Australia to Send Refugees to Papua New Guinea

[News_Editor]

Rohingya asylum seekers are seen after being found off the coast of Indonesia in 2009. (Photo: Reuters)

CANBERRA, Australia — Australia’s prime minister warned Friday that all refugees who arrive in the country by boat will be resettled on the island nation of Papua New Guinea, a policy shift that rights groups immediately condemned.

The move, described by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd as “very hard line,†aims to deter an escalating number of asylum seekers who travel to Australia in rickety fishing boats from poor, war-torn homelands through other countries such as Indonesia and Malaysia.

The growing influx is a major political problem for Rudd’s Labor Party, which is the clear underdog in elections expected within months.

“From now on, any asylum seeker who arrives in Australia by boat will have no chance of being settled in Australia as refugees,†Rudd told reporters after signing a pact with Prime Minister Peter O’Neill of Papua New that will enable Australia to deport refugees there.

The policy was condemned by refugee and human rights advocates.

The new plan “shows not only a complete disregard for asylum seekers but absolute contempt for legal and moral obligations,†said Graeme McGregor, Amnesty International’s refugee campaign coordinator for Australia.

David Manne, executive director of Australia’s Refugee and Immigration Legal Center, described it as “a fundamental repudiation of our commitment to protecting refugees.â€

Manne described Papua New Guinea—which is near Australia in the southwestern Pacific Ocean—as an unsafe country where violence is widespread and serious human rights abuses are a daily occurrence.

Rudd said the policy met Australia’s obligations under the United Nations’ Refugee Convention. Papua New Guinea is a signatory of the same convention that sets out refugees’ rights.

The rules will apply to asylum seekers who arrive from Friday.

Asylum seekers who arrive by boat would continue to have their refugee claims assessed in Australia and at detention camps in Papua New Guinea and Nauru.

Australia would help genuine refugees settle in Papua New Guinea—a diverse tribal society of more than 800 languages and 7 million people who are mostly subsistence farmers. Those who are found not to be genuine refugees could return to their home countries or another country other than Australia.

By Friday, 15,728 asylum seekers had arrived by boat this year. The arrivals are on track to exceed last year’s total of 17,202 as well as the government’s target of resettling 20,000 refugees a year.

Iran has become the biggest source country. Asylum seekers from Iran last year accounted for one in seven arrivals. This year, they make up one in three.

Indonesia announced Thursday it will stop issuing visas on arrival to Iranians in a bid to stem the flow to Australia.

Rudd said his government would negotiate with other neighbors in a bid to restrict visa access from other source countries. Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Vietnam, Iraq, Bangladesh and Burma are the next largest sources of asylum seekers arriving on Australian shores.

O’Neill set no limit on how many asylum seekers his country was prepared to accept.

“It is not going to be easy, but of course Papua New Guinea is blessed with a large land mass and a very small population so there is enough assistance that we can give to the Australian government,†O’Neill said.

Australia is PNG’s former colonial master and is now its largest source of foreign aid. In return for accepting the refugees, Rudd said Australia will redevelop a hospital in PNG’s second largest city and reform the country’s university sector.

The new policy echoes that of a previous Australian government that in 2001 also pledged that asylum seekers who arrived by boat would never be accepted by Australia. That policy all but stopped the asylum seeker traffic.

Some refugees spent years in an Australian-run detention camp on the tiny Pacific atoll of Nauru before Australia eventually resettled them because no other country would.

A protest by 150 asylum seekers on Nauru turned violent Friday with several demonstrators and their guards injured, Australia’s Immigration Department said in a statement.

The department said the unrest was unrelated to the new policy, which was announced later.

Associated Press writer Niniek Karmini in Jakarta contributed to this report.

Source: Irrawaddy.org

[chooka]

They destroy all there documentation and then become violent attacking Australians and destroying Australian property if they are not streamlined to citizenship. If they kept their I.D then things would definitely move faster. When they all claim to be the same person it makes the Australian authorities just a little suspicious.

[coma]

Bloomberg is just reporting another boat with 200 souls aboard has sunk of Java this morning. Only 25 survivors have been rescued so far. If this is true then, does the Australian Government have a secret policy on these boats we don't know about ? It sure seems to me that there are alot more of these boats sinking recently compared to a couple of years ago.

[Scott]

This is not the most hospitable time of the year to be at sea. I believe the weather is rather rough.

[simple1]

They destroy all there documentation and then become violent attacking Australians and destroying Australian property if they are not streamlined to citizenship. If they kept their I.D then things would definitely move faster. When they all claim to be the same person it makes the Australian authorities just a little suspicious.

