Australia to Send Refugees to Papua New Guinea

[David48]

Since facts are important and it does allow the issue to be seen in a rational light.

Much has been made of the rather small number of Refugees that Australia accepts.

From the Wiki data, Australia accepted 23,434 Refugees, while the USA accepted 264,763 Refugees ... more then 10 times the amount that Australia in that statistical year did.

However ...

When you look at it more rationally, say based on the countries population, Australia accepted 1 Refugee for every 997 Australians ... while the USA accepted 1 Refugee for every 1195 Americans.

So, on that basis, we accept more Refugees on a 'per capita basis' then the Yanks.

We are, admittedly, just under the World Average of 1 Refugee for every 683 people.

Sweden is a shining light accepting 1 Refugee for every 107 Swedes ... has anyone read reports of issues within Sweden and their open Immigration Policies?

.

[Steely Dan]

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.

Let's hope so, it would stop the natives from getting indigestion.

[Will27]

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.

Is that just a hunch or do you have any proof of that?

Because my information is exactly the opposite.

[Steely Dan]

Sweden is a shining light accepting 1 Refugee for every 107 Swedes ... has anyone read reports of issues within Sweden and their open Immigration Policies?

.

Just a few, Sweden is a shining example of cultural suicide by a liberal left government in denial as their inner cities burn.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/641503-stockholms-burning-trouble-in-the-liberal-utopia/

[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.

Is that just a hunch or do you have any proof of that?

Because my information is exactly the opposite.

OK, my thoughts are based upon the previous government reaction to the Christmas Island riots below. Are you saying none were denied residency in Australia?

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said inmates who took part in the riot risked being refused residency in Australia.

"If a detainee on Christmas Island has committed a serious offence this will be taken into consideration as part of the assessment as to whether or not they are granted a visa," he told parliament.

[chooka]

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?

That is so common. They form ghetto's of the country they fled. They keep the same mindset of that country and believe the same ways apply to the host. If the host has other ideas and wants to maintain their traditions then the refugees revolt with violence as seen over and over until they instill their way of life on the host. Normal trait of the parasite.

[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

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.

Understood that high birth rates were a mechanism to address high levels of infant mortality. However, a study claims falling birth rates will slow the world's Muslim population growth over the next two decades, reducing it on average from 2.2 percent a year in 1990-2010 to 1.5 percent a year from now until 2030. In addition Muslims will number 2.2 billion by 2030 compared to 1.6 billion in 2010, making up 26.4 percent of the world population compared to 23.4 percent now, according to estimates by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. Source:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/27/us-muslims-population-idUSTRE70Q68E20110127

Edited July 24, 2013 by simple1

[Scott]

If you are going to cite statistics, keep them relative to the thread.

[F430murci]

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?

That is so common. They form ghetto's of the country they fled. They keep the same mindset of that country and believe the same ways apply to the host. If the host has other ideas and wants to maintain their traditions then the refugees revolt with violence as seen over and over until they instill their way of life on the host. Normal trait of the parasite.

Interesting as I was thinking parasite or bacteria before I got to your last word. A serious problem for sure. Interesting how anyone could think that people who failed in their own country or become a drain on their own country's economic system would somehow be great for the new host country and people living in the host country.

[Will27]

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.

Is that just a hunch or do you have any proof of that?

Because my information is exactly the opposite.

OK, my thoughts are based upon the previous government reaction to the Christmas Island riots below. Are you saying none were denied residency in Australia?

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said inmates who took part in the riot risked being refused residency in Australia.

"If a detainee on Christmas Island has committed a serious offence this will be taken into consideration as part of the assessment as to whether or not they are granted a visa," he told parliament.

Risked being the operative word.

My understanding is that none of the low-life's that rioted were refused residency on those grounds.

The politicians use it as a scare tactic and to try and show Joe public that they won't tolerate it when

in fact they/we do.

To be honest, I don't think it is even taken into account when assessing someone for refugee status.

[Will27]

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.

If Rudd was really serious about stopping asylum seekers, he would impose the same restrictions

to air arrivals as well.

Having said that, the boat arrivals have gotten completely out of control.

Rudd opened the door for them and is now trying to close it.

Edited July 24, 2013 by Will27

[Scott]

Off-topic posts deleted.

Hint: Australia, Refugees, PNG

How to get your post deleted: Anti-Islam rant, Islam is taking over the world, Muslims are illiterate, etc., etc.,

Stay on topic please.

