Are you 'comfortable' with Australia's handling of Tamil asylum seekers at sea?

[Harpodom]

LOL, what is this? Some sort of team bonding exercise?

 

OK, if it isn't easy to assess asylum claims, can you explain how it was done with 4 questions?

 

By the same token, is it so hard that people are banged up indefinitely in offshore prisons?

 

Where is the logic? Where is the process?

 

 

Calm down, you've missed the point.

 

You stated that it should be easy to assess asylum claims. My own experience is that it isn't. I was prepared to go into a role play with you to demonstrate this. But you shied away, despite having all the answers, it would seem.

 

It's not credible to say you have the answers then refuse to disclose them.

[Danny842003]

LOL, what is this? Some sort of team bonding exercise?

 

OK, if it isn't easy to assess asylum claims, can you explain how it was done with 4 questions?

 

By the same token, is it so hard that people are banged up indefinitely in offshore prisons?

 

Where is the logic? Where is the process?

 

Again you side step answering how you would do it different.

[flag of convenience]

While i agree living in a camp is not ideal. How is it fair that the ones that can somehow afford to pay a people smuggler to bring them here should be given priority over those waiting in camps for resettlement. In most cases waiting years.

 

Because waiting in a camp is often a life sentence. (not purely years)The numbers that are selected are less than 1% each year. Shows a bit if initiative I'd say as well, although hardly grounds for the need of asylum. That's for the legal process to decide.

[Harpodom]

Again you side step answering how you would do it different.

I've said numerous times how I'd do it! You just choose to regard it as a non option, thereby indicating your bias

[Danny842003]

I've said numerous times how I'd do it! You just choose to regard it as a non option, thereby indicating your bias

 

well if you could please repeat it as I don't have the will power to trawl through 31 pages.

Simply saying with dignity is not an answer.

[flag of convenience]

Perhaps if these people were not left scratching out a life in the camps for years on end these situation wouldn't arise. Why does it take so long for the true refugees to be resettled from the camps? Perhaps the U.N. along with all the countries that offer resettlement should be working on resettling these people more quickly.

 

Very little to do with it. The numbers resettled direct from camps being too minimal each year with only several nations having a selection process en train.

[flag of convenience]

Greens leader Christine Milne is shocked that the Abbott Government is sending back boat people to Sri Lanka, a country she portrays as a hell-hole:

 

 

“They have a shocking reputation for human rights,” she told a press conference this morning.

 

 

“It is now up to Prime Minister Abbott. Prime Minister tell Australians - are you going to send 153 people back to the people who have persecuted them?

 

 

“Is that what this nation has become under your leadership? Because I think the overwhelming majority of Australians will be horrified by this.

 

 

“Not only is it shocking and cruel for the people who have been persecuted and are being treated like this, but it is absolutely in breach of our obligations under the refugee convention.”

 

 

Christine Milne plans a holiday in December 2011:

 

 

For now, there is a holiday in Sri Lanka and a rare chance to relax, possibly with her head in a history book, for the few short months that school is out.

 

 

Canada, 2010 - data shows many Tamil “refugees” actually think Sri Lanka is safe to visit:

 

 

 

 

A secret government survey reveals the majority of successful Tamil refugees travel back to Sri Lanka, raising questions about the legitimacy of their refugee status…

 

 

“I think it’s been fairly common knowledge, that after asylum seekers get status they go back,” said James Bissett a former head of Immigration Canada… A total of 50 people were surveyed, 31 of them had successfully obtained refugee status and 22 had returned to Sri Lanka. The CBSA refuses to release further information and will not say if an expanded study will be conducted to examine the full nature of the problem.

 

 

The most famous Tamil last year said conditions for Tamils in Sri Lanka were vastly better:

 

 

U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron has been misled about conditions for Tamils in the north of the country, cricketer Muttiah Muralitharan, a Tamil and national hero, said today.

 

 

The lives of people are improving, Muralitharan, who took 800 test wickets, told reporters at an event in Colombo with Cameron to promote reconciliation on the island. Cameron, who traveled to the north yesterday, confronted President Mahinda Rajapaksa last night about refugees…

 

 

“In wartime I went with the UN, I saw the place, how it was,” Muralitharan said. “Now I regularly go and I see the place and it is about a 1,000 percent improvement in facilities,” he said.

