ArthurPendragon

Did they pay to escape to the nearest safe country?

In the scheme of things happening around us, I would be more worried about undocumented people coming in through plane( highly unlikely) or boat than a person coming in with a visa and a passport. There might be 457 rorting going on, but its a fraud and not a threat to security.

I was talking about the top countries from which our permanent resident visa holders come. And they can't repatriate their tax money outside. The below from your first posting talks about security threat. Free movement of skilled people is vital to our economy. If there is any fraud in that. it has to be fixed. Or the business will go to countries which are business friendly. And the net result will be job loss.

So there is a common set of criteria to get visas. And with the added advantage of common language, how would it be difficult for an English speaking person to compete with Non English speakers? On top of that, you have the advantage of your qualifications, experience and even your tenancy certificates being recognized easily. And if its still tough to complete, then the problem is with them and not with the other migrants. And the top 3 migrants into Australia are Indians, Chinese and British. And as far as I know, the top 3 are not known to be a security threat. If you have someone breaking the rules, the immigration dept should crack down on them. The problem with UK was that it let in anyone during the 60's. It's not skilled migration that's the root cause. The activities that are security threat need to be taken seriously by the Government, which is a Law and order issue.

http://www.rediff.com/news/report/how-157-lankan-asylum-seekers-landed-in-australia-from-india/20140805.htm Most of the Sri Lankan Tamils had come to India and settled down in and around Pondicherry. They also made arrangements with lawyers in Australia to fight their case for asylum there based on human rights issues.They then contacted Lankans staying in the refugee camps in Tamil Nadu who put them in touch with the human smugglers. The Lankans had to pay Rs 50,000 per head for the arduous and risky journey to Australia.Once they neared the Australian shore they sent a distress signal. The Australians saved them on humanitarian grounds, but when the lawyers descended as if on cue, the Australian government placed them in isolation.An Indian government representative met them as the ship was flying an Indian flag. The refugees on the advice of their lawyers refused to meet the Indian officials. This was because they did not want the Australians to differentiate the ones who had come from Lanka and the ones who had come from Indian refugee camps.

A Worrying thing from the article was this section http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chennai/Lankan-refugee-trafficking-exposes-chinks-in-security/articleshow/39133010.cms The agents charged between 1.25 lakh and 1.5 lakh per head for the trip but gave discounts to women and children. "The traffickers wanted to take more women and children as this would influence Australian authorities to consider their case sympathetically. But the trauma that the children must have experienced can't be imagined. The boat reached the Australian border in 16 days," an official in Puducherry said. The traffickers procured a satellite phone for the boatman. "When the boat was in trouble, the people on board called a news agency and the father of the two-year-old who was in France using a satellite phone," the official said.

Always here to help:wink:

There is no country called Indian as there is no country called Australian. I assume you meant India. The Asylum seekers are/were mostly Sri Lankan refugees who were resident in India. And India is looking into unauthorized boat journey as a security threat http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/chennai/Lankan-refugee-trafficking-exposes-chinks-in-security/articleshow/39133010.cms

Rightly or wrongly, it depends on what people of a country what. In this case, Australians are not in favour of people coming in by boat and claiming asylum. If indeed they are refugees, then the refugee advocates should start convincing people of the facts. If not, then they should stop supporting the boat arrivals. The recent happenings in the world coupled with Sydney shootings and Aussies fighting in foreign shores make people worry against people arriving without any documentation and vetting process. To claim that people are racist due to this anti boat people stand insults ordinary people in a country with a non discriminatory legal migrant program where the largest groups admitted into it are Asians (including Chinese and Indians).

So if a refugee in Australia flies to Italy or sails to New Zealand for asylum and the Italian government/New Zealand goverment rejects the asylum request, would Australia take back the refugee? The interviewing was after the immigration minister met the Indian officials in New Delhi. So we don't know who requested it.