[chooka]

PNG Prime Minister, Peter O'Niell has just told Tony Abbot to stop spreading lies and rumours about the Aust/PNG deal on boat people. He says Abott is trying to derail the agreement

[overherebc]

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.

Post your name and address on, you pick the website, and let then people know how many spare rooms you have and how many YOU are prepared to look after for free.

[simple1]

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?

That is so common. They form ghetto's of the country they fled. They keep the same mindset of that country and believe the same ways apply to the host. If the host has other ideas and wants to maintain their traditions then the refugees revolt with violence as seen over and over until they instill their way of life on the host. Normal trait of the parasite.

Interesting as I was thinking parasite or bacteria before I got to your last word. A serious problem for sure. Interesting how anyone could think that people who failed in their own country or become a drain on their own country's economic system would somehow be great for the new host country and people living in the host country.

Suggest you read the content at the following URL regarding economic refugees in Australia. BTW, in Australia there has been virtually no processing of claims since August 13, 2012 made by the more than 20,000 refugees who have arrived since that time.. This was confirmed in the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee on May 27, 2013. So, if we have not processed claims, we have no idea whether recent arrivals by boat are “genuine” refugees or not.

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/factcheck-are-asylum-seekers-really-economic-refugees-20130702-2p96i.html#ixzz2Zy4p1Jys

Since Ausgust 2012, 1035 Sri Lankans, mainly Hindu, were returned to Sri Lanka as they had submitted refugee claims prior to 08/2012 and were assessed by the "enhanced screening" process as economic refugees

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/17/australia-refugees-legal-sri-lanka

[David48]

.

If you come here by boat without a visa you won't be settled in Australia.

Australia's migration policy has changed. From 19 July 2013 if you travel to Australia by boat with no visa, you will not be settled here. You will be sent to Papua New Guinea for processing. If found to be a refugee, you'll be settled in Papua New Guinea, or another participating regional state, not Australia. This includes women and children. These changes have been introduced to stop people smugglers and stop further loss of life at sea.

If you are not found to be in need of protection, you will stay in Papua New Guinea until you can be sent to your home country.

There will be no cap on the number of people who can be transferred or resettled in Papua New Guinea.

Don't risk your family's safety. Don't waste your money.

Don't risk your life or waste your time or money by paying people smugglers. If you pay a people smuggler you are buying a ticket to another country.

Arriving in Australia by boat means:

• being sent straight to Papua New Guinea for processing
• being settled in Papua New Guinea, not Australia, even if you are found to be a refugee
• not being reunited with family and friends in Australia.

You can still come to Australia through regular migration.

Find the right pathway for you and your family.

Australian Immigration

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfyKjh2nXQ0

.

[David48]

Solomon Islands to play role in Australia's Papua New Guinea asylum seeker solution ...

The small Pacific nation of the Solomon Islands is expected to play a role in the federal government's plan to send asylum seekers to Papua New Guinea for processing and resettlement.

The country's Prime Minister, Gordon Darcy Lilo has been in talks with Australia's Foreign Minister Bob Carr and the pair plan to make a joint announcement on the matter from the Solomon Islands on Tuesday ...

This follows last weeks announcement that no asylum seeker who comes to Australia by boat will ever be resettled in Australia, instead they will be sent to Papua New Guinea for processing and, if found to be refugees, will be resettled there.

Back in 2011, under former Prime Minister Danny Philip, the Solomon Islands was keen to host a refugee processing centre on behalf of Australia.

SMH

The Solomon Islands are a signatory to the United Nations Refugee Convention.

.

[F430murci]

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?

That is so common. They form ghetto's of the country they fled. They keep the same mindset of that country and believe the same ways apply to the host. If the host has other ideas and wants to maintain their traditions then the refugees revolt with violence as seen over and over until they instill their way of life on the host. Normal trait of the parasite.

Interesting as I was thinking parasite or bacteria before I got to your last word. A serious problem for sure. Interesting how anyone could think that people who failed in their own country or become a drain on their own country's economic system would somehow be great for the new host country and people living in the host country.

Suggest you read the content at the following URL regarding economic refugees in Australia. BTW, in Australia there has been virtually no processing of claims since August 13, 2012 made by the more than 20,000 refugees who have arrived since that time.. This was confirmed in the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee on May 27, 2013. So, if we have not processed claims, we have no idea whether recent arrivals by boat are “genuine” refugees or not.

