Is the 'Pacific Solution' unravelling?

[Guest241083]

As you well know, I am neither heartless, nor racist, but I remain suspicious of the motives of those who constantly look for the worst in everybody and everything connected with the process of preventing illegal people from entering Australia.

 

The Guardian and The ABC and people like yourself are determined to paint the RAN, the Customs service, the police, the Immigration Department, the people who run the detention centres as little better than Nazi concentration camp guards, whilst suspending all rational thoughts when it comes to looking at the motives of the illegal boat people and others.

 

The people who own and run the boats themselves, who would be imprisoned for life if they tried to run a similar service in Australia, you see as altruistic lovers of humanity, whilst the people who pay to be taken to Australia illegally are all bona fida refugees fleeing from the worst regimes in the world. If they take their children on unseaworthy boats, packed like sardines, then that is not evidence of their own lack of care for their own families, but evidence of their desperaton to flee oppression.

 

And of course, anybody who SAYS they are are a refugee must be accepted as a refugee, and it is inhumane to do anything by the most rudimentary of checks. They should immediately be released into the general Australian community and given the best of everything, homes, welfare, medical care, and their needs must come before those of Australians.

 

Under Rudd and Gillard, the boats and the people flooded into Australia, with many hundreds of people drowning. and our facilities on Christmas Island overwhelmed. Tony Abbott said he would 'stop the boats' and he did. End of. I'm happy. If Rudd and Gillard had still been in power, then thousands more people would likely have drowned, and criminals in Indonesia would have continued to make their profits.

 

What have I missed?

 

 

 

......goodness MR....

......your an intelligent young man IMO.....

......surely you can see its not just viewing all you listed as ...nazi tendencies....!

......it's about questioning the the policies of those who 's ...'care'......these people rely on....

......and care.....it should be....!

......to be desperate enough to risk what they do....

......must be evidence enough of manys genuine claim....

......checks are in place....

.......there are no guaranteed free anythings. ..!

.......and flooding into Australia...?

.......the numbers are available ,and flooding is not a word I think that fits...

.......why don't they stay in the next country they pass through...?

.......another country unable to support who they already have....resources stretched to the limit...!

.......or get a visa....?

.....when their fleeing for their lives.....

.......time to apply....submit and wait.....

.......if the opportunity is even available....

.......fine stop the boats.......but offer an alternative....

.........to seek asylum is a human right.....

.........and Australia has a commitment of care........!

[Guest51810]

:biglaugh:

 

True tho!

[Xenon4017]

Most people think you can still have a opinion on something without voting. You certainly seemed to have a opinion on the referendum even though you didn't have a say!

 

This is of course absolutely true. I think the point of PCs post wasn't to highlight that not all on the board have a vote. It was to try to stop Harpodom from sitting on the fence. The ALP haven't proposed any viable alternative to the current policy. (Neither has Harpodom, emphasis on "viable"). So who would he vote for? It's very easy to complain but much harder to propose something else that might work.

 

The number of boats arriving here has been starkly reduced. That's a fact. The number of boats embarking seems to have fallen off too. I guess this is because there's a latency between implementing a policy and seeing the results. People are no longer paying to get here by sea. If you want to analyse this issue properly you have to ask yourself why. My own conclusion is that they can see that it doesn't do you any good to arrive by sea. Any perceived benefits from years gone by have evaporated.

[Parley]

I never said you can't have an opinion.

But ultimately, like my opinion in the Scottish referendum, it won't count for anything if you are ineligible to vote.

 

What counts in the end is the opinions of those who are Australians who are registered to vote.

English people living here temporarily can certainly have an opinion but it won't count for anything.

[Guest241083]

This is of course absolutely true. I think the point of PCs post wasn't to highlight that not all on the board have a vote. It was to try to stop Harpodom from sitting on the fence. The ALP haven't proposed any viable alternative to the current policy. (Neither has Harpodom, emphasis on "viable"). So who would he vote for? It's very easy to complain but much harder to propose something else that might work.

