Exclusive - Australia to accept first Central American refugees under U.S. deal: sources

[webfact]

Exclusive - Australia to accept first Central American refugees under U.S. deal: sources

By Colin Packham

 

FILE PHOTO: Detainees walk around the compound among water bottles inside the Manus Island detention centre in Papua New Guinea, February 11, 2017. Behrouz Boochani/Handout via REUTERS/File Photo

 

SYDNEY (Reuters) - Australia will accept several dozen Central American refugees within the next few months, two sources familiar with the process told Reuters, the first transfers under a controversial refugee swap arrangement agreed with the United States.

 

Canberra pledged to take an unspecified number of Central American refugees under a deal struck with former U.S. President Barack Obama late last year.

 

In exchange, Washington said it would accept up to 1,250 asylum seekers held in Australian immigration centres in the Pacific Island nations of Papua New Guinea (PNG) and Nauru that Australia wants to close.

 

A group of approximately 30 refugees from El Salvador currently being held in Costa Rica will move to Australia in the next couple of months, the two sources said, with a second group of a similar size to follow shortly afterwards.

 

"The group have been vetted and will likely move in the (northern hemisphere) fall," said one source, who was not authorised to speak to media about the arrangements.

 

A spokesman for Australian Immigration Minister Peter Dutton declined to comment.

 

Officials at United States Citizenship and Immigrations Services (USCIS) and the State Department's Population, Refugees and Migration bureau did not respond to requests for comment outside regular office hours. The U.S. Embassy in Canberra did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

 

The transfer of the Salvadoran refugees to Australia will focus attention on U.S. steps to uphold its end of the agreement, described by President Donald Trump as a "dumb deal" for America.

 

None of the refugees on PNG's Manus Island or Nauru - mostly men from the Middle East and South Asia - have been approved to move to the United States yet. Earlier this month, U.S. officials halted screening interviews after the United States reached its annual refugee intake cap.

 

 

POINT OF TENSION

 

There are about 200 refugees in Costa Rica as part of a programme set up by former President Obama last year for people deemed too vulnerable to remain in their Central American homelands. Once vetted for criminal associations, including gangs, they are eligible for resettlement in the United States, while others can be transferred to third countries as part of a United Nations scheme.

 

The Trump administration has said it would honour the swap agreement to maintain its strong relationship with Australia, subject to the refugees satisfying strict vetting checks.

 

Trump's initial resistance to the deal strained relations with a key Asia Pacific ally, triggering a fractious phone call with Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull earlier this year.

 

Turnbull, under pressure in opinion polls and from within his own party, can ill afford for the United States to renege on the agreement, said Sean Kelly, an adviser to former Australian Prime Ministers Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard.

 

"The deal has become yet another test of (Turnbull's) leadership," Kelly said. "If it fails, that will be a big black mark against him, and he knows that."

 

Australia's hardline immigration policy requires asylum seekers intercepted at sea to be sent for processing at the camps on Manus and Nauru. The system, criticised by the United Nations and human rights groups, has cost taxpayers A$4.9 billion ($3.9 billion) since it was introduced in 2013, Australian officials said earlier this month.

 

Refugees are told they will never be settled in Australia.

 

Australia had hoped to have the bulk of the refugees resettled in the United States by the end of October, when the centre on Manus will close after a PNG court ruling.

 

(Additional reporting by Yeganeh Torbati in WASHINGTON; Editing by Lincoln Feast)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-07-25

[Trouble]

Okay, someone please explain the logic of this whole deal. Only reading from this,  it sounds like the most stupid idiotic thing I can imagine. Politicians never cease to amaze me.  The whole damn world has lost its mind. Meanwhile the hard working middle class everywhere pays the cost and suffers the consequences.

Edited July 26, 2017 by Trouble

[Rancid]

Aussies don't have a problem with taking refugees, we have a long history of such, they just don't want Muslim refugees as they don't integrate.

