  (21-07-2013),HollyGolightly81  (21-07-2013)


 

Similar Threads

  1. 4 corners - asylum seekers...
    By babyla in forum News & Current Affairs
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 30-04-2013, 09:47
  2. Asylum seekers (frustration)
    By Witwicky in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 113
    Last Post: 19-08-2012, 14:38
  3. Zoo weekly exploiting asylum seekers. Sign the petition!
    By Ffrenchknickers in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: 23-07-2012, 15:40

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
free weekly newsletters | sign up now!
who are these people who write great posts? meet our hubbub authors!
Learn how you can contribute to the hubbub!

reviews
learn how you can become a reviewer!

competitions

forum - chatting now
christmas gift guidesee all Red Stocking
Shapland Swim Schools
Shapland's at participating schools offer free baby orientation classes once a month - no cost no catches. Your baby will be introduced to our "natural effects" orientation program develop by Shapland's over 3 generations, its gentle and enjoyable.
sales & new stuffsee all
True Fairies
True Fairies is the first interactive website where children can engage and speak with a real fairy through the unique webcam fairy portal. Each session is tailored to the child, and is filled with enchantment and magic.
Visit website to find out more!
featured supporter
Pea Pods Reusable Nappies
Pea Pods are the smart choice when it comes to choosing what's best for you, your baby and the environment. Affordable and simple to use, Pea Pods keep your baby dry & happy. Visit our website to find your nearest stockist or order online.
gotcha
X

Pregnant for the first-time?

Not sure where to start? We can help!

Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!