As a serving police officer I would of thought you would know who tells "them" incorrectly to destroy their ID and why others do not hold original ID in the first place. As you well know, or should know, they are not streamlined for citizenship.

I understand that any held in detention, at a minimum the ring leaders, identified as rioters are declined access to Australia.

Edited July 24, 2013 by simple1

[chooka]

Bloomberg is just reporting another boat with 200 souls aboard has sunk of Java this morning. Only 25 survivors have been rescued so far. If this is true then, does the Australian Government have a secret policy on these boats we don't know about ? It sure seems to me that there are alot more of these boats sinking recently compared to a couple of years ago.

If this is another boat then another tragedy. A boat yesterday with 200 on board sunk with 3 lives lost. Again it was the Australian Navy that went to the rescue in Indonesian waters. What happened to those nice 6 shiny new patrol boats Australia built for Indonesia for the very purpose of fighting human trafficking and people smugglers? Who is wearing all the blame for these tragedies? It is Australia and it is Australia that the International population are looking at and finger pointing.

Indonesia isn't doing enough to prevent this. We have the majority coming from Iran who say they are facing persecution and imprisonment in Iran but the Iranian Government grants them passports and allows them to take 20K + equivalent in USD out of the country. They fly into Indonesia clear immigration and are given "Visa's on arrival" they then destroy all their documentation assume a false identity and jump onto a boat. Indonesian authorities for a fee escort then personally to the docks and off to sea they go. 3 metres from the Indonesian shoreline and they are considered Australia's problem.

When they do arrive in Australia without identity they then have the absolute audacity to riot violently because their "DEMANDS" are not met in their timely manner. They don't even have the simple intelligence to realise that they would be processed faster if they had identity documents. The only people who would destroy their past are people who have something to hide and they are not genuine or are simply lowlife criminals on the run.

Just watch them start to riot when they learn that there is absolutely no way they are going to be settled in Australia but in New Guinea. New Guinea wants them and is opening up their doors but this won't be good enough for them, they want Australia and will Demand that Australia takes them and how dare Australia tell them where they can live. Through Violence and destruction they will get want they want and god help anyone who gets in their way.

[geriatrickid]

Wait until these people meet the local PNG population.

The PNGers unlike the Australians won't take any guff and they'll only need look at the troublemakers to encourage peaceful behaviour.

Once word gets out on the hospitality awaiting in PNG, the refugee flow will slow to a trickle.

[chooka]

They destroy all there documentation and then become violent attacking Australians and destroying Australian property if they are not streamlined to citizenship. If they kept their I.D then things would definitely move faster. When they all claim to be the same person it makes the Australian authorities just a little suspicious.

As a serving police officer I would of thought you would know who tells "them" incorrectly to destroy their ID and why others do not hold original ID in the first place. As you well know, or should know, they are not streamlined for citizenship.

I understand that any held in detention, at a minimum the ring leaders, identified as rioters are declined access to Australia.

Quite true it is the smuggler but wouldn't anyone even with a brain 1/2 the size of a Nit say; "hang on I am genuine and I have nothing to hide. I don't want to sit in a detention centre for 1 or 2 years I would like to be in and out. I want to show them my honesty and be up front".

[chooka]

Wait until these people meet the local PNG population.

The PNGers unlike the Australians won't take any guff and they'll only need look at the troublemakers to encourage peaceful behaviour.

Once word gets out on the hospitality awaiting in PNG, the refugee flow will slow to a trickle.

And when word gets out that they are wasting their 20K USD for a passage to Australia, a place that they will never see.

Anyway they want a life in a New country so they should be extremely grateful that they are getting one. The culture and religion may not be what they wanted and they will have a hard time changing New Guinea's culture to suit their lifestyle but still a lot better life than they are claiming to be fleeing from so it has to be all looking up.

New Guinea has some beautiful beaches lined with white sand, an abundance of fresh fruits and seafood and not to mention the beautiful tropical weather. People pay thousands just for a weeks holiday there and these people are getting it free of charge for life. Better than a prod up the rear with a hot soldering iron.

[Rust Never Sleeps]

Let asylum seekers into Australia.

91% of asylum seekers were granted refugee status 2011-2012.

refugeecouncil.org.au/r/stat-as.php

Most boat people come from countries that are in civil war or in countries where Western armed forces are now active.

Most boat people would not leave their countries if they were safe,but they are not safe.

