ABCDiamond

A lot of people feel that these people will then get refugee status here very quickly.

They then become entitled to government benefits that even Australian Citizens can't get, let alone bypassing the 2 year wait that those using the normal channels have to wait.


The burning boat theory is based on similar previous events, where they hope to avoid being towed back out of Australian waters.

Although not yet confirmed, and may never be confirmed, it does seem to be a feasible action.

I wonder why they didn't stay in Indonesia, as they had got that far ?

If they were true refugees from their own country, then Indonesia would be better than where they were originally. But obviously not as good as Australia.

Australia takes in a certain number of Refugees each year. These refugees are selected by "I have no idea, but I did look".

Each illegal refugee takes away a place for a genuine refugee. So effectively this is queue jumping, and only harms other, maybe more genuine, refugees.
It has no other real effect on Australians as the total number will stay about the same.

Some people who may have been waiting for urgent hospital admission, and now get told that their case is delayed, may well be unhappy due to circumstances that 'may' be self inflicted.

Vash the Stampede

It is certainly difficult to understand why a refugee would travel through a number of perfectly safe countries in order to reach a specific one.

stuckinblighty

Happens all the time to the UK

Pollyana

A question that gets asked frequently in the UK when people have travelled across Europe before claiming refugee status.

Pollyana

Snap

Pollyana

The burning boat theory is certainly a favourite - guaranteed way of getting ashore, although if they did do it to their own boat, I doubt that they expected this outcome.

Personally, I think Australia is morally bound to treat them, in spite of the disruption caused to its own residents. However I guess we can hope that tose who are not injured have to face the due process and be treated as illegal immigrants, without preferential treatment. After all, if you are fleeing Afghanistan, Australia is unlikely to be the first country you reach......

We now have some in Brisbane for treatment, others may follow.

bridie

because like the uk they probably realise they'll be better off here

yes, i agree they needed treatment but i remember a similar instance when an illegal immigrant got injured falling off the back of a truck that had come through the tunnel. people who'd waited months and months for operations got cancelled so he could have emergency surgery to save his legs. whilst i agree tha he should have been treated is it really fair for people who pay their taxes and have to wait and wait and wait to have to wait some more? i remember a big uproar about it. very tricky....

i hope that they dont let these people stay here if it's found they sabotaged their own boat as it will send the message out that that's that way to get here.

stuckinblighty

Hit the nail on the head Polly

bcworld

Obviously these people are illegal immigrants in Australia, and when more is known about their circumstances, they MAY end up with refugee status, and be accomodated in whatever country is willing to take them.

It's worth bearing in mind though that all is not well in Afghanistan - despite the presence of allied forces and the removal of the Taliban, the parliament there recently passed a law which states:

Obedience, readiness for intercourse and not leaving the house without the permission of the husband are the duties of the wife.

As long as the husband is not traveling, he has the right to have sexual intercourse with his wife every fourth night.

Some consider this state sanctioned marital rape.

Before the Taliban Afghanistan was a relatively enlightened country....is it any wonder some people want to leave! Perhaps they felt more comfortable seeking asylum in a non muslim country. Or perhaps they were simply (illegal) economic migrants - it will all come out in the wash.

I don't buy into the idea that the first country where they set foot should always be the one to offer asylum (or imprisonment, whatever is relevant) - otherwise the UK and Australia would accomodate no genuine asylum seekers - whereas most countries, including the UK and Australia accept their moral responsibility to assist their fair share of genuine refugees. The UK press would of course have you believe that the UK is the only country that offers asylum to refugees.

ABCDiamond

I thought the idea was that the refugee organisations arrange which countries people actually go to.

Therefore in theory, once they get out to a neighbouring country, these organisations arrange for them to be placed in whatever country is arranged.

I do know that each country has a quota that they take, and these illegal ones seem to be just jumping the queues, leaving the "genuine" ones to wait even longer in the holding areas.

It is a bit like someone applying correctly for PR, but having to wait another year because someone else by-passed them using dodgy tactics.

These illegal immigrants are paying the people smugglers, thousands of dollars to by-pass the refugee queues.

Petals

These people have to be treated and they know we will do it because of our culture, I wonder if we would get the same treatment in their culture.

Its queue jumping and to do so they have to have money so obviously they are better off than a lot of genuine refugees awaiting resettlement.

They get given houses as a priority, English lessons everything they want and we don't bother to look after our old and infirm Australian people. Our waiting lists for public housing are as long as a piece of string and they just get longer all the time.

Cannot expect much sympathy from Mr Average who is dealing with family no where to live and elderly parents requiring nursing home care and no money is found for either.

bcworld

People don't just get classified as 'genuine refugees' because they are poor, but also because they are unsafe or persecuted in their own countries......irrespective of what they can afford to pay a people smuggler. That might be the case here, it might not be. Do you know? I don't.

Twiglets

Mmmm - so under the umbrella of self inflicted circumstances do we include accidents or illnesses related to smoking / drinking / sports / weight / childbirth etc etc?

stuckinblighty

uh oh here we go .................................................

Pollyana

Rather a different topic, don't you think? Unless there are people out there putting themselves through nicotine addiction or childbirth just to claim refugee status?