 

The number of boats arriving here has been starkly reduced. That's a fact. The number of boats embarking seems to have fallen off too. I guess this is because there's a latency between implementing a policy and seeing the results. People are no longer paying to get here by sea. If you want to analyse this issue properly you have to ask yourself why. My own conclusion is that they can see that it doesn't do you any good to arrive by sea. Any perceived benefits from years gone by have evaporated.

 

 

....but this still poses the question of what can be done.....

....the reality for these people is still there....

....all that's happened is a door has been slammed on a vulnerable people....

.....too easy IMO....to now close our eyes.....

.....asylum seekers don't just,..go away....

.....the problem isn't fixed....

......it's just been pushed away from the eyes of many Australians....

......it's not happening here.....they can't get here.......can't see it...!

......there's more than one way of voting for whats right ime...

......supporting a cause....

......forcing the government to address the issues..

......we all have a voice....

.......and need to use it....

.......stand up for what's wrong.........

.......and turning our backs on these people.....is wrong....IMO....!

[MARYROSE02]

......goodness MR....

......your an intelligent young man IMO.....

......surely you can see its not just viewing all you listed as ...nazi tendencies....!

......it's about questioning the the policies of those who 's ...'care'......these people rely on....

......and care.....it should be....!

......to be desperate enough to risk what they do....

......must be evidence enough of manys genuine claim....

......checks are in place....

.......there are no guaranteed free anythings. ..!

.......and flooding into Australia...?

.......the numbers are available ,and flooding is not a word I think that fits...

.......why don't they stay in the next country they pass through...?

.......another country unable to support who they already have....resources stretched to the limit...!

.......or get a visa....?

.....when their fleeing for their lives.....

.......time to apply....submit and wait.....

.......if the opportunity is even available....

.......fine stop the boats.......but offer an alternative....

.........to seek asylum is a human right.....

.........and Australia has a commitment of care........!

 

But there IS a limit to the numbers of people that Australia can admit. Christmas Island reached a point where it was 'full'. So many people drowned on the Titanic because there were not enough lifeboats. What would you have done if it had been your decision to choose who lived and how died? Australia's big cities are already bulging at the seams, and many services are stretched. So what if asylum seekers are suffering mental health problems because of their continued detention? Hundreds of thousands of Australias suffer from the same problems and many of them cannot access the care they need.Yet you just want to let them all in. They all have a genuine reason to come to Australia, so they must all get a seat on the lifeboat.

 

Of course, many people are genuinely fleeing from oppression, but many of them also bring their prejudices and hates into Australia with them. If they cannot live in peace in their own countries, then why would they be able to do it here? What makes Australia such a relatively peaceful place, and other countries so nasty? And when there is unrest, who is to blame? Why, nasty, racist Aussies of course. And yet, knowing full well just how nasty we are, they still want to come.

 

Australia already has an 'official' refugee programme, with many thousands of 'official' refugees patiently awaiting their turn to come here, and they now have to wait even longer whilst those who can afford to pay for their passage can 'jump the queue.' What is the solution? Double our official intake? Triple it? Quadruple it? Charter planes and ships to go to all the world's troublespots and bring all who want to come here?

[Xenon4017]

....but this still poses the question of what can be done.....

....the reality for these people is still there....

...

......it's not happening here.....they can't get here.......can't see it...!

 

 

And you're quite right there too. Even though arrivals here by sea have gone down, the global refugee population hasn't decreased. So they are just "somewhere else" and therefore "somebody elses' problem". [That's why countries like Luxemburg aren't worried by boat people]

 

That's why we need a policy that links the lack of arrivals here by boat with a genuine effort to address the global issue. My idea is to trade refugees. For each one that arrived here by boat, we'll trade them for 2 refugees in whichever camp is willing to engage us. The 2 we take get PR. This will reduce the global refugee population. After all, turning out back on those refugees is wrong too, isn't it?

