Illegal boat people
Can anyone explain what the Australian authorities do about illegal boat people? Do they send them home (:p), sink their boat (:thumbsup:), set fire to it (:ohmy:) or...... ? Rudd seems a little upset about what's happening! I feel a little sympathetic towards them but also why should many of us spend a great deal of money and wait months / years going through the correct procedures!!!
|
Re: Illegal boat people
No idea but killing them by sinking their boat seems a little extreme and the fire comment was a tad out of order considering recent events. :)
|
Re: Illegal boat people
From what I've read, Rudd is upset with the traffickers and Indonesia rather than the boat people themselves.
Normally they are sent to the offshore processing centre on Christmas Island but when that's been full in the past they have been sent to Baxter, SA or Naru. |
Re: Illegal boat people
Originally Posted by daddyofthree
(Post 7491557)
Can anyone explain what the Australian authorities do about illegal boat people? Do they send them home (:p), sink their boat (:thumbsup:), set fire to it (:ohmy:) or...... ? Rudd seems a little upset about what's happening! I feel a little sympathetic towards them but also why should many of us spend a great deal of money and wait months / years going through the correct procedures!!!
|
Re: Illegal boat people
Originally Posted by mohogony
(Post 7492039)
From what l read l think the boat people set fire to the boat themeselves so the Aussie navy could'nt then force them to turn the boat around and go back to indonesia, instead they would have to rescue them from the water and take them to OZ. OZ used to have a very tough policy under John Howard towards boat people and illegal immigrants they were ither all sent to some pacific island or locked up in a hell hole detention center in the middle of the hot outback surrounded by razor wire and electric fences, but Prime minister Rudd has softened the laws alot which may be why there are now alot more boat people coming,
|
Re: Illegal boat people
Under the Pacific Solution, (devised to cut down on the numbers of illegal boat people) the asylum seekers were sent to offshore processing centres on islands such as Nauru, rather than be allowed to land on the Australian mainland.
This caused difficulties for the illegal boat people, and most of this traffic stopped. The centre at Nauru was closed in Feb 2008 as promised in the last election. The plan was to allow all illegals to enter the country, and be processed whilst living here, and then asked to leave if they were not accepted (if they could then be found) The Christmas Island centre was also closed, but was re-opened in December 2008, to cater for the increasing boat people trade from 2008. http://www.greenleft.org.au/2009/779/40173 There have been a few instances of boat people setting fire to their boats themselves, to try to avoid being sent back. The only instances of the Australian Authorities setting light to these boats is after they are empty, and they are destroyed for reasons such as maritime safety and other legitimate reasons. |
Re: Illegal boat people
Originally Posted by hereshoping
(Post 7492135)
Article in the age recently said that 90% of boat people are subsequently found to be genuine refugees. Australia has an international obligation to shelter people in danger from harm, and gets relatively few refugees.
http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/as...112008eng.html I get the feeling that Amnesty international is not happy with the UK though, it says this about the UK... The UK does not participate in resettlement in a meaningful way. A positive move has been made to increase the annual resettlement quota from 500 to 750 to accommodate Iraqi refugees, including some people who worked with UK forces in Iraq. However, such a commitment is seriously inadequate when viewed against the needs in the region and the UK’s capacity. |
Re: Illegal boat people
Originally Posted by hereshoping
(Post 7492135)
Article in the age recently said that 90% of boat people are subsequently found to be genuine refugees. Australia has an international obligation to shelter people in danger from harm, and gets relatively few refugees.
|
Re: Illegal boat people
Originally Posted by ABCDiamond
(Post 7492162)
For 2008-2009 Australia has announced it will increase its Refugee and Humanitarian Programme from 13,000 places to 13,500 places.
http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/as...112008eng.html I get the feeling that Amnesty international is not happy with the UK though, it says this about the UK... I was under the impression that the UK took much more than 500 or 750 refugees each year ? :confused: Something I've noticed lately on my ride to work past a building which processes Asylum applicants is the sudden increase in the length of the queue outside it. It's more than doubled in length from what it was just a few weeks ago. |
Re: Illegal boat people
Given the experience of other countries that allow asylum seekers onto the mainlaind and who subsequently dissapear; What is the problem with them being placed on an island off the mainland?