Australia's interests would be better served on a socio-economic level if we try to intergrate them into our

community,through regular employment or community progams,(not locked up).

Let's treat boat people like human beings,not animals.

[samuibeachcomber]

Wait until these people meet the local PNG population.

The PNGers unlike the Australians won't take any guff and they'll only need look at the troublemakers to encourage peaceful behaviour.

Once word gets out on the hospitality awaiting in PNG, the refugee flow will slow to a trickle.

lets hope so!

[David48]

Bloomberg is just reporting another boat with 200 souls aboard has sunk of Java this morning. Only 25 survivors have been rescued so far. If this is true then, does the Australian Government have a secret policy on these boats we don't know about ? It sure seems to me that there are alot more of these boats sinking recently compared to a couple of years ago.

The Boat sunk in Indonesia waters ... not a matter for the Australian government.

Scott is spot on ... a number of open water journeys are delayed for the moment as the waters are currently unsafe.

Probably one of the main reasons that 'a lot more of these boats sinking recently compared to a couple of years ago' ... is that statistically there are more, many more boats attempting the journey as the chart clearly shows below.

.

Herald Sun

Edited July 24, 2013 by David48

[Radar501]

The perilous journey that most of these refugees undertake has more to do with seeking a soft welfare state like Australia to cater for their economic needs than it has to do with fleeing some perceived political oppression they suffer in their homelands.

I'm not exactly pro Rudd, but this policy may just work to slow the flood of boats. Papua New Guinea is a signatory to the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, and is therefore a safe haven, even if life there is not as cosy as it is in Ozz.

As usual, the bleeding hearts are crying "unfair" as loud as they can, but the silent majority of Aussies think it is an idea worth pursuing.

[chooka]

Bloomberg is just reporting another boat with 200 souls aboard has sunk of Java this morning. Only 25 survivors have been rescued so far. If this is true then, does the Australian Government have a secret policy on these boats we don't know about ? It sure seems to me that there are alot more of these boats sinking recently compared to a couple of years ago.

The Boat sunk in Indonesia waters ... not a matter for the Australian government.

Scott is spot on ... a number of open water journeys are delayed for the moment as the waters are currently unsafe.

Probably one of the main reasons that 'a lot more of these boats sinking recently compared to a couple of years ago' ... is that statistically there are more, many more boats attempting the journey as the chart clearly shows below.

.

Herald Sun

Try this one - 2012 17,270

2013 to date - 15,328

http://www.bigpondmoney.com.au/illegal-boat-arrivals-what-it-really-costs

[chooka]

How many is enough coming by boat, 50K 300K 1 Million per year? Do we stop taking those applying through the legal channels to cater for those jumping the que? How many can Australia afford before the taxpayer has had his personal household income totally depleted through increase taxes to process and pay the welfare of these people for life?

I am for taking refugees but totally against boat arrivals.

Boat arrivals to top 50,000: Carr

"You have got 3000 people arriving a month. The annual rate is something like 40 to 50,000 a year if it continues at this level.

"If it continues at this level - the prime minister was very persuaded by this - it could rise further as people smugglers really close in to make a financial killing."

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/national/boat-arrivals-to-top-50000-carr/story-e6frfku9-1226682638921#ixzz2Zw4TwRKQ

[simple1]

Yes it really costs & I believe it's now running at A$2 billion a year. Rudd has already admitted the costs and paying for additional & updated infrasturcture in PNG will not save any money for the Australian tax payers. I would guess in the longer term costs will not increase as the numbers attempting to access Australia by sea will decrease; so long as the current PNG solution is not overturned in the Australian High Court.

The government has not identified a solution for those arriving on tourist visas by air & then declaring themselves as asylum seekers. Prior to the explosion of people coming by sea in the past year or so, more asylum seekers were arriving by air, than by sea.

[chooka]

Yes it really costs & I believe it's now running at A$2 billion a year. Rudd has already admitted the costs and paying for additional & updated infrasturcture in PNG will not save any money for the Australian tax payers. I would guess in the longer term costs will not increase as the numbers attempting to access Australia by sea will decrease; so long as the current PNG solution is not overturned in the Australian High Court.

The government has not identified a solution for those arriving on tourist visas by air & then declaring themselves as asylum seekers. Prior to the explosion of people coming by sea in the past year or so, more asylum seekers were arriving by air, than by sea.