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/factcheck-are-asylum-seekers-really-economic-refugees-20130702-2p96i.html#ixzz2Zy4p1Jys

Since Ausgust 2012, 1035 Sri Lankans, mainly Hindu, were returned to Sri Lanka as they had submitted refugee claims prior to 08/2012 and were assessed by the "enhanced screening" process as economic refugees

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/17/australia-refugees-legal-sri-lanka

Read what? That article does not negate anything I said. The article seems to be based on speculation and agenda. Common sense and reality would dictate otherwise. For instance, the article mentions Iranians. Almost anyone except the extremely rich in Iran would have good economic reason to leave Iran given the pathetic incomes and high costs of goods. http://iransnews.wordpress.com/2011/04/12/prices-in-iran-and-canada/

What is the literacy rate in the countries from where these refugee or boat people arrived?

Are we to assume that only the literate and educated individuals with high social class standing and wealth left everything behind and jumped on a crappy boat that is likely to sink?

Is it your contention that all or a high percentage of these boat people are well educated, successful people that will be successful in Australia and will not be a drain on Australia?

If Australia wants to process them and let them in, Awesome. Good for Australia to spend what ever resources are necessary to care for these people. If Australia does not, then why bash them as they have good reason to be concerned and perhaps the citizens would like to stop the inflow of boat people.

[Sayonarax]

And that's how its done..!

PS> If you dont like our country's policy on immigrants we can send your comrades packing too!

Edited July 24, 2013 by Sayonarax

[chooka]

Tony Abott has stated that this will never go ahead when he is P.M. His plan is to put the Military in full control of the asylum seeker issue and boats will be pushed back out to sea with the aid of the Navy and SAS they will not be permitted to land on any Australian soil. Says RUDD is weak and not taking a strong stand.

[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?

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

Fair enough but not germain to the subject at hand

[chooka]

Kevin Rudd's asylum boat solution sinking

• by: David Crowe and Paige Taylor
• From: The Australian
• July 25, 2013 12:00AM

PEOPLE-SMUGGLERS are defying Kevin Rudd's new border-protection plan by despatching more asylum-seekers to Christmas Island, in a direct challenge to his pledge to send them all to Papua New Guinea.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/immigration/kevin-rudds-asylum-boat-solution-sinking/story-fn9hm1gu-1226684649444?utm_source=The%20Australian&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=editorial&net_sub_uid=6385596

[simple1]

@ F430murci:

Prior to the hold put on assessing new arrivals by asylum seekers by sea & air in 08/2012, 90% were confirmed as genuine refugees. I assume the remaining 10% are held in detention camps until they can be returned to their home countries. With the 20k plus and increasing, who have not gone through the assessment process it is pure conjecture as to their being genuine or not.

In my opinion the way forward is to hold a referendum regarding the ongoing commitment by Australia to the applicable UN conventions & treatment of asylum seekers/refugees.

[chooka]

@ F430murci:

Prior to the hold put on assessing new arrivals by asylum seekers by sea & air in 08/2012, 90% were confirmed as genuine refugees. I assume the remaining 10% are held in detention camps until they can be returned to their home countries. With the 20k plus and increasing, who have not gone through the assessment process it is pure conjecture as to their being genuine or not.

In my opinion the way forward is to hold a referendum regarding the ongoing commitment by Australia to the applicable UN conventions & treatment of asylum seekers/refugees.

Build a detention centre in Indonesia and then as the come through immigration/passport control they can be asked

Business / Pleasure or Asylum? If it's Asylum straight into the cattle truck for processing at the detention centre whilst they still have their I.D. No leaky boats or huge costs to traffickers. Cuts out the middle man and costs to the Australian Military. Then ship them off to their new home in PNG.

[David48]

In my opinion the way forward is to hold a referendum regarding the ongoing commitment by Australia to the applicable UN conventions & treatment of asylum seekers/refugees.

simple1 ... I can see that you are a compassionate person and most Australian people can feel compassion for the plight of a genuine refugee.

We, Australians, are all about a 'fair go' and supporting the 'underdog' ... but many view the 'Boat People' as queue jumpers. The fair go should be applied to those who have waited patiently for years in Asylum camps in Malaysia and the like.

You talk about holding a 'referendum' ... well, there is one about to be held ... it's called a Federal Election ... and it's a 'referendum' by default.

The reason being that, for the moment, the only policy discussion is about the current refugee problem.

Now, on the basis that the majority of policies are framed around what the Political Party reckon will get them re-elected ... both parties are for 'off-shore' processing, they are just bickering about the process to show to the voting public that there is a point of difference.

The only major party advocating 'on-shore' processing and community detention are the Greens.