 

Of course, all this is predicated on the premise that whilst it's a fundamental human right to be able to choose where you claim asylum, it isn't a human right to be able to choose where you are eventually resettled.

 

Do you believe that it's a fundamental human right to be able to choose where you are eventually resettled?

[Guest241083]

But there IS a limit to the numbers of people that Australia can admit. Christmas Island reached a point where it was 'full'. So many people drowned on the Titanic because there were not enough lifeboats. What would you have done if it had been your decision to choose who lived and how died? Australia's big cities are already bulging at the seams, and many services are stretched. So what if asylum seekers are suffering mental health problems because of their continued detention? Hundreds of thousands of Australias suffer from the same problems and many of them cannot access the care they need.Yet you just want to let them all in. They all have a genuine reason to come to Australia, so they must all get a seat on the lifeboat.

 

Of course, many people are genuinely fleeing from oppression, but many of them also bring their prejudices and hates into Australia with them. If they cannot live in peace in their own countries, then why would they be able to do it here? What makes Australia such a relatively peaceful place, and other countries so nasty? And when there is unrest, who is to blame? Why, nasty, racist Aussies of course. And yet, knowing full well just how nasty we are, they still want to come.

 

Australia already has an 'official' refugee programme, with many thousands of 'official' refugees patiently awaiting their turn to come here, and they now have to wait even longer whilst those who can afford to pay for their passage can 'jump the queue.' What is the solution? Double our official intake? Triple it? Quadruple it? Charter planes and ships to go to all the world's troublespots and bring all who want to come here?

 

 

........all your points don't advocate lack of empathy...!

........or indeed a want to try and find a solution........not just a deterent....!

........to take a humane interest and will to seek and employ a solution....

.........by lobbying those able.....!

 

.......queue jumping...?

........applying for protection.

........seeking asylum is standard procedure.

..........As a refugee is by definition a person outside his or her country of origin,

...........every refugee in the world must have, at some point, entered another country to seek protection.....!

........... Many refugees lack access to UNHCR’s resettlement processes altogether and simply do not have resettlement available to them as an option.

...........It is unreasonable to expect refugees to remain indefinitely in situations of danger and insecurity, or to penalise them for seeking their own solutions, when the international community fails in its responsibility to provide effective protection.

 

...........Australia bulging at the seams...?

...........but .... Australia received 29,610 asylum applications, just 1.47 per cent of the more than two million claims lodged across the world through individual application and group recognition processes.

..........is this such a large part of why....?

 

 

.......By definition, refugees are survivors.

.......They have survived because of their courage, ingenuity and creativity.

.........qualities which we value in Australia. .......,

........If we assist newly arrived refugees to recover from the experiences of their past and rebuild their lives in Australia, we will reap the benefits of the qualities and experiences they bring to our society.......

 

........( all taken from various available places on the Internet.....the refugee council of Australia....!surely they have correct information...).....http://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/f/myth-long.php#swamped

 

.......and the titanic debacle......?

.......caused by greed.....profits expectations.....

.......sadly the way of the haves....!

[Parley]

Not sure of the relevance, but the number of people who drowned on the Titanic and the number of asylum seekers who drowned under Labor's policies was the same. Around 1500 people in both cases.

 

Interesting observation.

[Guest241083]

And you're quite right there too. Even though arrivals here by sea have gone down, the global refugee population hasn't decreased. So they are just "somewhere else" and therefore "somebody elses' problem". [That's why countries like Luxemburg aren't worried by boat people]

 

That's why we need a policy that links the lack of arrivals here by boat with a genuine effort to address the global issue. My idea is to trade refugees. For each one that arrived here by boat, we'll trade them for 2 refugees in whichever camp is willing to engage us. The 2 we take get PR. This will reduce the global refugee population. After all, turning out back on those refugees is wrong too, isn't it?