Those arriving by air come with documentation and Identification and are not all called Bill Smith from London unlike those arriving by boat. The cost and time in detention to process air arrivals is reduced and they don't normally come with a list of demands and riot if they don't have their demands met swiftly. The only people who benefit from the boat arrivals are the people smugglers who are making a fortune. The Australian tax payer is the loser. When people arrive by air Australia is not seen as the evil nation because people a drowning at sea. Apparently a problem Australia has caused because it does not have a fleet of aircraft in Indonesia for these people.

Give Christmas Island to Indonesia and then Australia's mainland may be to far away for people to risk it.

[Berkshire]

The perilous journey that most of these refugees undertake has more to do with seeking a soft welfare state like Australia to cater for their economic needs than it has to do with fleeing some perceived political oppression they suffer in their homelands.

I'm not exactly pro Rudd, but this policy may just work to slow the flood of boats. Papua New Guinea is a signatory to the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, and is therefore a safe haven, even if life there is not as cosy as it is in Ozz.

As usual, the bleeding hearts are crying "unfair" as loud as they can, but the silent majority of Aussies think it is an idea worth pursuing.

But there are some prominent Aussies who don't think this idea will work:

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/24/opinion/australia-asylum-seekers-png/index.html?hpt=hp_c4

[canman]

The perilous journey that most of these refugees undertake has more to do with seeking a soft welfare state like Australia to cater for their economic needs than it has to do with fleeing some perceived political oppression they suffer in their homelands.

I'm not exactly pro Rudd, but this policy may just work to slow the flood of boats. Papua New Guinea is a signatory to the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, and is therefore a safe haven, even if life there is not as cosy as it is in Ozz.

As usual, the bleeding hearts are crying "unfair" as loud as they can, but the silent majority of Aussies think it is an idea worth pursuing.

Spot on!

In Canada, they were letting in so called Sri Lankan Refuges by the thousands. They were given generous welfare benefits. Shortly after having their refugee status approved and Canada passports issued guess what thousands of these refugees did, used the welfare money to have a holiday in Sri Lanka. Australia for too long has had a soft left driven refugee agenda, it's about time something concrete was done about the issue. So long as they stick to their guns and don't cave to the vocal minority Australia will see the boat people problem disappear in a matter of months. The only people dis-advantaged by the PNG solution is the people smugglers

[simple1]

Yes it really costs & I believe it's now running at A$2 billion a year. Rudd has already admitted the costs and paying for additional & updated infrasturcture in PNG will not save any money for the Australian tax payers. I would guess in the longer term costs will not increase as the numbers attempting to access Australia by sea will decrease; so long as the current PNG solution is not overturned in the Australian High Court.

The government has not identified a solution for those arriving on tourist visas by air & then declaring themselves as asylum seekers. Prior to the explosion of people coming by sea in the past year or so, more asylum seekers were arriving by air, than by sea.

Those arriving by air come with documentation and Identification and are not all called Bill Smith from London unlike those arriving by boat. The cost and time in detention to process air arrivals is reduced and they don't normally come with a list of demands and riot if they don't have their demands met swiftly. The only people who benefit from the boat arrivals are the people smugglers who are making a fortune. The Australian tax payer is the loser. When people arrive by air Australia is not seen as the evil nation because people a drowning at sea. Apparently a problem Australia has caused because it does not have a fleet of aircraft in Indonesia for these people.

Give Christmas Island to Indonesia and then Australia's mainland may be to far away for people to risk it.

Not entirely accurate. In 2011 more than 6,000 asylum seekers arrived by air. The largest group by far came from China, many with flase documentation & when applications are rejected the appeals process can go on for years.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-03-15/chinese-fly-into-australia-to-make-27dodgy27-asylum-claims/3892416

The number of detainees actually rioting is relatively small in comparison to the overall numbers detained. It's ironic that some of those who recently rioted on Nauru were about to be advised of their status. In the meantime have a read of the following that talks to the conditions on Naura for detainees.

http://www.theherald.com.au/story/1658884/cruel-and-degrading-policy-to-blame-for-nauru-riots-say-salvation-army-staff/?cs=12

[David48]

I'm not exactly pro Rudd, but this policy may just work to slow the flood of boats. Papua New Guinea ...

But there are some prominent Aussies who don't think this idea will work:

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/24/opinion/australia-asylum-seekers-png/index.html?hpt=hp_c4

I did read that opinion piece from a well credentialed Scholar.

How I read what the article says is not that it won't work ... but identifies a number of obstacles which might prevent it from working. A subtle, but important difference.