[simple1]

43 minutes ago, Rancid said:

Aussies don't have a problem with taking refugees, we have a long history of such, they just don't want Muslim refugees as they don't integrate.

Blanket statements such as yours & by others just do not reflect reality. I personally know a few Muslim refugees in Australia & they are very well integrated in Oz society, some would not be, same would apply for those from other faiths / regions.

[overherebc]

I also know a couple guys from Oz who worked there for many years paid their dues and now have to go back for two years so they can get their pensions.

How about Oz getting some priorities in place, instead of hand outs to others who paid nothing to Oz give the guys who are entitled their paid for pensions without them having to leave their families for two years.

I'm not an Ozzy by the way.

[simple1]

31 minutes ago, overherebc said:

I also know a couple guys from Oz who worked there for many years paid their dues and now have to go back for two years so they can get their pensions.

How about Oz getting some priorities in place, instead of hand outs to others who paid nothing to Oz give the guys who are entitled their paid for pensions without them having to leave their families for two years.

I'm not an Ozzy by the way.

So far as I know there is no link whatsoever to Oz Government Age Pension welfare claim & payment processes to refugee policy. In any case Oz Govt Age Pension are paid out of the Federal annual budget, not from a paid into pension fund.

Edited July 26, 2017 by simple1

[overherebc]

56 minutes ago, simple1 said:

So far as I know there is no link whatsoever to Oz Government Age Pension welfare claim & payment processes to refugee policy. In any case Oz Govt Age Pension are paid out of the Federal annual budget, not from a paid into pension fund.

Good lawyer speak.

Why do they need to go back for two years to collect it is the main question. Most likely they will be of an age that means they can't find a job etc etc.

Just an excuse that the gov' uses to get away with not paying it as far as I'm concerned.

[simple1]

20 minutes ago, overherebc said:

Good lawyer speak.

Why do they need to go back for two years to collect it is the main question. Most likely they will be of an age that means they can't find a job etc etc.

Just an excuse that the gov' uses to get away with not paying it as far as I'm concerned.

At least I was providing facts, as opposed to misinformation. If you're  interested in (off topic) Oz welfare policy formulation "Google is your friend".

Edited July 26, 2017 by simple1

[Jamin123]

3 hours ago, Rancid said:

Aussies don't have a problem with taking refugees, we have a long history of such, they just don't want Muslim refugees as they don't integrate.

 

You have a valid point. Larger Muslim concentration are more likely to bread radical terrorist. 

 

Instead of denying them, they could have given them the opportunity to convert. Some may have seized the chance than remain in limbo. Didn't many Jews converted to avoid deportation in some countries. Perhaps it's not unusual to switch religion to escape war, persecution and death.

[farcanell]

2 hours ago, overherebc said:

I also know a couple guys from Oz who worked there for many years paid their dues and now have to go back for two years so they can get their pensions.

How about Oz getting some priorities in place, instead of hand outs to others who paid nothing to Oz give the guys who are entitled their paid for pensions without them having to leave their families for two years.

I'm not an Ozzy by the way.

This is an over simplification of the system.

 

most countries have agreements and quotas, that they are required to meet, to belong to the "international" community at large.

 

to fulfill international treaty ( etc) obligations, the government must do this thing.

 

pensions are domestic issues, and the rules are very clearly laid out.... there should be no surprises here, unless one failed to do their research... 

 

on the the positive side, if you like ( or need to spin), your friends can probably return to Oz for two years, renting out their houses here (?), then return once they qualify for the pension.

 

they won't have to work, if they really don't want too, as they can undoubtedly find a way to throw themselves on the largess of the nanny state ( over fifties are not required to show proof of attempting to find employment... or at least that was the age specified when I left)

 

mind you.... this would need research beforehand, to ensure compliance with the gazzetted rules. (admitting to wealth overseas would be an issue needing addressing, for example)

[overherebc]

2 minutes ago, farcanell said:

This is an over simplification of the system.

 

most countries have agreements and quotas, that they are required to meet, to belong to the "international" community at large.

