Increase in asylum seekers is a problem of Rudd’s making

paul says:

07:04am | 14/10/09

This recycled Howard game of lets-beat-up-refugees argument is weak, pathetic and racist David. They are not queue jumpers or illegal they have every right to apply under international law for asylum.

Instead of jumping on the cockeyed redneck bandwagon, why not report on the thousands of non-brown illegal backpackers and visa over stayers in Bondi?  And if you ever get out of your inner city enclave David, go to Europe and America and see what a real refugee problem of tens of thousands of refugees looks like, instead of a pathetic trickle that are used as a political football by desperate media like you. Rudd is hardly to blame for media beat ups by desperate journalists.

We have bigger problems in Australia to focus on than this.

harvey says:

07:15am | 14/10/09

Why the alarmism over a few hundred boat arrivals when 45,000 people are in the country illegally each year after coming in THROUGH OUR AIRPORTS??? Yes, they might have come in legally in the first place, but they have overstayed and are very difficult for authorities to trackk. Where’s the outrage over these people?

acker says:

07:39am | 14/10/09

*The proximity of Sri Lanka where Tamils are being shunted out by the Ceylonese
*The recent increase in Asylum rejections in Europe
*Global Economic Crisis
*World publicity about Australia being the only Western Industrial nation not in recession

We just have more push factors than we did back when the World Economy was doing better prior to 2008.

Eric says:

07:39am | 14/10/09

Paul, the term “redneck” is a racist slur demeaning to white people. Please don’t be racist.

As for the asylum seekers, the problem is not their race, it’s their method of entry. That’s why it’s more serious than visa overstayers.

dude says:

07:50am | 14/10/09

The right need a boogie man to justify their own fear and project it on to others by way of scare mongering rightwing journo’s of which we are drowning in that love this old chestnut. And like refugees they’re very concerned about their future existence as well. It astonishes me that their dribble makes it to print, a sad proof of the further degradation of the news industry I suppose.

Michael says:

07:51am | 14/10/09

What alarms me is immigration is twice our birth rate, I’m even more alarmed we need to import skills that we can teach to people that are born here.
I don’t see how people that can afford to pay large sums of US dollars to board boats on a one way trip to oz are genuine refugees, what is wrong Indonesia and Malaysia or is it they like the idea of a country with the dole and free health care?

iansand says:

07:54am | 14/10/09

It’s complex, isn’t it?  Not the sort of thing that can be explained by simplistic sloganeering.

Eric says:

08:05am | 14/10/09

Yes, Ian. That’s why simplistic sloganeers like Paul, Harvey and Dude are so wrong.

They really should think before they type. Then they might overcome some of their fears and prejudices, and produce something worth reading.

Darren C says:

08:06am | 14/10/09

Rudd Quote:  “I was informed that once he got to Australia, under Mr Howard, there’d be two free houses and three free tractors. There you go - I mean, look, it’s a rumour mill out there.”

Author quote:  “This was condescending and even borderline racist.”

How was that racist?  How was it condescending?

It wasn’t - except in the imagination of David Southwell.

The changes put in place by the Rudd Government haven’t made it easier for illegal refugees to be accepted in Australia - they are just slightly more humane than under John Howard.

They were changes that should have been made by Howard long ago, except he wanted to feed on the ignorance and fear of Australians in regards to illegal refugees.

David Southwell is also a hypocrite - on one hand he has the gall to call Rudd a racist and condescending, but on the other, he publishes an article called the “Top ten ways to describe New Zealand”.

Hmmmm….

Tony says:

08:15am | 14/10/09

You can blame Krudd for bowing to pressure from the looney left. He removed TPV’s so the lefty nutjobs he relies on for support could have their oh so important warm fuzzy feelings inside. Under U.N. rules you are only a refugee until you reach your first safe destination, these people have travelled through multiple destinations and are therefore purely economic refugees now.

Allan says:

08:39am | 14/10/09

They are no economic refugees. If they were, they would not be granted refugee status. Anyone claiming to be a refugee is assessed against the criteria set down in the Refugees Convention. If you do not meet this test, you are deported.

Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore are not signatories to the Refugees Convention and therefore, we cannot return them to these places or we’d be breaking international law. We cannot stop these boats outside our contiguous zone and turn them back or we’d be breaking international law (it’s called piracy). You should note that these boats are not reaching the mainland. They are intercepted as soon as they reach our contiguous zone and are taking for offshore processing on Christmas Island. Even if CI was full, they’d just transfer some of the CI people to the Darwin detention centre so any new arrivals can continue to be processed offshore.