 

Of course, all this is predicated on the premise that whilst it's a fundamental human right to be able to choose where you claim asylum, it isn't a human right to be able to choose where you are eventually resettled.

 

Do you believe that it's a fundamental human right to be able to choose where you are eventually resettled?

 

 

 

.........and such as your solutions should be considered.....!

.........it's the lack of wanting to solve a world problem.......

........that's all of ours to consider as part of the human race that saddens me tbh....

.........and choice of resettlement....

...........of course .....if its viable......

...........did we not choose our place of residence......?

[Guest241083]

Not sure of the relevance, but the number of people who drowned on the Titanic and the number of asylum seekers who drowned under Labor's policies was the same. Around 1500 people in both cases.

 

Interesting observation.

 

 

......one caused by greed...of the few...!

......the other by desperation......of many...!

 

.....opposite ends of the scale...IMO...!

[Parley]

Tink, that is what undermines their claims of being asylum seekers.

Genuine asylum seekers would be happy to seek the closest safe haven if they really are fleeing persecution.

That is what is expected under international law.

 

To fly to Indonesia and then get on a boat to Australia, because Australia is seen as a paradise, is what galls Australians and undermines their whole claim.

[Guest241083]

Tink, that is what undermines their claims of being asylum seekers.

Genuine asylum seekers would be happy to seek the closest safe haven if they really are fleeing persecution.

That is what is expected under international law.

 

To fly to Indonesia and then get on a boat to Australia, because Australia is seen as a paradise, is what galls Australians and undermines their whole claim.

 

 

 

.....the choice is made ...IMO....because often the countries first arrived in.....

......do not have the resources to cope...!

.......this is available to explain.....!

 

.......The country in which they have sought protection has a clear framework for assessing refugee claims and providing protection;Asylum seekers can have their claims assessed through a fair and credible system of status determination;

People who are found to be refugees have a secure legal status and will be protected against forcible return to their country of origin (refoulement);

Refugees have access to services and support necessary to ensure a decent standard of living;

Refugees have access to a durable solution within a reasonable period of time; and

The human rights of refugees and asylum seekers are respected and upheld.

 

.......not every country has the above....!

[Xenon4017]

.........and choice of resettlement....

...........of course .....if its viable......

...........did we not choose our place of residence......?

 

So, you think it's a fundamental human right.....but only if it's "viable".

 

OK, that's introduced an interesting concept. I'm sure plenty of government would like to opt out of the Human Rights conventions on the basis of "not being viable right now".

 

You've just demonstrated a classic case of fence-sitting. You don't want to explicitely say that it isn't a right, because that makes you look uncaring. But you can't just come out and say that it is a right, because that would mean abandoning any kind of immigration control. So you opt for "it's a human right only given to certain qualifying humans". Blair would be proud of you. (Eric, not Tony)

[Guest241083]

....going to leave this one alone now....!

....information is available for all to read....!

....but still many are led in their beliefs by those with political agendas to fulfill....

....smoke screens offered.....for problems the country has.....

.....not caused by the issue at hand....

.....mismanaged public spending....

......not enough health care availability....

......poor infrastructure...

......mismanaged world trading opportunities.....

......lets blame the huge proportion of asylum seekers.......!

.......its easier than admitting ....that who we voted for may be wrong....!

.......or have lied.....

.......or are just inept.....

.......my final thoughts......tink X

[Guest241083]

So, you think it's a fundamental human right.....but only if it's "viable".

 

OK, that's introduced an interesting concept. I'm sure plenty of government would like to opt out of the Human Rights conventions on the basis of "not being viable right now".

 

You've just demonstrated a classic case of fence-sitting. You don't want to explicitely say that it isn't a right, because that makes you look uncaring. But you can't just come out and say that it is a right, because that would mean abandoning any kind of immigration control. So you opt for "it's a human right only given to certain qualifying humans". Blair would be proud of you. (Eric, not Tony)

 

 

......had to reply to this...!