 

 

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees says it’s helping refugees return to Sri Lanka:

 

 

Five years after the end of the conflict in Sri Lanka, the majority of those who were IDPs [internally displaced persons] in the country have returned to their place of origin. However, an undetermined number of individuals remain in protracted displacement, unable to return home owing to housing, land and property issues…

 

 

In Sri Lanka, IDP and refugee returnees have difficulty in meeting their basic needs. The lack of a comprehensive national policy on land rights has had an adverse impact on sustainable return… The return of Sri Lankan refugees will continue, albeit at a slower pace…

 

 

UNHCR will also facilitate the voluntary repatriation of Sri Lankan refugees in cooperation with the Governments of India and Sri Lanka.

 

 

UNHCR now praises Sri Lanka for how it is resettling returning refugees and the displaced. In fact, refugees from other countries are fleeing to Sri Lanka:

 

 

In this global and regional context, Sri Lanka has made progress in reintegrating the returning Sri Lankan refugees and by being a host country to many of those that flee violence in the region. Since the conflict in Sri Lanka ended in May 2009, UNHCR has helped over 11,400 Sri Lankan refugees who have returned voluntarily to restart their lives. Similarly, though numbers remain low in comparison to other host countries in the region, Sri Lanka currently hosts 291 refugees and 1547 asylum seekers, all of whom are registered with UNHCR.

 

 

Sri Lankan government has made great strides in reintegrating 573,651 returning internally displaced persons since the end of civil conflict in 2009. UNHCR continues to assist the government in finding durable solutions for the remaining IDPs. Likewise, Sri Lanka has very effectively dealt with the issue of statelessness on its territory by passing legislation enabling Tamils of Indian Origin, who had been previously disenfranchised, and a population of ethnic Chinese, who had been in the country since the 1940s, to access citizenship. Sri Lanka is often cited as the best practice in the region in resolving issues of statelessness.

 

 

UPDATE

 

 

 

 

 

 

An insane anology, grossly offensive both to Sri Lanka and to the Jews and gypsies particularly who were the victims of Nazi genocide:

Former Liberal prime minister Malcolm Fraser, an opponent of Operation Sovereign Borders, went further still yesterday, tweeting that handing asylum-seekers over to Sri Lanka at sea was redolent of handing Jews to Nazis in the 1930s.

 

 

(Thanks to readers brett t r, pitman and others.)

 

Actually the UNHCR has voiced great concern with regards to Tamils being returned to Sri Lanka. Not only in the past but a few days ago as well. That includes Australia's actions on the high seas to date. Great concern, I believe the communique stated.

 

As for former Sri Lankans returning once in receipt of a Canadian/British/USA/Australian etc passport, so what? Many from repressive regimes do return. Not just Iraq's, but Sudanese, Eritrean's, Ethiopians, to name some I'm personally aware off, as well as numerous Chinese that I heard about that gained refuge after Tiaomen Square massacre in 89.

 

Could be a Sri Lankan government communique being in part regurgitated here. Hence Sri Lanka is not regarded as a safe country for all Tamils and UNHCR instructs this as being so.

[Harpodom]

well if you could please repeat it as I don't have the will power to trawl through 31 pages.

Simply saying with dignity is not an answer.

I've given my tuppence worth previously and if you can't be arsed to look for it, I certainly can't be arsed to repeat it.

 

Why is it so hard to accept that everyone deserves to be treated with dignity?

 

These people haven't committed a crime. Even if they are suspect of committing a crime, the legal framework is meant to presume innocence until proven guilty.

 

But asylum seekers in Aus are treated in an entirely manner, as if they don't belong to the same species as the rest of us.

 

They are treated as guilty, though never charged, incarcerated indefinitely, with no exceptions. Disabled children, unaccompanied children, mentally ill adults, all treated the same.