I agree the decision making process needs to be quick so as to be "humane" and either the asylum seeker taken to the mainland or sent home. As long as the holding centre is safe, secure, clean, appropriate so as to meet their needs then what's the problem?:confused: |
Re: Illegal boat people
Originally Posted by hereshoping
(Post 7492135)
Article in the age recently said that 90% of boat people are subsequently found to be genuine refugees. Australia has an international obligation to shelter people in danger from harm, and gets relatively few refugees.
|
Re: Illegal boat people
Your joking comment about setting fire to their boats is actually happening quite often, and for good reason. These boats carry with them a great number of species that Australia doesn't want ( bugs / bacteria ) so they prefer to set fire on these little boats rather than tow them in. The refugees are often not allowed on land ( if they set foot on land then they have rights, if they don't then they don't have rights ) they are deported to Papua Guinea and Indonesia. There was one occasion where indonesia denied a sinking ship ( they are all sinking , it's part of their tactic ) access to their port, Australia also denied them, hm... wonder what happened to that ship.
|
Re: Illegal boat people
Originally Posted by ABCDiamond
(Post 7492162)
I was under the impression that the UK took much more than 500 or 750 refugees each year ? :confused:
|
Re: Illegal boat people
Originally Posted by scamp1976
(Post 7492747)
hm... wonder what happened to that ship.
|
Re: Illegal boat people
Originally Posted by NedKelly
(Post 7492770)
They put the plug back in until they reached New Zealand and then pulled the plug out again.
|
Re: Illegal boat people
I was quite happy when Labour won the election but looking at current events John Howard has his good points.
I support Howard's procedure of processing refugees offshore and the tough attitude towards preventing an influx of refugees. |
Re: Illegal boat people
Originally Posted by looky
(Post 7492801)
I was quite happy when Labour won the election but looking at current events John Howard has his good points.
I support Howard's procedure of processing refugees offshore and the tough attitude towards preventing an influx of refugees. |
Re: Illegal boat people
Originally Posted by sonlymewalter
(Post 7492534)
Given the experience of other countries that allow asylum seekers onto the mainlaind and who subsequently dissapear; What is the problem with them being placed on an island off the mainland?
I agree the decision making process needs to be quick so as to be "humane" and either the asylum seeker taken to the mainland or sent home. As long as the holding centre is safe, secure, clean, appropriate so as to meet their needs then what's the problem?:confused: The main problem with the argument about stopping in the nearest safe country is that all the HR countries tend to be in one or two areas of the world so those neighbours would end up taking everyone whilst countries like Australia, UK, US etc would take no one which is hardly fair but I don't know how anyone would make the whole situation fair and legal to all. |
Re: Illegal boat people
During the Balkan conflicts the numbers were higher. The number of assylum seekers in the UK is certainly a lot higher.
During this sort of debate it is important to distinguish between the type of migrant and illegal migrants. Refugees typically are chosen from nearer the country they are exiled from. Assylum seeks make their own way often at great danger.
Originally Posted by ABCDiamond
(Post 7492162)
For 2008-2009 Australia has announced it will increase its Refugee and Humanitarian Programme from 13,000 places to 13,500 places.
http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/as...112008eng.html I get the feeling that Amnesty international is not happy with the UK though, it says this about the UK... I was under the impression that the UK took much more than 500 or 750 refugees each year ? :confused: |
Re: Illegal boat people
Originally Posted by IvanM
(Post 7494805)
During the Balkan conflicts the numbers were higher. The number of assylum seekers in the UK is certainly a lot higher.
During this sort of debate it is important to distinguish between the type of migrant and illegal migrants. Refugees typically are chosen from nearer the country they are exiled from. Assylum seeks make their own way often at great danger. |
Re: Illegal boat people
Originally Posted by looky
(Post 7492801)
I was quite happy when Labour won the election but looking at current events John Howard has his good points.
I support Howard's procedure of processing refugees offshore and the tough attitude towards preventing an influx of refugees. However, the Labour government is currently rejecting asylum appeals at a greater rate than the Howard administration, so we need not fear that they are "softer" on this issue. |
Re: Illegal boat people
I doubt the home office has any better idea of the numbers.
Originally Posted by ABCDiamond
(Post 7494849)
I agree, but with Amnesty talking about the combined Refugee and Humanitarian Programme totals in that article, the UK figure does appear rather inaccurate, to say the least.
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 9:11 am. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.