......viable...!....perhaps poor choice of word....

......as in they fill a criteria.....!

......as all migrants do.....

.......a criteria of seeking refuge....

........of seeking asylum....

........I realise there has to be control.....

.........but not to the extent of exclusion.....

.........when the above is a fact.....

.........to seek asylum.....IS....The Right of any human being....!

.........you questioned the right to choose where....

.........I replayed that it should be....!

.........but of course often more than one criteria needs to be filled....

.........as any migrant knows,.,

.........asylum seekers have the right to expect a country that has the resources to support them....

..........Australia has.....IMO....!

[MARYROSE02]

.....the choice is made ...IMO....because often the countries first arrived in.....

......do not have the resources to cope...!

.......this is available to explain.....!

 

.......The country in which they have sought protection has a clear framework for assessing refugee claims and providing protection;Asylum seekers can have their claims assessed through a fair and credible system of status determination;

People who are found to be refugees have a secure legal status and will be protected against forcible return to their country of origin (refoulement);

Refugees have access to services and support necessary to ensure a decent standard of living;

Refugees have access to a durable solution within a reasonable period of time; and

The human rights of refugees and asylum seekers are respected and upheld.

 

.......not every country has the above....!

 

 

So, Why does Australia have unlimited resources to cope with as many refugees who want to come here? Why don't we have unlimited resources to build motorways between all our capital cities, and thus reduce the number of people killed and injured in accidents, and of course reduce the cost to the health service? Why do people have to wait for operations, wait to see specialists, wait to see psychologists? Wait ten years to get into public housing? How would you change our budget to do this?

[Guest241083]

So, Why does Australia have unlimited resources to cope with as many refugees who want to come here? Why don't we have unlimited resources to build motorways between all our capital cities, and thus reduce the number of people killed and injured in accidents, and of course reduce the cost to the health service? Why do people have to wait for operations, wait to see specialists, wait to see psychologists? Wait ten years to get into public housing? How would you change our budget to do this?

 

 

 

........we voted someone in to make these decisions.....

.........to choose how and where monies should be spent.......

.........my post posed the question of why.....

.........asylum seekers were in any way of consequence to these problems......

.........being of such smaller proportions than reported in political point scoring.......

 

.......oh and if I ruled the world......

........let alone the budget.... there would be no wars, Just a bunch of angry countries not talking to each other.......lol....!

........I'll let you share your ideas....

........I'm off to CTF...!

[Xenon4017]

.........to seek asylum.....IS....The Right of any human being....!

 

 

Correct. And you can't take it away. No condition or criteria required. (Except being human, obviously)

 

 

.........you questioned the right to choose where....

.........I replayed that it should be....!

.........but of course often more than one criteria needs to be filled....

 

 

So what are you saying? It's not a fundamental inalienable right. It's a "nice to have"?

 

 

.........asylum seekers have the right to expect a country that has the resources to support them....

 

 

Again, is this really a right? But you are correct in that many asylum seekers expect this (and not just of Australia). Specifically, having made considerable effort to get here and get their feet under the table, they expect a pretty smooth ride. But the current government policy is a huge obstacle for this. I can understand why they feel aggrieved. They've been sold a dream by people who have no intention on giving them their money back.

[Harpodom]

True tho!

 

Nothing funnier than the truth Stace!

[Guest241083]

.......perhaps my replies are failing to portray my opinions.....

........so have decided to clarify my posts.....

 

........I believe our government is using the issue of asylum seekers to cover their ineptitude in other matters....

........useing scaremongering tactics with other world issues....ie terrorism....

........to sway public opinion....

.........that Australia does not accept enough refugees to fulfill its potential quota....!

.........that refugees have a right to seek asylum.....

.........in a country capable of fulfilling the needs of those seeking it....

.........that false and misleading data......has been used to fuel a suspicion and fear within the public of Australia....