This is all about ignorance. People just do not understand what actually goes on.

Mark says:

08:40am | 14/10/09

ah the old redneck card? Good work Paul. Nothing like throwing around some racial slurs to prove your point that your not racist.

Liz says:

08:58am | 14/10/09

Paul and Harvey have got it.Our policies are not the problem,conditions in other countries are.Can’t we offer refugees a good home and be generous and caring in how we do it?

Retired says:

09:08am | 14/10/09

We should open our country to all the minorities whose lives are at risk, or whose livelihoods are threatened by those in power. So, let the Tamils, Kurds, Taliban, Tibetans, Balinese, Palestinians, Christian Lebanese, Muslim Lebanese, Uighurs, Hutu, Maori all come to Australia. If we don’t we could be seen as racist, or worse, uncaring. Silly us for thinking maybe the UN might give Sri Lanka, or Burma, or China, or Indonesia a bit of a hurry on to improve their Human Rights.

Daniel says:

09:09am | 14/10/09

Overall when you look at the ABS stats the overall number of Refugees coming to Australia is quite minimal. No doubt the hysteria that gets whipped up by this stull will help our elected leaders get a few votes come election time. I think its totally disgusting. The only way this will stop is if we get a Greens government.

kenny says:

09:11am | 14/10/09

It’s funny how Rudd can sound all warm and fuzzy and caring for these assylum seekers, but his own Government still allow indiginious Australians to live in poverty and making promises of fixing their housing problem can’t manage to get one house or even a roof built for them. And yet very little is said about that.

P says:

09:34am | 14/10/09

Who no longer believes in “children overboard”? These people are happy to set fire to their fellow passengers to get attention, why do we think they would not threaten to throw their children overboard? Grow up people!

These people are simply abusing international law, and to be blunt most are not exactly prime migration candidates who will add to the quality of life of those who already live here.  Some of the current crop are terrorists. Go look up the Tamil Tigers record or suicide bombs, torture, child soldiers and fanaticism. 

We have a Middle Eastern Crime Squad precisely because Labor lost control of migration once before. Now they are doing it again.

paul says:

09:50am | 14/10/09

Eric this is the definition of redneck:

A white person regarded as having a provincial, conservative, often bigoted attitude.

What is inaccurate about that?

Lester says:

09:53am | 14/10/09

Pre election Rudd was croaking how unfair Howards policy was and he would change that. (certainly gained a few votes for that one)And how Howard and his Government wasted tax payers money on buuilding the detention centre on Christmas Island. The bloody thing is full since he took over as PM. Now he is saying I’m tough, on border protection, whilst we are having boat after boat of “illegal migrants” as he terms them coming to our shores. He also promised no “illegal Migrants” would be processed on mainland Austrlalia under his Government. Well well well he just sent 200 beds to Christmas Island so he can hopefully starve off another election promise demise. I think he is going to need more than 200 beds at Christmas Island in that wasteful detention centre that Howard built.

Alex Megalos says:

10:00am | 14/10/09

Interesting that at a time the Libs are in trouble, they bring out the boat people card. My cousins live on a Greek island just off the coast of Turkey, that has experienced more than 10 thousand entries from a total of about 120,000 this year alone, and even though there is angst about the problem, it is not being treated as an alarmist “BOAT PEOPLE INVASION or BORDER SECURITY PROBLEM” but rather as a humanitarian crisis with many trying to assist them. In fact there isn’t this notion of an invasion, but rather concern for their welfare. The fact remains that the increase in arrivals to Australia has been from two sources Afghanistan and Sri Lanka…. two places that have experienced great displacement due to war this year.  Ruddock is a xenophobic dinosaur and many of these alarmist attitudes are not based on facts and are just indicative of an isolationist approach to the world. By all means target the smugglers, but don’t make the asylum seekers or refugees villains.

Ryan says:

10:07am | 14/10/09

um Alex - in all fairness you can’t say that the Libs brought out the boat people card. I think the boat people brought out that card. silly comment. I understand that Rudd supporters don’t like any scrutiny of their leader but fairs fair now. And if anything the boat people saga was actually part of an election winner for Rudd so why should it be advantagess for the Libs to play this card again.

