I am absolutely dumbfounded - Australia to give asylum seekers $70m dollars compensation

[steven100]

Well ...  just when I thought I had seen it all ....    This just announced on the news  :

 

Australian government to compensate Manus island refugees $70 million dollars as agreed today following court proceedings by Slater & Gordon representing around 2,000 asylum seekers.

 

I am absolutely disgusted and dumbfounded at the same time ......  thesecountry shoppers got food, accomodation, medical, transport and gods knows and now they will each get around $35,000 for the hardship they have endured.

Can you believe this .............     absolutely a disgrace,  there are homeless, the poor, families struggling and yet these so called asylum seekers get $35k for their hard lifestyle.

 

Absolute shit in my book .....    the poor taxpayers of Australia ... This is outrages ...  

Edited June 14, 2017 by steven100

[steven100]

One word comes to mind  ...   ludicrous    !!

[Covertjay]

In the interests of balance the following was widely reported when the original story broke: 

 

The devastating trauma and abuse inflicted on children held by Australia in offshore detention has been laid bare in the largest cache of leaked documents released from inside its immigration regime.

 

More than 2,000 leaked incident reports from Australia’s detention camp for asylum seekers on the remote Pacific island of Nauru – totalling more than 8,000 pages – are published by the Guardian. The Nauru files set out as never before the assaults, sexual abuse, self-harm attempts, child abuse and living conditions endured by asylum seekers held by the Australian government, painting a picture of routine dysfunction and cruelty.

 

This money goes a little way to mitigating this disgraceful chapter in modern Australian history. The government knew they were in a bad place re international agreements ratified and opted for this payment. A tacit admission of guilt in part. 

Edited June 14, 2017 by Covertjay

[mfd101]

Australians have - very comfortably - built over many decades a wealthy and comfortable society that, like all modern welfare states, places more emphasis on 'rights' than on 'responsibilities'. This is one of its manifestations.

 

Given the impossibility of leaving these people where they are indefinitely (even PNG & Nauru are sovereign states!) and given that the Aussie taxpayer is paying anyway for them to camp in PNG & Nauru (not to mention a handful in Cambodia), I would say that $A70m is pretty cheap at the price - providing it means that they're permanently off Oz hands (but I doubt that that will prove to be the case, as this seems at first glance to be a court-imposed, not governemnt-devised, outcome).

[lovelomsak]

Yes it would be good if it meant they would not come to the OZ. If that is the case it was a cheap buyout. 

[JimGant]

Quote

Yes it would be good if it meant they would not come to the OZ. If that is the case it was a cheap buyout. 

I think this is the flotsam coming to the US -- and which (rightfully so) got Trump"s chest dots in a wringer. Hopefully, an admittance fee of $35k will be assessed -- which, of course, won't pay back in any shape or form the dole the US taxpayer will have to pay out for ad nauseum.

[steven100]

12 hours ago, Covertjay said:

In the interests of balance the following was widely reported when the original story broke:

Whats not balanced is the support for homeless & poor Australians vs these asylum seekers.

There are around 105,000 homeless people in australia , that means without a roof over their heads ....  and these country shoppers had a roof over their heads provided, and now they'll be given $35k to help them more ......... 

 

I'll bet they are laughing .....   'we got another 35 of that stupid aussie government '  

[simple1]

On 2017-6-14 at 7:39 PM, lovelomsak said:

Yes it would be good if it meant they would not come to the OZ. If that is the case it was a cheap buyout. 

None of those located in PNG and Naura will be permitted entry to Australia for life, even though most of those remaining in the camps are positively vetted refugees. The compensation for the 1900 detainees is approx AUD50 million, plus AUD20 million for the lawyers and more will be deducted from the AUD50 million by the lawyers for admin fees for the payouts.

 

Oz government has legal responsibility for the welfare of offshore detained asylum seekers, positively vetted or not. The Oz government has declined to fight the case in Court, in effect continuing the governments regime of forced silence / suppression of what's been happening in the camps in the public domain. In the meantime there is still a backlog of 20,000 asylum seekers in Oz, awaiting determination of refugee status for years, plus approx 6,000 arriving by air every year then claiming refugee status.