Should their vote bounce from around 10% in the last election to 15 or 20% ... that is sending a message to major parties.

It won't happen because the major political parties will have consensus tested their policy before engaguing their current policy.

.

[simple1]

In my opinion the way forward is to hold a referendum regarding the ongoing commitment by Australia to the applicable UN conventions & treatment of asylum seekers/refugees.

simple1 ... I can see that you are a compassionate person and most Australian people can feel compassion for the plight of a genuine refugee.

We, Australians, are all about a 'fair go' and supporting the 'underdog' ... but many view the 'Boat People' as queue jumpers. The fair go should be applied to those who have waited patiently for years in Asylum camps in Malaysia and the like.

You talk about holding a 'referendum' ... well, there is one about to be held ... it's called a Federal Election ... and it's a 'referendum' by default.

The reason being that, for the moment, the only policy discussion is about the current refugee problem.

Now, on the basis that the majority of policies are framed around what the Political Party reckon will get them re-elected ... both parties are for 'off-shore' processing, they are just bickering about the process to show to the voting public that there is a point of difference.

The only major party advocating 'on-shore' processing and community detention are the Greens.

Should their vote bounce from around 10% in the last election to 15 or 20% ... that is sending a message to major parties.

It won't happen because the major political parties will have consensus tested their policy before engaguing their current policy.

.

David, I understand your points, but there are no options being presented to voters other than demonstrating who is the toughest in handling asylum seekers/refugees. The Greens are somewhat irrelvant as their policy will only be considered if Greens MPs seats are required to secure Lib/Labor power. Any "message sending" will be ignored by the major parties

Edited July 25, 2013 by simple1

[chooka]

Assange wants PNG asylum seeker deal reversed

He is the world's most famous asylum seeker and now Julian Assange's political party wants a reversal of Australia's PNG asylum seeker deal.

Mr Assange addressed the launch via Skype from London, where he is holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy, avoiding extradition to Sweden to face allegations of sexual assault.

Mr Assange said his party's seven Senate candidates, including himself, will address the gradual decline in Australian democracy during the past 30 years.

"Canberra needs to be a place of light, not a place of darkness," he said.

The party wants transparency on the PNG asylum seeker deal, more media diversity and a review of climate change targets, free of industry influence.

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/2013/07/25/12/09/wikileaks-unveils-candidates-in-melbourne

[samran]

- There is no 'queue'. Just ask those stuck in the Thai border camps for years on end.

- Just because you have a bit of cash (usually pooled by relatives to get just one through) doesn't mean you can't be a refugee. Just ask the Jews from WWII.

- The fact they are willing to get on a boat ride says alot about their options between their home country and Australia. In between (Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, PNG), no work rights, no access to health and education = no chance to start a new life. Not much use being 'safe' if you are starving and not allowed to feed and educate your kids

- The ones who do have papers destroy their papers cause they are told to by the people smugglers. For the rest, well, getting your passport application sorted from a government you are fleeing from is kind of counter-intuative (though not for some of you, I'm sure).

- The refugee convention put together precisely because Jews (on boats) were turned back from the America back to Germany during WWII cause up till then it was illegal to enter without proper paperwork. No guesses to where they were sent back to, and their ulitmate fates.

- All this is ironic and a bit hypocritcal coming from citizens' of a country who's national day is....wait for it....a celebration of an unannouced boat arrival.

Edited July 25, 2013 by samran

[samran]

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?

That is so common. They form ghetto's of the country they fled. They keep the same mindset of that country and believe the same ways apply to the host. If the host has other ideas and wants to maintain their traditions then the refugees revolt with violence as seen over and over until they instill their way of life on the host. Normal trait of the parasite.

I take it everyone on this thead speaks, reads and writes fluent Thai?

[simple1]

Assange wants PNG asylum seeker deal reversed

He is the world's most famous asylum seeker and now Julian Assange's political party wants a reversal of Australia's PNG asylum seeker deal.

Mr Assange addressed the launch via Skype from London, where he is holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy, avoiding extradition to Sweden to face allegations of sexual assault.

Mr Assange said his party's seven Senate candidates, including himself, will address the gradual decline in Australian democracy during the past 30 years.

"Canberra needs to be a place of light, not a place of darkness," he said.

The party wants transparency on the PNG asylum seeker deal, more media diversity and a review of climate change targets, free of industry influence.

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/2013/07/25/12/09/wikileaks-unveils-candidates-in-melbourne

Still going to vote for him?