Closed Thread
Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 76
  1. #41
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    3,054
    Thanks
    269
    Thanked
    1,053
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Father View Post
    Interesting numbers that you put out.
    Firstly, Howard introduced the 'Pacific Solution' in 2001 to combat the number of arrivals. So his 'vile' policies were not really in effect on that year. Quite convenient that you ignore 2002 (1 boat/1 arrival), 2003 (1 boat/53 arrivals), 2004 (1 boat/15 arrivals), 2005 (4 boats/11 arrivals), 2006 (6 boats/60 arrivals), 2007 (5 boats/148 arrivals). Why did you ignore all of those?

    2008. The policy is changed. Now lets have a look at the numbers.

    2008 (7 boats/161 arrivals), 2009 (60 boats/2727 arrivals),2010 (132 boats/6502 arrivals). That last year was very conveniently ignored by you also. Why? This year?

    Yes. They do care about our policy.
    This graph says it all.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BoatArrivals.gif
    If you know all of that from a source other than wiki you will also know why the numbers were so low in 2002, the govt moved the goal posts, asylum seekers landed on the closest possible island, thinking they were safe, but no the Howard Govt changed the exclusion zone, making those closer and safer islands a free ticket back to where they came from, and thus NOT part of our statistics.
    The recent rise has much less to do with policy than it does with world events.

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by luvmyboys View Post
    The recent rise has much less to do with policy than it does with world events.
    The Labor government doesn't seem to think so.

    Can you tell me which world events have caused the dramatic rise in 2009?
    And maybe you can also explain the dramatic rise in the last month? 900 so far!

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    3,054
    Thanks
    269
    Thanked
    1,053
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Father View Post
    The Labor government doesn't seem to think so.

    Can you tell me which world events have caused the dramatic rise in 2009?
    And maybe you can also explain the dramatic rise in the last month? 900 so far!
    For one the increased violence and poverty in countries such as Afghanistan, fleeing a war zone not entirely of their own making.

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,935
    Thanks
    393
    Thanked
    1,325
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    The labor govt is unfortunately pandering to the right wing vote, or at least, the perception of one.
    Last edited by Mod-pegasus; 18-12-2011 at 20:08.

  5. #45
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by luvmyboys View Post
    For one the increased violence and poverty in countries such as Afghanistan, fleeing a war zone not entirely of their own making.
    And what changed in Afghanistan between 2007 and 2008 which drastically changed the numbers?

    I'm after something a little bit more specific than a general comment like that. The spike was very marked.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Chew the Mintie View Post
    The labor govt is unfortunately pandering to the right wing vote, or at least, the perception of one.


    Who is the Immigration Department 'pandering' to?
    http://www.theage.com.au/national/to...209-1onn8.html
    Last edited by Mod-pegasus; 18-12-2011 at 20:08.

  7. #47
    Mod-pegasus's Avatar
    Mod-pegasus is offline ADMINISTRATOR
    and all that the Lorax left here in this mess was a small pile of rocks with the one word...UNLESS
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    14,644
    Thanks
    1,734
    Thanked
    1,735
    Reviews
    2
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 posts
    Honest question - I get that onshore v offshore processing is a huge issue - which is continued to be bantered between both major parties, while the onshore processing centres become overcrowded and unfunctional, so I'm not sure where to go with that - but otherwise - a major difference between Howards policies and current was the issuing of TPV.

    Educate me - what's so wrong with TPV's - that it wouldn't enhance and speed up processing of refugees?

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    my house
    Posts
    18,049
    Thanks
    1,424
    Thanked
    7,642
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 posts
    TPV were given to people who were already proven refugees, so it put them through the whole process again. Also, with the tpv, they had to reapply after a few years and if things improved in their homeland, they had to return there. There's a few other things too!

  9. #49
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by pegasus View Post
    Honest question - I get that onshore v offshore processing is a huge issue - which is continued to be bantered between both major parties
    Both major parties now support offshore processing - thanks to the last Labor party conference. This is now bipartisan - with the exception of where to have the offshore facilities.

    I personally think TPVs are a great idea. It is a deterrent to the economic migrants who choose to come by boat, whilst at the same time giving those genuine refugees the protection that they need for as long as they need it.

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    my house
    Posts
    18,049
    Thanks
    1,424
    Thanked
    7,642
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 posts
    OMG - economic refugees! It just gets better and better

    And clearly shows that you really don't care that there are people drowning IMO.


 
Closed Thread
Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. *Possibly Distressing - poor little man
    By 2Bboys in forum News & Current Affairs
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 29-04-2012, 17:40
  2. ***Possibly distressing*** What do you think of this?
    By GluttonForPunishment in forum General depression and blues
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 11-02-2012, 23:10
  3. **possibly distressing** Have you been to Auschwitz? Would you go?
    By Witwicky in forum Destination Suggestions
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 05-01-2012, 21:09

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
FEATURED SUPPORTER
ProSwimProSwim runs learn to swim classes for babies, children and adults. Our indoor centre in Plympton Park has lessons all ...
FORUMS - chatting now ...
REVIEWS
"Pigeon teats rule!"
by Alex
Pigeon PP Wide Neck reviews ›
"Wonderful natural Aussie made product!"
by Mrstwr
Baby U Goat Milk Moisturiser reviews ›
"Replaced good quality with cheap tight nappies"
by Kris
Coles Comfy Bots Nappies reviews ›