But, to honest, it matters naught, zero, zip what we, or any other person thinks ... except the person sitting in Iran, Sri Lanka, Vietnam, Malaysia or Indonesia is thinking when weighing his or her option on where to try and escape to.

If that person is convinced that the only place that he/she is going is to PNG and never to Australia ... then the boat arrivals will dwindle to a trickle ... and fairly quickly.

.

Edited July 24, 2013 by David48

[chooka]

I'm not exactly pro Rudd, but this policy may just work to slow the flood of boats. Papua New Guinea ...

But there are some prominent Aussies who don't think this idea will work:

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/24/opinion/australia-asylum-seekers-png/index.html?hpt=hp_c4

I did read that opinion piece from a well credentialed Scholar.

How I read what the article says is not that it won't work ... but identifies a number of obstacles which might prevent it from working. A subtle, but important difference.

But, to honest, it matters naught, zero, zip what we, or any other person thinks ... except the person sitting in Iran, Sri Lanka, Vietnam, Malaysia or Indonesia is thinking when weighing his or her option on where to try and escape to.

If that person is convinced that the only place that he/she is going is to PNG and never to Australia ... then the boat arrivals will dwindle to a trickle ... and fairly quickly.

.

True the number of boats will dwindle. They will start to look at other places like New Zealand etc if they don't like PNG. Many find it hard to assimilate in a Christian Culture like Australia anyway even when Australia gives up Christian ways like xmas and Easter in schools and bans religious things so as not to offend them. I think they may find it easier to intergrate into PNG Culture. I think they will be happier there if they abide by the PNG way of life.

[Chicog]

Overpopulated third world countries should be forced to discourage their populations from breeding like rabbits and then they wouldn't be dumping their economic migrants on everyone else.

[simple1]

Overpopulated third world countries should be forced to discourage their populations from breeding like rabbits and then they wouldn't be dumping their economic migrants on everyone else.

Using data for 49 Muslim-majority countries and territories, he found that fertility rates declined an average of 41 percent between 1975-80 and 2005-10, a deeper drop than the 33 percent decline for the world as a whole. Twenty-two Muslim countries and territories had fertility declines of 50 percent or more. The sharpest drops were in Iran, Oman, the United Arab Emirates, Algeria, Bangladesh, Tunisia, Libya, Albania, Qatar and Kuwait, which all recorded declines of 60 percent or more over three decades. Source:

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-02-08/opinions/36991734_1_muslim-world-fertility-decline-fertility-rates

[Rust Never Sleeps]

Obviously facts are lost in this thread.

[David48]

Obviously facts are lost in this thread.

Which 'facts' got sunk?

.

[canman]

Overpopulated third world countries should be forced to discourage their populations from breeding like rabbits and then they wouldn't be dumping their economic migrants on everyone else.

Using data for 49 Muslim-majority countries and territories, he found that fertility rates declined an average of 41 percent between 1975-80 and 2005-10, a deeper drop than the 33 percent decline for the world as a whole. Twenty-two Muslim countries and territories had fertility declines of 50 percent or more. The sharpest drops were in Iran, Oman, the United Arab Emirates, Algeria, Bangladesh, Tunisia, Libya, Albania, Qatar and Kuwait, which all recorded declines of 60 percent or more over three decades. Source:

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-02-08/opinions/36991734_1_muslim-world-fertility-decline-fertility-rates

Irrelevant statistics. What is relevant is the total fertility rates today which are still very high in the countries you mentioned. It is not relevant what the fertility rates in these countries were 30 years ago because the infant mortality rate was so very much higher.

[canman]

Obviously facts are lost in this thread.

Why is it that these "refugees" flee a country which they hate so much and then want to change the culture of the country which takes them in to match that which they have run away from?

[Farma]

I suggest Rust Never Sleeps have a read through this interesting article written by Professor Mirko Bagaric the Dean of the Deakin Law School, former member of the Refugee Review Tribunal and co-author of Migration and Refugee Law.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/opinion/prime-minister-kevin-rudd8217s-png-asylum-seeker-solution-does-not-help-the-millions-languishing-in-camps/story-fnihsr9v-1226683719887

Could it be he was referring to Rust Never Sleeps when he wrote this.

How did Australia get itself into such a humanistic mess?

Easy: it stems from the typical herd-like worship by the Greens and the refugee lobby to symbols and slogans over achieving good outcomes.

[Berkshire]

Obviously facts are lost in this thread.

Why is it that these "refugees" flee a country which they hate so much and then want to change the culture of the country which takes them in to match that which they have run away from?

I often wonder that very same thing about farangs in Thailand.