Nil says:

10:09am | 14/10/09

The facts are:
1.  They leave their country and go past numerous other countries and arrive at Australia, if they were true refugee’s they would have stopped at the first safe country and have been happy they are alive (with the wife and kids)
2.  They arrive by themselves (single male) and leave the family in this fictitious dire situation that they are running from, if it was so dangerous they would have left the country with them. Once the single man gets into Australia, they get the rest of the family into the country and one illegal immigrant turns into how many( 6, 9, 12) so the 200 end up being 600, if it is wife with one kid and keep multiplying if there is 4 kids and then a grandparent or two.
3.  If they were truly refugees they would not have the money to pay for passage to Australia, $15k is a fair chunk of money, so they were already well off and left because they could, or they stopped along the way and worked to get the money, in either case they are not refugees, and could of settled anywhere along the way.
4.  In case people have not noticed the cost of living is high and keeps going up and house prices are ridiculously high. The taxpayers have to cover the living expenses of these people when they get here, when they get their visa we give them a housing commission house, welfare payments and concession cards (it all adds up) Then they use legislation to get the family into Australia and adds to the expense.
5.  Our infrastructure is shot, hospitals are stuffed and unless you can afford private health care, forget about medical treatment worth receiving, schools are a joke (and adding the immigrant kids to the mix is making it worse) unless you can afford private schools as well, transport and infrastructure are going down hill under the strain.

So to all those who keep supporting letting them in, have the guts to put your money where your mouth is and lead by example.

You can let them stay in your house, you can support them, give them your car, give them your spots in the hospitals and take your kids out of school and let them have the spots too. Don’t want to do this, then don’t expect the rest of the country to do it.

And yes I am against the white people in the country who sponge off the welfare system as well, the system should only give 12 months worth of payments and then nothing (unless there is a reason such as a disability) and the baby bonus and family tax benefit should only apply to the first two children and after that you are on your own. We cannot afford the expense, we cannot afford the additional population.

Dave C says:

10:14am | 14/10/09

“And the people smugglers the unelected and unaccountable UN and the left wing minority extremists will decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come.” Funny that I thought as a Liberal Democracy we as a nation had a right to decide who enters Australia and how they enter and not be called racists redneck xenophobic and all the other pieces of abuse thrown by the minority left crowd

Hey Paul and Daniel lets let everyone in.. come on open the doors we will let every terrorist rapist murderer etc use and abuse the UN system and while we are there lets give them our welfare from day 1 without them paying any tax. ... But I digress…...

Seriously though we need strong border protection and if we dont then the situation I describe above will happen. Yes if you overstay your visa after you fly you need to be locked up as well, it doesn’t mater what race you are. But by advocating an open door policy (and yes that is the alternative to the current policy the left dont say it but if you dont have mandatory detention then its an open door) the floodgates will open.

As well considering most migrants of any race dont move outside cities or the coast lets have more pressure on the air, water, roads, rail houses etc.

The solution is, close the door to everyone (regardless of race) except those who can create employment. As for the boatloads of asylum seekers, tow the boat to the nearest UNHCR centre its there problem.

While you are there we should withdraw our signatory to whatever UN Declaration we signed for that got us into this mess in the first place. We are not some magical world socialist utopian community run by the UN. But at this rate it wont be long before we are.

Tony says:

10:19am | 14/10/09

Daniel says “The only way this will stop is if we get a Greens government. ” Yes indeed, we’d rapidly become a 3rd world nation ourselves and there would be no reason at all for economic refugee’s to want to come here. Brilliant idea!

AFR says:

10:21am | 14/10/09

Nil, please don’t confuse the term “fact” with “uneducated generalisations”.

Morry says:

10:31am | 14/10/09

This country is not Heaven and Rudd is not God. We need tougher border protection than we have now to dicourage these people from wanting to make the dangerous trip here. Stop all the crap about being humanatarian Rudd and stop worrying about your votes and stop these people and fix our own Indiginous problem where our own people are living in squaler and deprivation! If you want to lead these people to think it’s a good idea to head for Australia then settle them out at a camp near Alice Springs where you let the Aborigines exist and see if they still want to come here.

Alex Megalos says:

10:46am | 14/10/09

@Ryan, so Ruddock’s claim about 10,000 boat people to invade Australia is not bringing out the Tampa card? Come on. You have got to be kidding me. The Libs and the Rupert press love this issue. The refugee problem is probably the most misrepresented issue in the media. I would also have to add, that it is over-represented as an issue given the amount of arrivals.  This is an issue for the extreme right wing to go to town on and enjoy, by whipping up hysteria about an invasion of the nation. It clogs up talk back lines with people eager to voice their racist concerns and cloak them up in jingoistic patriotism. It’s a win win for them, because the refugees can’t answer for themselves.

