Should all kids, offshore and mainland, be released from Australia's detention centres?

[Xenon4017]

I think the problem is that Labor and the Greens have refused to allow temporary protection visas which would have allowed the detainees claims to be assessed and release them into the community until circumstances improved in their home country.

 

But who is really interested in changing things in their home country? There's basically a ratchet effect going on. You have to release a child because detaining a child is inhumane. And you have to release the parents because separating parents from children is inhumane. And you can't send them back if the possibility exists that they might come to harm. And since they're here permanently, you might as well make them permanent residents.

 

To solve this problem, all you have to do is break the link between the place where they initially lodge their asylum claim and the place where they eventually get resettled. Once those who make the extensive and expensive journey by boat realise that they will get no preferential treatment over those who languish in camps further afield, then the true victims of persecution will save their money and apply in nearer countries, whilst the economic migrants will give up entirely, or apply through the standard skilled migration route.

 

I'd happily swap 1 detainee from Nauru for 2 refugees from Africa and give them PR. The short term net result would be Australia takes more refugees, albeit not those who landed on its' shores. No one could say we weren't doing our bit, and the overall number of refugees _in the world_ would go down. But the legal profession here would have a revenue stream cut off.

[flag of convenience]

But who is really interested in changing things in their home country? There's basically a ratchet effect going on. You have to release a child because detaining a child is inhumane. And you have to release the parents because separating parents from children is inhumane. And you can't send them back if the possibility exists that they might come to harm. And since they're here permanently, you might as well make them permanent residents.

 

To solve this problem, all you have to do is break the link between the place where they initially lodge their asylum claim and the place where they eventually get resettled. Once those who make the extensive and expensive journey by boat realise that they will get no preferential treatment over those who languish in camps further afield, then the true victims of persecution will save their money and apply in nearer countries, whilst the economic migrants will give up entirely, or apply through the standard skilled migration route.

 

I'd happily swap 1 detainee from Nauru for 2 refugees from Africa and give them PR. The short term net result would be Australia takes more refugees, albeit not those who landed on its' shores. No one could say we weren't doing our bit, and the overall number of refugees _in the world_ would go down. But the legal profession here would have a revenue stream cut off.

 

Except would it altar anything? If there was a steady flow of those found to be refugees out of African camps wouldn't it just increase the number entering such camps? In comparison to the trickle that win the lucky draw at the moment. Perhaps that is a big part of the reason Africans are most numerous in taking boats to Europe.

Where is the difference? Isn't any really if you expect a different result.

 

You cannot label one group the true victims of persecution but label another less deserving. Being poor or having money has nothing to do with being in need of asylum or not. As for the place originally lodging the claim to the place finally being allowed to stay has by definition usually been the case as most claims are lodged in poorer developing world countries, hence the onus on some to leave and seek their solution be that by boat to Europe or Australia or even plane, than festering for years or decades in camps.

 

But then this has all been said before.

[fizzybangs]

Yes! With their mothers

[Xenon4017]

Except would it altar anything? If there was a steady flow of those found to be refugees out of African camps wouldn't it just increase the number entering such camps?

 

No, I don't think it would lead to a large increase. There would be a nominal increase, as those people who would otherwise have spent money getting to Australia presumably wouldn't now do so; they'd lodge in a place nearer to home. Which would pull the rug from under the people smugglers business model.

 

The big difference is that we wouldn't need to hold anyone in detention for very long. Just long enough to get them on the next (half full) plane. The planes return journey would be full, obviously. And those making the inward leg would get full support to integrate into Australian society.

 

>>You cannot label one group the true victims of persecution but label another less deserving

 

I don't. You do. I think a refugee is a refugee is a refugee. I treat them all the same, regardless of how much effort they went through to escape their travails. I also don't put any "onus on them to seek their solution".

 

But it's true, that if you enter into the asylum system, then all you can do is hope for safety from your immediate peril. Anything else is a bonus. You are, after all, leaping from the second floor of a burning building. You don't have much of a right to complain that the fire brigade should have broken your fall a little more softly.

[flag of convenience]

Every time I read one of these threads , I start with an open mind and sympathy for boat people and the children. Then I read the same people deriding opposing views , name calling and questioning of intellects .

The suposed good/ nice guys do little for their cause when they resort to that level of debate. I'm righteous , your an idiot .

do you really believe you can alter people's points of view by treating them as simpletons ?

when was the last time any of the ' good guys ' wrote to their MP or organised a protest outside the Indian embassy to put pressure on a more local solution ? How about a march to get all those other countries to sign up to the resolution ?

My own personal view , no children shouldn't be locked up on camps , even if that camp is better or safer than where they left . And they'd be better off with their parents out as well . I'd grant temporary work / resident visas . The problem of course is that they'd be a hell of a lot more boats coming . There are over a billion people in the world who would be better off in tent in a camp . Luckily notmany can afford the people smuggling route .

 

You rather spoil your pretend openness on the debate by denigrating those not in favour of ill treatment of folk for political short term gain, with the term" the supposed nice guys do little for their cause" and "righteous, your an idiot. Nothing said on the side that refuses debate and repeats slogans and support a system that treats human beings with such vile contempt with any sort of sanction or criticism.

