Illegal boat people
Apr 19th 2009, 9:59 am
#16
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 691
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.
I support Howard's procedure of processing refugees offshore and the tough attitude towards preventing an influx of refugees.
Apr 20th 2009, 1:38 am
#17
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Illegal boat people
All politicians have good points, tis a pity we can't just select each of their combined good points and drop the bad. But party politics, on both sides, will not allow that.
Apr 20th 2009, 1:46 am
#18
Crazy Cat Lady
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 65,493
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?
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?
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.
Apr 20th 2009, 5:13 am
#19
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,555
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.
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.
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 ?
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 ?
Apr 20th 2009, 5:40 am
#20
Guest
Posts: n/a
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.
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.
Apr 20th 2009, 6:22 am
#21
Fighting my corner
Joined: Aug 2005
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 11,948
Re: Illegal boat people
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.
Last edited by Vash the Stampede; Apr 20th 2009 at 6:25 am.