Hmmm says:

10:46am | 14/10/09

Rudd seems to have got his mitts on some polling that shows that many Aussies are fairly cross about rickety boats turning up, and in some cases threatening to blow up, if they aren’t admitted to Australia. This is also a very contentious issue in WA, a state which Labor would dearly love to do better in, it’s possibly Labors weakest state. It also happens to be very close to where the boats are being intercepted. If Rudd didn’t think this issue had the potential to embarrass him and his government then he would not have taken any action with Indonesia to stop the boats. Perhaps I too am a ‘redneck’ but reading that people are threatening to use violence or demanding entry to MY country, makes me get my back up a bit, I can’t help it. But you can’t bash down someones front or back door and demand to come in, and if you do you won’t be popular. I actually know lots of people who came as refugees from Africa in the 90’s, I’ve never thought I was a racist. I was completely on the side of the gov. during the Tampa incident but then I went and saw Woomera detention centre and it appalled me… And yes, heaps more people come in and overstay on tourist or other visas. There’s just something about the whole idea of ’ boats from the north’  that seems to disturb many Australians, maybe it’s uncalled for but it’s a fact I’m afraid. It messes with our psyche. Even though the numbers are so tiny it still feels like an invasion, I would rather they flew in and we never heard about it. Just my confused ramblings, sorry.

Jade says:

10:54am | 14/10/09

We should turn there boat around and send them back where they came from.  Its there own fault for spending all there saving try to get here.  if they want to blow them selfs up let them.  I do not care and do not want them here.

Dani says:

11:23am | 14/10/09

How does Paul Toohey’s piece prove that the Rudd govt is responsible? I only skim read the article, so correct me if I’m wrong - but he only quoted one, just one, refugee who knew about Rudd and the supposed immigration policies. So there’s one person in 400 who knew about changes to the policy. I hardly think we can generalise that refugees in general, all over the world, also know.

There’s so many other problems here in this article, but I’m too tired to even start. I’ll leave that to everyone else here who seems to be going a good job so far.

Nil says:

11:27am | 14/10/09

AFR I suggest you do some research yourself and then come back.

Lincoln says:

11:29am | 14/10/09

Dani - It’s the people smugglers who know our policy their the ones doing the business. They sell Australia to the boat people.

Jade says:

11:45am | 14/10/09

I’m with Nil on this one! Perfectly Said!

DWest says:

12:15pm | 14/10/09

@DaveC more Aussies are killed by Aussies on the roads than are killed by terrorist and rapist or rabid refugees. Actually, sharks kill more Aussies than terrorist and rapist refugees - should we up border protecion for that too?

As someone struggling to buy a home, it’s not helping a few thousand refugees that is the big issue for me - it’s the total lack of housing planning for tens of thousands of legal immigrants and illegal visa stayers that are making it difficult for ordinary Aussies to afford rent or to buy a house. Thats were Rudd and Howard let us DOWN BADLY. The rest is petty hysteria. A population policy might help.

Did you notice that Mr Southwell?

David Southwell and Paul Toohey are precisely why I won’t buy The Australian or other papers.

Mr G says:

12:32pm | 14/10/09

Alex - you must have a short memory mate. It wasn’t long ago that all we heard about from Rudds Labor was refugees and border protection policy mate. All over our TV’s, newspapers and online, non stop until he won the election. Now there seems to be some problems with his policy and is getting media attention it’s called stirring up trouble and using the boat people card.

South Aussie says:

12:33pm | 14/10/09

Really its the fault of a politician from Queensland that the number of asylum seekers increased? There was silly me thinking it might have something to do with conflicts, conditions ect in other nations.

acker says:

01:18pm | 14/10/09

Getting new arrivals jobs as taxi drivers carting around urban drunks doesn’t exactly help ethnic understanding and tolerance either.

Bob says:

01:19pm | 14/10/09

Im sorry, but can someone explain to me why there are apparently more conflicts and reasons to become refugees now than 10 years ago? That is a joke to make that statement. You can bring up Iraq if you like, but a decade ago there was Kosovo. Tamil Tigers? Ten years ago there was Sierra Leone. Afghanistan? Was still a disaster ten years ago, plus there was Zaire. List goes on. And to bring up the GFC. Do you think that affects the impoverished and oppressed in developing countries? Im not an economist, so I will be willing to be corrected by someone with an answer but logic tells me that is not a reason for an increase in asylum seekers. However, an increase after softening imigration laws, sounds nice and logical to me.

Clare says:

01:28pm | 14/10/09

Oh hell, Nil, that is possibly THE most ignorant piece of rubbish I have ever read.

You very clearly have no idea what constitutes a refugee, or what sort of situations they flee, or what sort of situations they find themselves in when they arrive in places like Indonesia or Malaysia.

And how the hell would you know of what consequence their bank balance has on their refugee status? A refugee, by definition is someone who is facing persecution in their country of origin (for one or more of 5 reasons outlined by the UN, but you are obviously pathetically stupid and it would be a waste of typing space to convey these and have you try to understand) and who cannot find safety by relocating to another part of the country. Of course people with money can be at risk of persecution, in fact they are more LIKELY to be at risk because it is more likely they have the education or the contacts that would cause them to be of displeasure to the government.

Instead of spouting your ignorant drivel, go out there and talk to a refugee or an asylum seeker, talk to many of them, hear their stories, get to know them, and then come back here and just TRY to write the same sort of crap you just did.

Mel says:

01:33pm | 14/10/09

I agree Bob - that line of defence by Rudd is absolutely rediculas, there has been conflict and flash points around the world always no more now than 10 or 20 years ago. And also using the GFC is hysterical! It is because of Rudds borders protection Policy and nothing else, ask the people smugglers not the refugees!

South Aussie says:

01:39pm | 14/10/09

Bob, 1) there are more people in the world (including the developing world) than there was 10 years ago (incidentally money sent from migrants into rich countries back home has a large part to play in the fact less people die young in the developing world now than did 10 years ago). 2) Not necessarily saying the current increase is an increase on the days of Sierra Leone (or WWII for that matter), but an increase in the last few months

humbug says:

01:54pm | 14/10/09

The solution is very simple.

Bring the level of immigration overall way down, to a more sustainable level - say 80,000 or less a year. Then allocate 20% of those places as a maximum for incoming refugees each year.  Provide an Ox-based shipping service at cost+ to bring them.

Then they can bring their kids and most of their - what was it, $15,000? with them - to spend in our country, for their gain and our profit, including that of the ranting rednecks posting here. See, there could be a buck in it for youse, too!

Jenny says:

01:59pm | 14/10/09

Anyone who denies the fact that the change in Border Protection Policy in Australia has not caused an increase in refugees attempting to get here are deluding themselves. Any other reason is incorrect. Whether you agree with Rudds Policy or not the fact is, this Policy has attracted more refugees, no doubt.

Bob says:

02:33pm | 14/10/09

South Aussie
Yes there are more people in the world. Everywhere, not just impoverished nations. If you can find a correlation between the percentage increase in asylum seekers and the population growth in war torn and impoverished nations then that is posibly a valid argument. I don’t know the figures so perhaps there is. Until that correlation is shown then I will not agree with that however.
On to your second point.
That is our point. the increase has been in the last few months. Werent these softer laws brought in about a year ago? (stand to be corrected).

Justin Davies says:

02:38pm | 14/10/09

Marilyn’s computer must be broken… or it’s welfare day..

We have had this exact ‘debate’ a few months ago.. I bothered to write a response then as I did yesterday on ‘The Australian’ ...
http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/the-human-story-behind-asylum-seeker-hysteria/

I have had a small revelation, we are waisting our time, or perhaps more accurately our employers time as no dout most comments written here were on company time (except Marylin of course). I think all those with an agenda, especially those opinion pieces that are rich with facts, figues and cute abreviations for varous organisations and policies… should redirect thier attention.  Seriously, if you want to change the system, the way we live not to mention a foreign countries immigration/refugee policies/humanitarian records etc…  you have a lot to get cracking with, Join amnesty, the UN, Redcross, the Greens and offer your time and no doubt perceived suprior intellect to the cause.
I don’t need to as I like things the way they are (oh so small minded of me) so I can keep doing what I do.  The rest of you spinless bleeding hearts, get out there and do somthing.. effect some change! don’t just type about it.

Kym Durance says:

03:04pm | 14/10/09

NIl says it all really - he encapsualtes the all the nonsense in several neatly laied out dot points - none of which I agree with - the one I really love is the stealthy take over - I think he stopped short of ” forever changing or way of life” garbage - but it was there between the lines - family reunion etc etc etc - and then their un paralleled fecundity! - they breed like there is no tomorrow!! - of course they have not unlike us turned sex into a recreational pastime so when they shag they breed - its a numbers game -
And I love this one - it seems they ( the seafaring wnaderers ) pay 15K a head to get here - I suppose he’s seen the receipts! -  yet how come 3.4% of refugess come here by boat at 15K per head - when the other 96.6% come here by plane - for maybe a few grand -  Gee if they had the 15K they get change to do a weekend at Hayman and a couple of nights at Crown to boot! Give me a break
We do not have a problem - we have nt had a problem - it is unlikely we will have a problem -

Judie M says:

03:18pm | 14/10/09

The issue is about our border protection policy.
Who’s Marilyn?

Betelnut says:

03:19pm | 14/10/09

Hey Bob, have a look at a map buddy.

If a refugee can get from Kosovo, Zaire or Sierra Leone to Australia by boat, let them in for God’s sake and lets put them to work on our next America’s cup bid. If escaping Sri Lanka, Burma or Pakistan (Afghanistan) by boat, one of the closest developed countries appears to be Australia, which might explain how increased troubles in these proximal countries translates into increased refugees for Australia.

Let’s get one thing straight, Australia is an awesome place to live, is it particularly surprising that people are skipping the paradise of tropical destinations like Indonesia, Burma, Pakistan to get here? I know if I was leaving my country of birth due to war/persecution/or even economic reasons, I would try to get to the best place within geographic possibity to re-settle my family, it just makes sense.  No need to demonise people for doing what makes sense, lets just intercept them, place them temporarily in quarantine, make a refugee determination and resettle them either here or back at home as soon as practiable.  Preferably without all the pseudo-racist BS.

Peter Rawlings says:

03:24pm | 14/10/09

I want to know where does Rudd (mother Theresa) plan to house all these refugees? He can’t even a build a house for our own indiginous people, or at least give them somewhere to live?

Tim says:

03:31pm | 14/10/09

Good work Clare,
just attack Nil and not refute any of his argument. And of course everyone who disagrees with you must be ignorant right?
If Indonesia and Malaysia are such bad places for these refugees passing through, what about the people who are born there and have to live there, if they arrived on a boat should they be classified as refugees too?
Sure they may not be nice places to you or me but a refugee shouldn’t get the choice to be picky as to which country they get setlled in.
Face it, these people see an oppotunity to bypass the system and they take it.

Jill says:

09:22pm | 14/10/09

Just how many bloggers here are descendant from migrants who came out post WW2 and thereafter? Ships arrived here loaded with economic refugees from all over Europe who had paid a fee for passage but were classified economic refugees. Shiploads of people who couldn’t speak English. We were given an opportunity to have a life of peace & prosperity.
Yet, we wish to deny others the opportunity.
I find it disturbing that the hysteria voiced on radio talkback is very similar to the early beginnings of Nazi Germany. 
It is not about being soft or hard. It is about empathy & fairness. Politicians may see this as an opportunity to score points. What a blight on us that we allow them to.

davido says:

01:05am | 15/10/09

Get real, the percentage of the 180,000 plus immigrants to this country must be tiny.

I also doubt that these people have a clue as to what the policy is in Australia re refugees etc.

Bob says:

08:11am | 15/10/09

Betelnut
Closest developed country to all of those is Russia.
All the countries you mentioned were disasters ten years ago as well, so there is no reason to say there are more likely to be refugees coming from those countries now than a decade ago. Also like how you claim that Afghanistan, which is a landlocked country, is just the same as Pakistan. I think you’ll find that its become far tougher to cross the border into Pakistan, especially with a family, than it used to be without the US army occupying it.
Who was demonising them? I know I wasn’t, I was simply making the point that our Prime Minister refuses to acknowledge that it is his policy change which has brought on the increase. Feel free to refute that, but dont just call me a racist because you couldn’t bring up a valid argument.

Leonard says:

08:18am | 15/10/09

The problem is People Smugglers need to given the message it is not a good idea to sell Australia to these desperate people and convince them Australia is an easy solution to their problems. No the refugees have no idea of our policy davido, that’s correct, it’s the people smugglers who are in business that know our policy. their the ones who send the refugees here and take thteir money. Then put them into sinking boats and point them to Australia. The softer policy of Australian Border Protection is no doubt the reason there is this increase. There is no point in defending Australias change in Border Protection Policy, when it obviously is having a desasterous affect. It is causing refugees to endanger their lives,

Mal Clark says:

08:42am | 15/10/09

It really is a simple thing. As a member of the United Nations we are duty bound to offer genuine refugees asylum. To all those who oppose the refugees, do we pull out of the United Nations to avoid doing the right thing or do we stay in and flout international conventions. This is really the only question that needs answering. If we stay in, we mist take these refugees.
Walk a mile in their shoes folks.

Clare says:

09:47am | 15/10/09

Yes Tim, people who don’t agree with me are ignorant.

And being born somewhere is very different to being a refugee in that same place. Ever been to a refugee camp in a developing country? When you have, get back to me and we’ll discuss it more. Do you know how long it can take people to get any sort of stability back in their lives when dealing with organisations like the UNHCR? When you do, let me know, we’ll chat. And if you are really interested in having a well rounded argument, I would suggest that if you can’t have empathy, then actually put yourself in the place of an asylum seeker, go and live in a camp for 16 or 17 years as many of these people do, and then see how much abuse you want to heap on the people who tried to get out earlier.

I despair over those who are ignorant by their own choosing.

Betelnut says:

12:26pm | 15/10/09

Dear Bob,

My comments about demonisation and racism were not directed specifically at you, sorry if you got that impression.  However there is a disproportiante and totally uncessary element of both running throught this debate and this blog.  I also find it quite ironic that many of the same people arguing that 1.5% of global emissions is insignificant, then turn around and argue that 1.5% of illegal, boat arriving immigrants is a soverign threat to our nation.  Especially as most of us are decended from recent immigrants ourselves.

Anyway, I still notice you totally ignore logistics as a potential reason why we are currently seeing more people arriving from proximal areas.  Are you seriously suggesting that getting to Australia from Sierra Leone by boat is as easy as getting here from Sri Lanka?  I fail to see how you can catagorically rule out geographic location as playing a part in the recent influx of refugees, but can be 100% certain that a few tinkerings with Australian immigration law can “open the floodgates”.  Do we have any data to back up this assertion?  links?  studies?

Have a look at google maps, and also have a look UN/IMF designation of high income/developed countries (link below)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developing_country

To me, Australia looks a pretty inviting destination for most areas circumventing the Indian ocean.

PS Nowhere did I claim that Afghanistan is Pakistan?  Merely highlighting that the passage of most Afghan refugees coming to Australia is through Pakistan, hardly contraversial I would have thought.

me my mo says:

06:13pm | 15/10/09

FFS people. Australia has a quota of how many refugees it takes in a year. These people are pushing themselves above others who are less fortunate. I ask that you kindly explain to those refugees who don’t have money why their wealthy compatriots are allowed to skip the refugee process ahead of them as Australia rewards queue jumping. The very activity they are doing should force them to fail the character test.

Bob says:

06:17pm | 15/10/09

Betelnut
When did I ignore logistics? As you state, this article is about the recent influx of refugees, has Australia floated closer to Sri Lanka, or other countries that provide the Asylum Seekers in the past year?

Never said it was easier to get by Boat from Siera Leone than Sri Lanka. Perhaps I was being flippant so I will clear up what I mean’t as I understand why you got that impression. The point I was making is that conflict was occuring ten years ago too, I mean it was occuring a year ago,yet the number of Asylum seekers trying to reach Australia has increased in the last few months. If its just the poor state of the countries, why an increase now? If you want me to get specific, all the countries you named were just as bad 10 years ago, even 1 year ago as they are now. So once again, why the increase now?

Floodgates? Where did I use that term? The article is about the increase in Asylum Seekers recently, after the changing of our countries policy about a year ago. Never did I make a statement that this is going to get worse.

Nice link, pity its a Wikipedia article and therefore means nothing as it may have been written and created by a 15 year old high school student in Argentina. Besides, any rating which puts South Africa, Russia and Turkey in the same catergory in terms of quality of living as Pakistan, India, Iraq is probably a little bit too broad

Totally agree Australia looks like an inviting destination to refugees, so are you saying it wasn’t a year ago? Because if you agree it was just as inviting a year ago, why the recent increase in Asylum Seekers now?

Absolutely agree that most Afghan Asylum Seekers to Australia come through Pakistan, dont recall ever saying that is controversial. But like I said, due to the US occupation, its actually harder to cross the Afghan- Pakistan border. But I fail to see how this means more people want to come to Australia from Aghanistan than they did 10, 5 or even 1 year ago due to the state of their country.

So as I see it, these are our countering arguments.

I say that the increase of Asylum Seekers is due to the softening of the policy
(and never have I said that I do not agree with this policy), as I believe Australia was just as appealing, in just as close proximity to the countries that Asylum Seekers are from, and these countries were just as disastrous before the increase and before the change in policy.

Your argument is that the softening of the policy has not had an effect on the amount of Asylum Seekers we are experiencing because Australia has become more appealing, moved to within closer proximity to the countries Asylum Seekers are from and these countries have gotten worse from before the increase and before the change in policy.

Please confirm or qualify your argument and we can discuss this further.

Don O says:

04:20am | 12/11/09

“These people are highly informed about the countries they want to go to.”

Dude, you really need to actually speak to refugees. I know a number of them who arrived , 3 Aghans and an Iranian, during the Howard years and they all pretty much seemed to say the same thing, that they had no idea they’d be rotting in some desert prison camp for years. It might shock some people, but australias immigration policies really are not common knowledge outside of australia, and its entirely likely people assumed we’d be like the rest of the west and have more or less humane policies.

I mean seriously dude, where do you think the afghans would be finding this stuff out from? The net?

Carol says:

09:04am | 12/11/09

I can’t believe Rudd is offering these asylum seekers fast tracked resettlement in Australia 4 - 6 weeks housing medical english classes and income support, if found to be genuine refugees. What sort of message is that going to send to the next boat that decides to punch a hole in their boat and be rescued by Austtalia next time! Stay on board the rescue vessel and refuse to get off, be fed and washed wait 4 - 6 weeks and your done! How bloody stupid is this Government! We also have heard the Sri Lankin representitive to the UN say they aren’t escaping duress in their own country, if they were they would head to India, 20 miles away not Australia. Doesn’t this prove that Rudds policy has opened the door and made Australia look like an easy solution for them? They should have been bought to Christmas island weeks ago and processed. He should then change back his non existant border protection policy and get the message out, don’t try this again because it wont work, the policy has now changed.

Muzz says:

09:34am | 12/11/09

I agree with NZ that Rudds adhock policy on the go is not a message they want to encourage. He can’t deal with every boat differently, he needs to review his policy and change it. Not change it every time he has a boat turn up.

Luke says:

10:24am | 12/11/09

If he doesn’t take them to Christmas Island immediatlley he is going to have a catasrophy when they decide to start killing themselves on board an Austrlalian ship. That will be their next option no doubt. Can this Government make any decisions? Kevin Rudd is a disgrace as Prime Minister!

Adam says:

11:50am | 12/11/09

Holding the Australian governernment to ransom, paying for the privilege, and nominating a criminal as your spokesman does nothing to help your cause - that is unless the government of the day is hopless and inept, & led by a PM that cares more about being served the right food on a plane, than this countries best interests.

The customs boat should immediately be sent back to Sri Lanka and these ‘pirates’ returned unceremoniously to where they came from. My sign is held high and bolded ‘Not Welcome’

Larry says:

04:13pm | 12/11/09

Rudd has lost the plot!  He can’t just let this continue,  He has to do SOMETHING! ANYTHING! What sort of loony is running this country!

Gazza says:

07:51am | 13/11/09

Now we know Rudd is offering them a special deal. What world is Kevin in? What on earth does he think will happen when we rescue the next boat load????? And what about the other refugees in Indonesia waiting in line? I’m sure they’re going to be impresssed by the fast tracking of asylum seekers who held us to ransom. Looks like now they know not to get off the Australian Rescue ship and you get fast tracked to save face for our weak and incompetent Prime Minister!

Dee says:

09:10am | 13/11/09

Remember bleeding hearts…...the Tamil Tigers mastered the art of suicide bombing. They also invented the suicide bra (I kid you not).....and know we’ve given a whole bunch of them guarenteed entry into Australia. Nice one Rudd

Kaz says:

09:37am | 13/11/09

God help us if there is ever an invasion, Rudd will probably hand them the keys and go for an overseas trip! How safe is Australia under this Government? Move over Rudd and give Turnbull ago!

Alicia says:

09:43am | 13/11/09

Kevin Rudd you will go from being the most popular PM in history to being famous for the largest slide in the polls in history. You may even lose the unloseable election, what a short legacy you will have, and what a legacy it will be. Good bye Kevin07!

Kelley says:

12:18pm | 13/11/09

It was interesting to see Evans last night on tele squirming and dithering, and then Lateline with Tanner and Pyne. Pyne made mince meat of Tanner. Well done Pyne about time. About time this Government had scrutiny.

Jason says:

03:31pm | 13/11/09

Amazing - nobody is saying we shouldn’t take genuine refugees.  Just don’t accept queue jumpers.  If Australia collapsed into a civil war (or say, the greens got into power), it’s the “fat cats” who would be the boat people choosing their destination and leaving the poor “working class” back in Australia desperate to leave.  Given the anti fat-cat sentiment in this country, I’m not sure why we would accept the fat-cats from somewhere else over the really needy demographics who can’t afford the boat ride.

rooney says:

10:13pm | 24/05/11

im from the future! we still have the ame problem