 

Rather obviously there is next to no debate as the haters have dug in and no chance of changing their mind set. Don't care to be honest. Just ensure that such bigoted and ill informed posters do not get the last word in.

[Xenon4017]

Rather obviously there is next to no debate as the haters have dug in and no chance of changing their mind set. /QUOTE]

 

I don't know why you keep repeating that label "the haters". Show one post where someone said "I hate asylum seekers/refugees". I've seen plenty of posts that argue that the current system/solution is the lesser of two evils, but that doesn't equate to hating. And I seen plenty of posts that assert that the cost of housing all claimants in the community would not be financially viable. But this isn't hate.

[Sammy1]

Rather obviously there is next to no debate as the haters have dug in and no chance of changing their mind set. /QUOTE]

 

I don't know why you keep repeating that label "the haters". Show one post where someone said "I hate asylum seekers/refugees". I've seen plenty of posts that argue that the current system/solution is the lesser of two evils, but that doesn't equate to hating. And I seen plenty of posts that assert that the cost of housing all claimants in the community would not be financially viable. But this isn't hate.

 

Oh come on, let's be at least a little truthful on here. There are haters and if you care to read through all the posts this is clearly obvious.

[flag of convenience]

No, I don't think it would lead to a large increase. There would be a nominal increase, as those people who would otherwise have spent money getting to Australia presumably wouldn't now do so; they'd lodge in a place nearer to home. Which would pull the rug from under the people smugglers business model.

 

The big difference is that we wouldn't need to hold anyone in detention for very long. Just long enough to get them on the next (half full) plane. The planes return journey would be full, obviously. And those making the inward leg would get full support to integrate into Australian society.

 

>>You cannot label one group the true victims of persecution but label another less deserving

 

I don't. You do. I think a refugee is a refugee is a refugee. I treat them all the same, regardless of how much effort they went through to escape their travails. I also don't put any "onus on them to seek their solution".

 

But it's true, that if you enter into the asylum system, then all you can do is hope for safety from your immediate peril. Anything else is a bonus. You are, after all, leaping from the second floor of a burning building. You don't have much of a right to complain that the fire brigade should have broken your fall a little more softly.

 

People will move regardless when situations inflame in various global trouble spots. Unless the camps have an active and visible rate of departure, there will always be those, who will either avoid the camps going for the direct route where possible, or go to camps and leave due to years of frustration in being resettled.

 

The claims are already being lodged near to places of departure from so don't at all get your point. Afghans for example are in their hundreds of thousands in Pakistan. Burmese are in their tens of thousands in Thai camps or in Malaysia. And so on.

 

So if all refugees are to be treated the same it matters not apart from the convenience of Australia to control the flow rather than the legalities of the issue. It is true not all seeking asylum are in need of permanent refuge. This is recognised by UNHCR which does facilitate the return of asylum seekers when an area is judged safe enough. Cambodia was an example where large numbers were returned from Thailand when judged safe to do so.

[flag of convenience]

Rather obviously there is next to no debate as the haters have dug in and no chance of changing their mind set. /QUOTE]

 

I don't know why you keep repeating that label "the haters". Show one post where someone said "I hate asylum seekers/refugees". I've seen plenty of posts that argue that the current system/solution is the lesser of two evils, but that doesn't equate to hating. And I seen plenty of posts that assert that the cost of housing all claimants in the community would not be financially viable. But this isn't hate.

 

The actual word hate doesn't need to be formulated when the content will pass.

[flag of convenience]

 

Oh come on, let's be at least a little truthful on here. There are haters and if you care to read through all the posts this is clearly obvious.

 

It comes out loud and clear. But they won't get the last word on the matter.

[Parley]

Aren't you all haters.

You just hate different things.

[Echidna66]

Im not a hater, but I dont want to contribute one single cent to economic migrants..If that makes me a "hater" then so be it.."Hater" thats a really "modern, childish, x-factor, do-gooder" type word..

[Parley]

Some of these guys just don't want to be part of Team Australia.

[Xenon4017]

 

Oh come on, let's be at least a little truthful on here. There are haters and if you care to read through all the posts this is clearly obvious.

 

I'll be truthful, there is one poster who seems to be a little unhinged. But not MR2, or several others who's objections seems to be based on the practicality or fairness of letting asylum seekers gain de facto PR through misrepresentation or queue jumping.

 

If they hated asylum seekers in general then they would object to issueing any humanitarian visa, but I don't see any posts suggesting this.

 

Indeed you have to question the motives of those "on the opposite side" who seem unwilling to make any compromise, and would rather subject asylum seekers to a less rigorous system which is doomed to fail. Make no mistake, any system which does not have public support will fail. So the onus is on you to convince the public to change their minds. Using language like "haters" won't do this. You must know this, so my conclusion is that you're not really interested in changing the current status quo; you just want to complain about it.