 

The ones who are allowed into the community on so called bridging visas must sign and abide by a code of conduct devised by the immigration minister that applies to no one else but asylum seekers. Breaking the code could result in being thrown back in detention, no questions asked, no appeal. The definition of what could be considered to break the code is so nebulous that pretty much shouting at someone would do it.

 

Even those who are granted refugee status and already living in the community are living under threat of having their visa status revoked by the same minister who is hell bent on trying to prevent them staying here.

 

That isn't treating people with even the most basic level of dignity. Is that all good with you?

[oldun]

I do apologize for saying it was you that mentioned torture, it was actually flag and you just jumped in on it and tried to takeover. I also do not believe you are sorry, but I am sorry, for you, don't' ask me why! but maybe its because you cannot fully read/understand a posting or even believe and accept some one that states their agreement of torture being wrong and that anyone seeking asylum from such terror are genuine, you just want to cherry pick out the bits that disagree with any part of what you have to say, I think shows you up for been a diminished human being more than I.

 

I state again (if you care to take note and accept Harpodom) if anyone has witnessed or has credible evidence of torture and give such to the relevant authorities, then I will be with you all the way, it's just a great shame that non genuine asylum seekers (of which there are many, and I believe that they should be punished as a deterrent to others) and people that promote them, are just abusing the system and make it harder for the genuine cases to be assessed more fairly.

 

Great argument.

[flag of convenience]

Christine Milne is shocked at everything.

 

A lot to be shocked about with the attempted blitzkrieg of an unelected agenda by present regime. Thank goodness for a voice of humanity, decency and in general good sense in presenting a voice to the world that Australia is not entirely a land of right wing radicalism rowing frantically backwards in an illogical attempt to arrive in the fifties.

[Parley]

Christine Milne reminds me of a little poodle. A very small dog yapping loudly.

 

Considering they only won one seat at the election they sure have a lot to say.

[flag of convenience]

Sorry, but what is the source of this incoherent polemic?

 

Communiques out of Colombo do tend to be problematic. I blame the Wiki translator from Sinhalese script to English.

[Harpodom]

Christine Milne reminds me of a little poodle. A very small dog yapping loudly.

 

Considering they only won one seat at the election they sure have a lot to say.

What was that you were saying yesterday about childish insults parley?

[Danny842003]

I've given my tuppence worth previously and if you can't be arsed to look for it, I certainly can't be arsed to repeat it.

 

Why is it so hard to accept that everyone deserves to be treated with dignity?

 

These people haven't committed a crime. Even if they are suspect of committing a crime, the legal framework is meant to presume innocence until proven guilty.

 

But asylum seekers in Aus are treated in an entirely manner, as if they don't belong to the same species as the rest of us.

 

They are treated as guilty, though never charged, incarcerated indefinitely, with no exceptions. Disabled children, unaccompanied children, mentally ill adults, all treated the same.

 

The ones who are allowed into the community on so called bridging visas must sign and abide by a code of conduct devised by the immigration minister that applies to no one else but asylum seekers. Breaking the code could result in being thrown back in detention, no questions asked, no appeal. The definition of what could be considered to break the code is so nebulous that pretty much shouting at someone would do it.

 

Even those who are granted refugee status and already living in the community are living under threat of having their visa status revoked by the same minister who is hell bent on trying to prevent them staying here.

 

That isn't treating people with even the most basic level of dignity. Is that all good with you?

 

you say they haven't commuted a crime but is that true? Many of them arn't genuine asylum seekers they are economic migrants trying to beat the system. Is applying for asylum under such terms not fraud?

I think you misunderstood my point about don't just say treated with dignity. My point is how is this achieved without just letting everyone onshore to then abscond? this is what happens in the UK.

 

You our also said in an earlier post my comments indicate some form of bias. Again totally unfounded I'm not even a resident and my wife to be is the daughter of boat people.

[Harpodom]

Apologies if I was rude

 

you say they haven't commuted a crime but is that true? Many of them arn't genuine asylum seekers they are economic migrants trying to beat the system. Is applying for asylum under such terms not fraud?

I think you misunderstood my point about don't just say treated with dignity. My point is how is this achieved without just letting everyone onshore to then abscond? this is what happens in the UK.