[lovelomsak]

In the old days out west where I grew up when we had a problem with something we put a bounty on it. People made money by eradicating the problem . Maybe a bounty should be put on refugees. Ever one you bag is worth x amount of money.Then homeless Aussies could get money bagging refugees.

 

 I would really like to know how Australia came about to be legally responsible to refugees. Does not make sense to me. Their own home  country should be the legal responsible country. If their home country is unwilling to be responsible maybe they should have stayed home.

Edited June 16, 2017 by lovelomsak

[simple1]

4 hours ago, lovelomsak said:

In the old days out west where I grew up when we had a problem with something we put a bounty on it. People made money by eradicating the problem . Maybe a bounty should be put on refugees. Ever one you bag is worth x amount of money.Then homeless Aussies could get money bagging refugees.

 

 I would really like to know how Australia came about to be legally responsible to refugees. Does not make sense to me. Their own home  country should be the legal responsible country. If their home country is unwilling to be responsible maybe they should have stayed home.

Just wonderful to read from a member of TV's right of centre clique, "eradication of the problem" 

 

Oz is responsible due to signing UN Convention for Refugees, but also passed local laws in contravention to the UN agreement, to process people offshore. Naturally basic humanitarian considerations also come into consideration as well as agreements with the governments / contractors responsible for the camps. BTW PNG Supreme Court has declared the offshore detention camp in breach of human rights and must be closed down by October this year.

 

 

[Covertjay]

7 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Just wonderful to read from a member of TV's right of centre clique, "eradication of the problem" 

 

Oz is responsible due to signing UN Convention for Refugees, but also passed local laws in contravention to the UN agreement, to process people offshore. Naturally basic humanitarian considerations also come into consideration as well as agreements with the governments / contractors responsible for the camps. BTW PNG Supreme Court has declared the offshore detention camp in breach of human rights and must be closed down by October this year.

 

 

A worrying 'final solution' proposed by someone with a pauce grasp of law and human decency. Simple1 rightly points out the basics of international law and the domestic legal mess. 

 

I'd simply add The United Nations Special Rapportuer on Torture has found that various aspects of Australia’s asylum seeker policies also violate the Convention Against Torture on Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. 

[Rancid]

Oz voters by majority, as opposed to the progressive press, don't want Muslim immigration due to complete lack of compatability. So yes, for taxpayers to be forced to make a bigger payout than most will ever see in their lifetime is an outrage.

 

So who is to blame? Those that tried to arrive illegally, the UN bureaucrats, progressive lawyers or an incompetent government? Probably a mix of the lot, plenty of bludging snouts in the taxpayer trough.

[Crowes]

On 6/16/2017 at 3:17 AM, Covertjay said:

A worrying 'final solution' proposed by someone with a pauce grasp of law and human decency. Simple1 rightly points out the basics of international law and the domestic legal mess. 

 

I'd simply add The United Nations Special Rapportuer on Torture has found that various aspects of Australia’s asylum seeker policies also violate the Convention Against Torture on Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. 

The UN is a joke. None of their policies hold any water. It isn't a suicide pact.

[dexjnr555]

Typical Aussie govt, doing nothing to help Aussies but always giving handouts to these leeches.

Sent from my Pixel using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Pdaz]

What part of illegal immigrant don't they understand ? Oh well at least I know where the 48% of my pay is going now.. 

[bazza73]

On 14/06/2017 at 6:53 PM, Covertjay said:

In the interests of balance the following was widely reported when the original story broke: 

 

The devastating trauma and abuse inflicted on children held by Australia in offshore detention has been laid bare in the largest cache of leaked documents released from inside its immigration regime.

 

More than 2,000 leaked incident reports from Australia’s detention camp for asylum seekers on the remote Pacific island of Nauru – totalling more than 8,000 pages – are published by the Guardian. The Nauru files set out as never before the assaults, sexual abuse, self-harm attempts, child abuse and living conditions endured by asylum seekers held by the Australian government, painting a picture of routine dysfunction and cruelty.

 

This money goes a little way to mitigating this disgraceful chapter in modern Australian history. The government knew they were in a bad place re international agreements ratified and opted for this payment. A tacit admission of guilt in part. 

If the OP wants to be outraged, the concept of offshore detention is a good place to start.

It costs the Australian taxpayer about 9 BILLION dollars to maintain offshore detention EVERY YEAR. That's because onshore detention opens up too many cans of worms with respect to protests and lawsuits from the human rights groups.

It would actually be a lot cheaper to give each and every illegal asylum seeker a quarter of a million dollars to go elsewhere - and that would be a one-off cost.

[BEVUP]

18 minutes ago, bazza73 said:

If the OP wants to be outraged, the concept of offshore detention is a good place to start.

It costs the Australian taxpayer about 9 BILLION dollars to maintain offshore detention EVERY YEAR. That's because onshore detention opens up too many cans of worms with respect to protests and lawsuits from the human rights groups.

It would actually be a lot cheaper to give each and every illegal asylum seeker a quarter of a million dollars to go elsewhere - and that would be a one-off cost.

9 Bill, that's because Auss is a soft touch & the world knows it ( agree with OP)

A common statement in Auss is " your better of not being a citz. "

Try being a skilled Auss & cant get a job because you have a beginner taking the jobs & not a citz while you have been living of your credit card

Also as OP says they have been given everything (even mobile phones & push bikes ) while you have pensioners (in a dwelling) & homeless in Auss that have to use blankets to keep warm because the can't afford the power 

[bazza73]

2 minutes ago, BEVUP said:

9 Bill, that's because Auss is a soft touch & the world knows it ( agree with OP)

A common statement in Auss is " your better of not being a citz. "

Try being a skilled Auss & cant get a job because you have a beginner taking the jobs & not a citz while you have been living of your credit card

Also as OP says they have been given everything (even mobile phones & push bikes ) while you have pensioners (in a dwelling) & homeless in Auss that have to use blankets to keep warm because the can't afford the power 

So why do you think I live in Thailand?  An Australian pensioner can live here much better than in Oz.

[steven100]

11 hours ago, Rancid said:

Oz voters by majority, as opposed to the progressive press, don't want Muslim immigration due to complete lack of compatability. So yes, for taxpayers to be forced to make a bigger payout than most will ever see in their lifetime is an outrage.

 

So who is to blame? Those that tried to arrive illegally, the UN bureaucrats, progressive lawyers or an incompetent government? Probably a mix of the lot, plenty of bludging snouts in the taxpayer trough.

and the bleeding hearts club of dogooders .....   which have predominately uckd Australia.

[bheard]

In the old days out west where I grew up when we had a problem with something we put a bounty on it. People made money by eradicating the problem . Maybe a bounty should be put on refugees. Ever one you bag is worth x amount of money.Then homeless Aussies could get money bagging refugees.
 
 I would really like to know how Australia came about to be legally responsible to refugees. Does not make sense to me. Their own home  country should be the legal responsible country. If their home country is unwilling to be responsible maybe they should have stayed home.

When did Aus become legally responsible for refugees?
When it put them in gaol, that's when.
Just shows the folly of the "island solution".
Serves the Aus govt right.
Unfortunately the tax payer pays. As usual.

[Salerno]

It's not a gaol, they can go home any time they like, they'll even get free flights. The fact they may be persecuted or killed on arrival is a small downside I guess.

[bheard]

So why do you think I live in Thailand?  An Australian pensioner can live here much better than in Oz.

If you have an 'aged pension' from the federal govt you'd better make sure you have a plan B.
The govt has tried once already to stop the aged pension being paid to people living overseas, but fortunately it didn't pass.
One day . . .
Gotta pay their own exorbitant retirement benefits somehow . . . and who better to milk than old agers?

[bazza73]

13 minutes ago, bheard said:

 

If you have an 'aged pension' from the federal govt you'd better make sure you have a plan B.
The govt has tried once already to stop the aged pension being paid to people living overseas, but fortunately it didn't pass.
One day . . .
Gotta pay their own exorbitant retirement benefits somehow . . . and who better to milk than old agers?

 

As it happens , I do have a plan B. The part pension I get is icing on the cake.

Until the Baby Boomers have passed into history ( I'm pre-Baby Boomer ) I don't think governments of any stripe in Oz will tamper with a powerful voting bloc. By then I won't care.

[simple1]

18 hours ago, bazza73 said:

As it happens , I do have a plan B. The part pension I get is icing on the cake.

Until the Baby Boomers have passed into history ( I'm pre-Baby Boomer ) I don't think governments of any stripe in Oz will tamper with a powerful voting bloc. By then I won't care.

Recently been submitted to Parliament - again - to cease payment of Age pension after six weeks overseas. Given the new Fed Govt education budget required paying bribes of AUD5 billion for minority parties to get it passed, have to wait and see if Labor / minority parties can be bothered to invest the effort to block the legislation.

Edited June 22, 2017 by simple1

[steven100]

23 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Recently been submitted to Parliament - again - to cease payment of Age pension after six weeks overseas. Given the new Fed Govt education budget required paying bribes of AUD5 billion for minority parties to get it passed, have to wait and see if Labor / minority parties can be bothered to invest the effort to block the legislation.

and ....  I see this morning where federal MP's will get a pay rise from July 1.

 

 

[simple1]

4 minutes ago, steven100 said:

and ....  I see this morning where federal MP's will get a pay rise from July 1.

 

 

Yep, by 2% on top of the 2% increase in January, so minimum wage for Fed MP will be AUD$203k p.a., plus benefits

[steven100]

3 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Yep, by 2% on top of the 2% increase in January, so minimum wage for Fed MP will be AUD$203k p.a., plus benefits

But .... what gets me about Australians is that nobody stands up and protests ... or it's rare.

The penalty rates slashed ....

Bank ATM fees amoung the highest in the world ...

Energy costs to increase by 20-50% ...

Petrol prices amoung the top 3 in the world ...

Food prices are now higher than that of the US or EU ...

 

Australia has really lost it bad IMO .....

[Haso]

I am an aged pensioner travelling/ living overseas for the past 9 years. I have never seen any documentation or evidence to suggest that the Australian Government has considered / is consideration stopping the payment of the Aged pension to persons traveling / living overseas. In fact I have personally attended different Centrelink offices recently and they know nothing of stopping Aged Pension payments overseas. Nor is there any evidence from Governments of the same. If so... Show me the money. They will make monthly payments into an Overseas bank account for your convenience. Now, payments to persons on an Invalid pensions and travelling/residing overseas is governed by a different set of rules.


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

[simple1]

1 hour ago, Haso said:

I am an aged pensioner travelling/ living overseas for the past 9 years. I have never seen any documentation or evidence to suggest that the Australian Government has considered / is consideration stopping the payment of the Aged pension to persons traveling / living overseas. In fact I have personally attended different Centrelink offices recently and they know nothing of stopping Aged Pension payments overseas. Nor is there any evidence from Governments of the same. If so... Show me the money. They will make monthly payments into an Overseas bank account for your convenience. Now, payments to persons on an Invalid pensions and travelling/residing overseas is governed by a different set of rules.


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

Age Pension legislation is before Parliament for a number of changes to eligibility criteria, Centrelink staff would not be permitted to comment / advise until passed into law. Media don't often comments in detail on proposed changes, but changes have been enacted e.g. entitlement period for full Age Pension payment being extended from 25 to 35 years for portable pension payment and a number of other matters. Unfortunately for me the extended entitlement period came into being two months before I could apply for Age Pension.

 

An example of the albeit limited media coverage, a revised tougher proposal has recently been submitted for enactment, after the attempt in the article below failed.

 

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/moves-to-limit-overseas-travel-for-pensioners-discriminatory-say-migrant-refugee-groups-20160123-gmcr8v.html

 

BTW if you do a search you will find parliamentary papers concerning the portability of Age Pension payments, so yes there is documentary evidence of intent.

Edited June 23, 2017 by simple1

[canthai55]

Another Topic displaying the boundless compassion of the nation in question.

After imprisoning - yes, placing in jail, of defenseless women and children, they are being given a pittance for their time there.

Count the Aus Gov't lucky that those same people do not file individual claims in court for the conduct of the people who forced them there, and forced them to stay there in appalling conditions.

You will thank your lucky stars that they only receive $35K