[Xenon4017]

Im not a hater, but I dont want to contribute one single cent to economic migrants..If that makes me a "hater" then so be it.."Hater" thats a really "modern, childish, x-factor, do-gooder" type word..

 

I wouldn't call you a hater. (Although I have previously called you unhinged). But we're all economic migrants. Why do you post to a forum full of them?

[mickyb]

http://mobile.news.com.au/national/inspiring-tale-of-former-refugee-dr-munjed-al-muderis-and-war-hero-michael-swain/story-fncynjr2-1226849124080

this is the story that change my stance completely. Make sure you read it .

[mickyb]

You rather spoil your pretend openness on the debate by denigrating those not in favour of ill treatment of folk for political short term gain, with the term" the supposed nice guys do little for their cause" and "righteous, your an idiot. Nothing said on the side that refuses debate and repeats slogans and support a system that treats human beings with such vile contempt with any sort of sanction or criticism.

 

Rather obviously there is next to no debate as the haters have dug in and no chance of changing their mind set. Don't care to be honest. Just ensure that such bigoted and ill informed posters do not get the last word in.

pretend openness ? There's plenty here that can get there point across with out abuse , as for haters. Only one I can see , not sure if he's a genuine hater or escapee. I still don't believe that Sri Lanka is a genuine source of asylum seekers . And still no evidence posted as I've asked before ,does that make me a hater. ? . No wonder they're digging in, are they supposed to be bullied into changing their minds ? You and harpo are hardly coming across as ambassadors of diplomacy are you. People have genuine concerns over the validity , number and conditions of travel

. Take the case of the afghan Sikhs in the uk container. One dead. , should the smuggler be given medals for helping them to sanctuary or prosecuted for manslaughter ? Under your rules they'd be heroes wouldn't they. ?

[mickyb]

I wouldn't call you a hater. (Although I have previously called you unhinged). But we're all economic migrants. Why do you post to a forum full of them?

I'm an uneconomic migrant . I didn't come for more money .

[flag of convenience]

Aren't you all haters.

You just hate different things.

 

Like the dignified treatment of human beings for short term political gain. The detention of children. The mental anguish imposed. You'd have to be a real hater to go along with that. Hating spinach isn't quite along the same lines.

[flag of convenience]

pretend openness ? There's plenty here that can get there point across with out abuse , as for haters. Only one I can see , not sure if he's a genuine hater or escapee. I still don't believe that Sri Lanka is a genuine source of asylum seekers . And still no evidence posted as I've asked before ,does that make me a hater. ? . No wonder they're digging in, are they supposed to be bullied into changing their minds ? You and harpo are hardly coming across as ambassadors of diplomacy are you. People have genuine concerns over the validity , number and conditions of travel

. Take the case of the afghan Sikhs in the uk container. One dead. , should the smuggler be given medals for helping them to sanctuary or prosecuted for manslaughter ? Under your rules they'd be heroes wouldn't they. ?

There's little need of diplomacy on here. Facts are water of a duck's back to those in the hate camp. laughable being for the most part migrants themselves. Evidence is a plenty on conditions that human beings are being kept and should be an affront to every clear thinking Australian. What happens in UK in regards to entry is another subject. Start a thread on that if feel the need and I will respond accordingly. This one is clearly on the abuse under going in detention centres put in place by Australian governments regardless of colour.

[flag of convenience]

I'm an uneconomic migrant . I didn't come for more money .

 

I trust they brought you forward to the front of the queue?

[flag of convenience]

http://mobile.news.com.au/national/inspiring-tale-of-former-refugee-dr-munjed-al-muderis-and-war-hero-michael-swain/story-fncynjr2-1226849124080

this is the story that change my stance completely. Make sure you read it .

 

Good story. Another example of a refugee success story. There are many. Being a refugee increases the emphasis imv to succeed.

[flag of convenience]

I wouldn't call you a hater. (Although I have previously called you unhinged). But we're all economic migrants. Why do you post to a forum full of them?

 

Certainly not a lover of the human form.

[mickyb]

I trust they brought you forward to the front of the queue?

Nope , still about three and a half years in total. Plus the possibility the wait might be longer or at all as the skills list changed after I'd paid all my money .luckily I passed the English test for additional points . Then the extra payments and even at one time being told my baby might not be allowed in on a holiday visa , as he'd no intent on returning to the uk , at 3 months old . Evil regime that labour one was I tell ya .

[mickyb]

There's little need of diplomacy on here. Facts are water of a duck's back to those in the hate camp. laughable being for the most part migrants themselves. Evidence is a plenty on conditions that human beings are being kept and should be an affront to every clear thinking Australian. What happens in UK in regards to entry is another subject. Start a thread on that if feel the need and I will respond accordingly. This one is clearly on the abuse under going in detention centres put in place by Australian governments regardless of colour.

id say that the uk container death is very relevant to the boat deaths considering both were looking for better lives , taken advantage of by unscrupulous smugglers interested only in money . I also find positive stories much better than detriment . Again I don't see the hate camp

as you describe them. Opinions based on their thoughts and facts the way they see them. Carrot and stick , the carrot to me was that story .