.........by a government unable and unwilling to address aworld issue that is a concern and obligation of Australia....

.........that the lack of resources is down to the influx of asylum seekers is a myth.....again bandied by inept politicians...

.........that by stopping the boat people......a solution has not been found....

..........merely a door slammed in the faces of a vulnerableeople...shameful IMO.....

..........any thing else unclear...?

...........I apologise for my poor clarity.....

............but am preoccupied ATM.......a reason not an excuse.....

............why I have recently stayed away from such threads.....

............but my passion for finding a solution......is still as strong.....!

.............tink X

[Echidna66]

With all the other chaos going on in the world now, who really gives a damn about asylum seekers..Most people now in any country are struggling to survive, not only the bloody freeloaders..

[Wellers and Whitehead]

With all the other chaos going on in the world now, who really gives a damn about asylum seekers..Most people now in any country are struggling to survive, not only the bloody freeloaders..

 

Most?? People..really? If you look at the cost of UK v oz thread, parleycross's two grandchildren are in her swimming pool..struggling? Other talking about nice houses etc etc, yes people are on benefits might find it tight..but struggling? I think talking about life and death prioritises some unknown people 'struggling'.

[Paul1Perth]

Most?? People..really? If you look at the cost of UK v oz thread, parleycross's two grandchildren are in her swimming pool..struggling? Other talking about nice houses etc etc, yes people are on benefits might find it tight..but struggling? I think talking about life and death prioritises some unknown people 'struggling'.

 

I only have to think back one generation to my parents to realise my generation and maybe 20 years younger (I'm 60) had the best of everything. We didn't have a car, my Dad didn't learn to drive till after me, my Mum never did, we didn't have a TV, we didn't have a home phone till I was in my mid 20's, we lived in a mid terraced house where the shower was in the small kitchen, if we wanted a bath it was the old tin bath in front of the fire, no central heating, just a coal fire, holidays to Skegness or Rhyll, parents had never owned a passport and been out of the country till they were in their late 40's. I remember going on my first holidays to Spain as a 17 year old, with loads of money in my pocket and everyone used to cheer and clap the pilot when the plane landed OK in Spain.

 

Seeing where my parents got to and my expectations of being able to drive and owning a car at 16, to being able to go to Spain 2 or 3 times a year with mates, everyone had a home phone, go to the pub every night and nto worry about buying a round for everyone.

 

Now today. Young people have mobile phone bills to pay as a minimum, internet fees, foxtel, multiple flat screen around the house, entertainment rooms, expect to go "travelling" either before or after they've done a degree or fit it in round work, which usually means basically giving work up for a few months while they buzz off and "do Europe" or America.

 

You could say we've never had it so good but I think the best is behind us and there is a reality check coming for a lot of younger people. One of the most worrying things is a lot of the stuff that youngsters see as necessities and everyone has one so I should are paid on credit. My son earns pretty good money on a FIFO job, has been to tomorrowland for the last two years, 3 months travelling last year, this year went to America twice to different concerts but I wouldn't like to hazard a guess how much he's actually paid for and what he owes the credit card and banks. He seems to think if you don't open letters from the bank the problem will just go away????

 

Credit wasn't around when I was growing up and having to save up and pay cash for things was a great learning experience that is totally different from paying on a card and then being shocked when the bill comes in.

 

I think most people are a long way from struggling.

 

As for not giving a damn about asylum seekers I think it's time to be having an even better look at them when they try and get in. There are going to be millions more of them and a lot are going to be pretty pissed they they had to bail on their mother country because it was being bombed by the Americans and us.

[Jessiejam]

With all the other chaos going on in the world now, who really gives a damn about asylum seekers..Most people now in any country are struggling to survive, not only the bloody freeloaders..

 

 

There are probably people on this forum who could dissect what you've said and pointed out the problems with it an eloquent way, but I'm not one of them. I'll just say that your comment makes me sad and sick. It's a disgusting sentiment.