 

to fulfill international treaty ( etc) obligations, the government must do this thing.

 

pensions are domestic issues, and the rules are very clearly laid out.... there should be no surprises here, unless one failed to do their research... 

 

on the the positive side, if you like ( or need to spin), your friends can probably return to Oz for two years, renting out their houses here (?), then return once they qualify for the pension.

 

they won't have to work, if they really don't want too, as they can undoubtedly find a way to throw themselves on the largess of the nanny state ( over fifties are not required to show proof of attempting to find employment... or at least that was the age specified when I left)

 

mind you.... this would need research beforehand, to ensure compliance with the gazzetted rules. (admitting to wealth overseas would be an issue needing addressing, for example)

How easy would that be? Uproot your family and get visas for them to stay with you in Australia for two years as housos. I really can't see many people who would choose to go through that.

[farcanell]

10 minutes ago, overherebc said:

How easy would that be? Uproot your family and get visas for them to stay with you in Australia for two years as housos. I really can't see many people who would choose to go through that.

Your right... it's not easy... far from it

 

but if they need the pension, then it's better than starving to death

 

this is why the research needs to be done beforehand, so as you know your options before making decisions that may negatively impact on your future.

 

also... as an aside regards Australia's priorities ( and resultant cost).... the deal seems to be to accept 60 South Americans, whilst having the US take 1250 refugees currently suckling off Australias tit.... a damn good deal, costing less, allowing more monies to be spent on other initiatives, such as the old age pension, for example.

Edited July 26, 2017 by farcanell

[simple1]

39 minutes ago, farcanell said:

This is an over simplification of the system.

 

most countries have agreements and quotas, that they are required to meet, to belong to the "international" community at large.

 

to fulfill international treaty ( etc) obligations, the government must do this thing.

 

pensions are domestic issues, and the rules are very clearly laid out.... there should be no surprises here, unless one failed to do their research... 

 

on the the positive side, if you like ( or need to spin), your friends can probably return to Oz for two years, renting out their houses here (?), then return once they qualify for the pension.

 

they won't have to work, if they really don't want too, as they can undoubtedly find a way to throw themselves on the largess of the nanny state ( over fifties are not required to show proof of attempting to find employment... or at least that was the age specified when I left)

 

mind you.... this would need research beforehand, to ensure compliance with the gazzetted rules. (admitting to wealth overseas would be an issue needing addressing, for example)

Oz will take in approx 200 people from Central America as a part of the swap agreement. I believe the swap arrangement was agreed to by Obama to help out a friendly allied government under domestic political pressure; maybe also a part of the agreement to permit a US Marines base in N.T. 

 

The verified genuine refugees sitting in offshore detention cost about AUD$400k each p.a. to the Oz tax payer, not permitted to work etc. As genuine refugees obviously no option other than to go to the US, not Cambodia or PNG where they are not welcome.  PNG government has stated they want all refugees out of Manus by end 10/17 so guess they will be transferred to Nauru. 

Edited July 26, 2017 by simple1

[Phuketboy]

Never understood this refugee exchange.  Australia gives their refugees to America and America gives their refugees to Australia.  At the end of it all you are still stuck with .... you guest it "Refugees".  Sounds like a waste of time and money.  

[Saan]

5 hours ago, simple1 said:

So far as I know there is no link whatsoever to Oz Government Age Pension welfare claim & payment processes to refugee policy. In any case Oz Govt Age Pension are paid out of the Federal annual budget, not from a paid into pension fund.

The former Federal Treasurer Peter Costello stole the pension fund some years ago and used it to balance his budget.

The pension payment in Australia is unusual, compared with many countries, in as much as a person who has worked his entire life is paid the same as someone who has never been employed, yet lived in Australia for many years.

[simple1]

2 minutes ago, Saan said:

The former Federal Treasurer Peter Costello stole the pension fund some years ago and used it to balance his budget.

The pension payment in Australia is unusual, compared with many countries, in as much as a person who has worked his entire life is paid the same as someone who has never been employed, yet lived in Australia for many years.

With Costello I believe you're confusing the Future Fund for government employee's superannuation, with welfare based Age Pension for the general public.

[ChiangMaiLightning2143]

New territory for the MS13 thugs salted amongst "refugees". They'll make the local gangs Dunnunda into Pupusa filling


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Saan]

4 hours ago, overherebc said:

Good lawyer speak.

Why do they need to go back for two years to collect it is the main question. Most likely they will be of an age that means they can't find a job etc etc.

Just an excuse that the gov' uses to get away with not paying it as far as I'm concerned.

The initial reason for the two year residence in Australia prior to pension payments was because may Greeks, mainly Greeks, worked for a few years in Australia and the returned home. At the age of 65 they claimed the Australian pension. Subsequently others followed this path, particularly Lebanese. The Government lowered the boom and now all eligible people must be in Australia two years before they can claim. It is unjust if you have worked and paid taxes most of your life in Australia.

The other problem is that some people who immigated to Australia, returned to their home country, and claimed the Australia pension then never died as far as the Australian Government know.. When they die the die as Greeks or Serbians or Lebanese or whatever and the Australian embassy is not notified of their death by local authorities..

[Kinnock]

7 hours ago, simple1 said:

Blanket statements such as yours & by others just do not reflect reality. I personally know a few Muslim refugees in Australia & they are very well integrated in Oz society, some would not be, same would apply for those from other faiths / regions.

Well integrated, and yet you were aware they are Muslim?  If they were fully integrated, you would not even know they belonged to a specific religion.

 

Has anyone, in the history of the universe, ever said "I was pleasantly surprised how well those Buddhists,/Hindus/Seventh Day Adventists integrated into Australian society"?

[simple1]

1 minute ago, Kinnock said:

Well integrated, and yet you were aware they are Muslim?  If they were fully integrated, you would not even know they belonged to a specific religion.

 

Has anyone, in the history of the universe, ever said "I was pleasantly surprised how well those Buddhists,/Hindus/Seventh Day Adventists integrated into Australian society"?

Truly strange comment, must be a member of right of centre ideology. Integrated does not require someone to give up their Muslim heritage identity (Ethiopian). I guess you would be surprised as to what happens in private within the culture of conservative Hindus and so on, try expanding your sources of info.

[Saan]

3 minutes ago, simple1 said:

With Costello I believe you're confusing the Future Fund for government employee's superannuation, with welfare based Age Pension for the general public.

Costello pinched the funds put aside and paid for by taxpayers for their future pensions. If they were paid what they were entitled from the fund it would be considerably more than they get now. It was a pension fund, funded by those who would draw on the pension in the future, and irrelevant what he did with it if it did not go to pensioners. Howard and Costello squandered billions from the mining boom and still had steal from the poorest.

[simple1]

1 hour ago, Saan said:

Costello pinched the funds put aside and paid for by taxpayers for their future pensions. If they were paid what they were entitled from the fund it would be considerably more than they get now. It was a pension fund, funded by those who would draw on the pension in the future, and irrelevant what he did with it if it did not go to pensioners. Howard and Costello squandered billions from the mining boom and still had steal from the poorest.

Getting way off topic. You will find  members of the civil service superannuation fund get their payments and to repeat nothing to do with Age Pension payments.

 

http://www.smh.com.au/money/super-and-funds/pension-benefits-public-servants-gain-from-future-fund-decision-20170518-gw7mfy.html

.

Edited July 26, 2017 by simple1

[Prbkk]

The deal makes sense for both countries; for Australia ,it is consistent with the bi-partisan support for not rewarding those who queue jump and arrive illegally; for the US, it is similar.

Australia has a large refugee program and it has been successful: it took the largest % of Vietnamese refugees per capita and in 45 years they have integrated very well ( some early issues to do with drugs were to be expected given the massive disruption/trauma faced by those who traveled by boat; an ongoing issue with highrates of gambling addiction). A few pet dogs got eaten. But really a great success.

[Kevbo]

6 hours ago, Phuketboy said:

Never understood this refugee exchange.  Australia gives their refugees to America and America gives their refugees to Australia.  At the end of it all you are still stuck with .... you guest it "Refugees".  Sounds like a waste of time and money.  

It may sound like a waste of time and money initially, until you see the massive benefit to Australia of not having to take muslims

[Kevbo]

10 hours ago, simple1 said:

Blanket statements such as yours & by others just do not reflect reality. I personally know a few Muslim refugees in Australia & they are very well integrated in Oz society, some would not be, same would apply for those from other faiths / regions.

A few being the operative word, other faiths might possibly struggle to integrate initially but Muslims, generally refuse to integrate or assimilate, another true blanket statement.....

[Grubster]

9 hours ago, simple1 said:

So far as I know there is no link whatsoever to Oz Government Age Pension welfare claim & payment processes to refugee policy. In any case Oz Govt Age Pension are paid out of the Federal annual budget, not from a paid into pension fund.

I will make a wild guess here, I bet that the Pension plan, welfare plans, and refugee funds all come from the guy who paid taxes all his life and that none of it came from the incoming refugees. I think its a crime that these guys have to go back and beg for what is rightfully theirs while they watch their government hand money to people who have paid nothing.

[Grubster]

I dont agree with Trump on most he has been saying but I think he is way right on this one, these Latin Americans are likely good people and the US is trading a few hundred of them for a couple thousand very troublesome Muslims.  Bad Deal.

[Scott]

Please get back on topic.   The issue of pensions is really quite far out of bounds, although it is interesting.

 

I has already been stated that much of the impetus with this on the part of Australia is to stop the 'pull factor', that is to slow the boats headed to Australia.   There is still an obligation, at least internationally, for those deemed to be refugees to be resettled.  

 

Since Australia is allowing for the 'extreme vetting' by the US, it sounds like a reasonable deal.   I am not sure what the US is getting in return, but it may help with preventing more Central Americans from heading North.  

[overherebc]

2 hours ago, Scott said:

Please get back on topic.   The issue of pensions is really quite far out of bounds, although it is interesting.

 

I has already been stated that much of the impetus with this on the part of Australia is to stop the 'pull factor', that is to slow the boats headed to Australia.   There is still an obligation, at least internationally, for those deemed to be refugees to be resettled.  

 

Since Australia is allowing for the 'extreme vetting' by the US, it sounds like a reasonable deal.   I am not sure what the US is getting in return, but it may help with preventing more Central Americans from heading North.  

Re I'm not sure what Americans are getting in return for me means that by some strange effect people ( on the street, ie voters ) would actually have an understanding of how politicians actually think and the reasons behind their public statements.

The whole situation with so called refugees is going to blow up in all our faces because, in my mind, every politician in every country only spouts forth with what they think will get them more votes so they can enrich themselves.

So called refugees, my opinion, are a small percentage of the hordes who because of the crap state of their own countries  believe that moving country will mean they can live a free and easy life and all will be handed to them on a plate.

Some are geniune refugees but only a small minority, the rest want to be on the gravy train without buying a ticket.

People will say I am too hard on it but if they find a boat with 100 of them half way over the Med, rescue them then go back to the north african coast and put them back on the beach.

Hard words but if it's not done then in the very near future, at my age it won't be a problem for me, but it will be for the next generation.

If you allow them in then offer them the same benefits that they would get in Thailand, in my mind that is one of the many benefits that you get in Thailand. It makes you responsible for yourself.

End of rant.

[Chris Lawrence]

17 hours ago, Trouble said:

Okay, someone please explain the logic of this whole deal. Only reading from this,  it sounds like the most stupid idiotic thing I can imagine. Politicians never cease to amaze me.  The whole damn world has lost its mind. Meanwhile the hard working middle class everywhere pays the cost and suffers the consequences.

Australians are just smarter.