 

You our also said in an earlier post my comments indicate some form of bias. Again totally unfounded I'm not even a resident and my wife to be is the daughter of boat people.

[flag of convenience]

It's what was being said on the radio this morning so yep I looked it up and posted it, paints a clearer picture if true that these people are in fact economic asylum seekers

 

Well if the radio told you and the internet confirmed it I guess that must it then? A see no clarity in supposition what so ever. A process can only determine what is and isn't you.

[flag of convenience]

Again you side step answering how you would do it different.

 

A bet's that a trick question? Tell me it's something other than under law? The legal progress Australia signed up to and is at the moment abiding to after being brought to heel.

[Danny842003]

A bet's that a trick question? Tell me it's something other than under law? The legal progress Australia signed up to and is at the moment abiding to after being brought to heel.

 

Im not trying to trick anyone. I simply don't know what the answer to this problem

is.

Camps? Doesn't work.

4 questions at sea? Seems flawed.

Land them and let them abscond? Doesn't work in the UK I fail to

see why it would work in a country 30 times larger.

 

My point was simply that Harpodom made it sound like there was an easy answer to this problem. If there is I still haven't heard it.

[flag of convenience]

what is the fairer way of doing things? Processing the people onshore where they promptly abscond and are lost to the system for years at a time? As happens in the UK

Im not saying I like either way but it's a harder problem than you seem to be making it out to be.

 

Nothing hard about following a legal process in place. I'd consider the government, is well aware most those in ongoing detention do met present criteria for refuge under law as stands.

[Xenon4017]

Nothing hard about following a legal process in place. I'd consider the government, is well aware most those in ongoing detention do met present criteria for refuge under law as stands.

 

The problem is that how do you objectively determine if someone's life is under threat? Or that they're being persecuted? That's the tricky part that Harpedom can't get to grips with. Very often, you rely on uncorroborated testimony. And those who seek to cheat the system know this.

[flag of convenience]

It isn't. Want to give it a go? I'll be the recent arrival and you can be the Australain Govt that you'd like to see.

 

I'll write my replies as the asylum seeker in square brackets, and my other comments in parenthesis.

 

So, fire away. We're sat opposite each other, and by the way, thanks for the cup of tea.

 

What makes you think you can wear the shoes of an asylum seeker? Perhaps why the questioning is in accordance with set guide lines and not forgetting often with an interpreter present.

Your offer does not only go towards denigrating the process involved but the trauma of the individual being ascertained as to be in need of asylum as well.

[Parley]

What Harpo and Flag don't understand or acknowledge is that their softly softly approach would lead to a massive influx of boats worse than what occurred under Labor.

 

They would be arriving every day and thousands would die each year on the journey.

 

We absolutely need a harsh approach that will deter boats as much as possible, while continuing to take refugees through the correct channels from the international camps.

[flag of convenience]

It isn't. Want to give it a go? I'll be the recent arrival and you can be the Australain Govt that you'd like to see.

 

I'll write my replies as the asylum seeker in square brackets, and my other comments in parenthesis.

 

So, fire away. We're sat opposite each other, and by the way, thanks for the cup of tea.

 

If Harpo accepts and it is found you have no ground for any further leave to remain, you promise to go for real?

[Xenon4017]

What makes you think you can wear the shoes of an asylum seeker? Perhaps why the questioning is in accordance with set guide lines and not forgetting often with an interpreter present.

Your offer does not only go towards denigrating the process involved but the trauma of the individual being ascertained as to be in need of asylum as well.

 

Another without the cojones to give it a go then.

 

The case I was going to present represents a genuine case of someone I knew. Lovely guy, but bogus. Well, partially bogus. I'm happy to divulge the gist of it if you want.

 

The thing is, you think you've got an answer, but it wouldn't stand up to the rigors of practical application. I'd like to demonstrate to you why this is, but you refuse to participate.

[MARYROSE02]

Hundreds of people drowned because of the previous Government's policies. How could the situation be better if the Abbott Government had continued the same way?

 

I don't understand why any person who makes any sort of attempt to come to Australia illlegally should be automatically assumed to be a bona fida refugee?