That's true and in addition to that, there's a Free trade agreement in Progress. There are also combined Naval exercises between US, Australia, India and Japan and it was during the last BJP government in India did all the four democracies teamed together to aid millions affected by the Indian Ocean Tsunami. Australian relationship is too important for India too, especially in the world view of the current Indian government as an energy supplier and strategic partner. So there is no controversies between the government and both of them are handling it silently. There is not much about this in Indian media too. Also, if the refugees started from India where they had got asylum already, then it doesn't look like they were fleeing persecution as the people of the Indian state of Tamil Nadu and the Union territory of Pondicherry are of the same ethnic and linguistic background.

Hello Abhishek There is no set format and I'm afraid no one would share their letter with a stranger. Sorry for not being of help.

What I'm getting at is that the skilled entrants are not the problem, but an open border, both for Europeans or for the rest of the world is not in the best interests of UK. For the citizens of Eurozone countries that are doing good, UK might not attractive enough. But for the rest, it is attractive enough and no social security system can survive if the benefits are more than the tax income. The immigration of the rest of the world can be stopped, but the European union migration cannot as UK is part of EU. So that's the problem that needs to be sorted out, not Indians or Chinese coming in when there is a competition to attract skilled employees.

So you agree that the category white is diverse and encompasses nationalities from German to Romanians. Similarly, non white encompasses a more diverse category and can't be generalized. And among non whites, do you have refugees from India or China?

Regarding Indians, I'm sure they know better English than the rest of the Europe courtesy British Empire. And British Government presents a different picture with regards to Indians, totally at odds with your comments above. According to this report below- "Unemployment rates also vary significantly between ethnic minorities.For example, the ethnic minority group with the lowest unemployment rates is Indians(6.8%)." - Source: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http:/www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/media/410872/web-poverty-report.pdf Indians have one of the lowest incarceration rate in UK, next only to jews. Source:www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/sn04334.pdf‎ And immigration statistics ( if we exclude the dog whistle politics) show that the illegal overstayers are mostly from the nearby region. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/228967/7197.pdf India and Britain have a shared history and hence you find them there.

Can you please provide some data to back this up? By white, do you mean Germans or do you mean Bosnians, Romanians or Bulgarians? By non white, do you mean Chinese or Indians or Bangladeshi or Japanese or Pakistani or Africans?

http://whirlpool.net.au/ You can try this site while searching for service providers. Most of them use either Telstra, optus or TPG line. So you wouldn't have problems even with the small providers. Just see on what line they are as the smaller ones don't have their own line and piggy back on the bigger ones.

I think the national anthem and Patriotism acts as a binding glue for different people who call themselves Aussies.

Again, its the capability that counts and not intention. Intentions might change with new government in neighbouring countries.Indonesia has the SU-30, which is also a formidable 4+ generation fighter.

The ban is there till 2015. I'm not sure if it will be lifted after that. But the Raptor is a formidable machine due to its stealth features and the US might want to keep the most advanced to itself.

Its capability of the neighbours that will drive a defence policy. As intent change and when things get hot, we can't raise our capabilities suddenly.

Here is my humble opinion on this topic. The SU35 and SU30 are 4+ generation aircrafts and the T-50 PAKFA is the fifth generation aircraft which is still having development problems and is way behind schedule compared to F35. But the proliferation of cheap but capable fighter planes in the neighbourhood would have forced us to select this plane. F-35 is a radical new design and as with any new aircraft, there were budget overruns.

Unfortunately, we can't legislate against what a person thinks. And again, we can't jail people because they say sh**. And there is nothing that prevents you from returning the favor to the abuser. But we can throw the book when they cross a boundary and get physical. This is the same world over. Haven't we had a loony from a minority that used to send abusive letters to the families of Soldiers? In any country, the rural people are not exposed to other races and cultures and might be less tolerant as due to the fear of the unknown. As for the extreme rightwing, they are monitored by the Government and action taken when the try to do something stupid. . Again, we must keep also our eyes wide open and be vigilant as no country or nation is immune from Bigotry, both of the majority or the minority. But because Majority is in majority, its bigotry has more power and that's the reason that most of the sensible and civilized nations are more strict with them.

Mate, Before you have another go at me, I'll try to change my name to just "Pendragon" :biggrin:

:ssign11: