Boat people debate has lost no heat from Tampa days

Daniel says:

07:06am | 19/10/09

I think overall its so sad. It really proves to me that Australia isa racist country. Nothing ever changes. Its sad.

NJ says:

07:28am | 19/10/09

And in other countries it can be a tribal mentality that goes back centuries. If I was to find myself and my family in dire circumstance due to war or the like, I’m sure I would be seeking to get to the closest and safest place first. Once safe, then look to the longer future and perhaps emigrating through the legal channels. I’d rather have my loved ones safe and alive than dead or in the hands of people smugglers en route half way around the world.
This doesn’t mean I don’t feel for these people seeking a better life after facing death and destruction, if that is what they have been facing.

Jeff from Meroo says:

07:39am | 19/10/09

The problem I have with boat people is that they’re queue jumpers.  Australia takes in 18,000 refugees a year and another 60,000+ people a year immigrate here legally.  I (being a first generation Aussie) followed the rules, the processes, the red tape, the endless paperwork and it took over 5 years..  but I did it legally and now I’m here and prouder than most to be Australian.  These cashed up people however jump on a boat, float for a couple weeks in our general direction, then get the red carpet rolled out for them when they get near here.  I, for the life of me, don’t understand why we don’t put them on a plane and return them to where they came from (it’d be cheaper for the tax payers for one thing).  They can go stand in the queue behind the rest of the thousands of people that want the same thing but are willing to follow the process..  the laws…  that were put in place to deal with these matters in a fair way.  Let these people in and they’ll be the same people you’ll see driving in the bus lane on the M2 during peak hour.  They think they’re better than you, they think they’re better than those they left behind patiently waiting their turn and they’ve found the bus lane to Australian citizenship….  aka Rudd’s “tough” stand on boat people. 

And as for Rudd’s “tough” stand?  “Tough” would be having the navy sink these boats as they invade Australian waters not escorting them to a processing facility that fast tracks them straight into public housing and the dole queue.  Tough would be putting them to work in the mines or picking fruit until they worked off the cost of the plane ticket back to where ever they came from.  Tough would be simply turning them back from Australian waters and letting them find their own way home.  This gov’t policies are anything but “tough”.

shabangabang says:

07:56am | 19/10/09

We are a nation built on unwanted immigration. The First Fleet were not welcomed with open arms when they sailed into Sydney Cove.
Perhaps if we introduce repective legislation then we can all go back to the countries our ancestors originated from.

Jim says:

07:58am | 19/10/09

The mainstream newspapers in this country need to print a simple graphic or table, showing their readers how many asylumseekers enter OTHER countries. Then they’ll realise we’re way down on the list of destinations.

Australia’s received about 1600 asylum seekers by boat so far this year. Last year, Italy alone received 36,000 boat arrivals. Most prefer to go to the US (49,000 asylum seekers in 2008), Canada (36,900), France (35,200), Italy (31,200) and Britain (30,500).
About

In 2008 there were 16 million refugees and 26 million internally displaced people worldwide, according to the UNHCR. The UNHCR’s 2008 Global Trends report on refugees and displaced people mentions Australia ONLY ONCE (it says we took 11,000 refugees that year).

Chill, people.

Nick Pappas says:

08:15am | 19/10/09

Daniel…..... Why is a Australia a racist country for wanting to stop illegal immigration? It has nothing to do with race. Stop playing the race card. If these people are just trying to get to a safe place, why come all the way to Australia? Thailand and Malaysia are closer. Why not stay in Indonesia? The truth is they want to take advantage of our good nature and come to a country that will support them.

Dalma Smithy says:

08:18am | 19/10/09

Why cant we all admit we are a rabid bunch of redneck racist. Pauline Hansen revival mk5 !! The bleeding heart reporters are adding fuel to the flames by conjuring vivid images of poor wretched 10 year olds pleading for a place to live in this vast Continent, and imploring readers to share her grief at what is perceived as heartlessness. By and large, the forums abound with 2/3’s   saying the Srilankans should be shipped on else where, preferable into a Tsunami ! Our Immigration Dept is pathetic. Policies that are outdated, and remnants of Amanda Vanstone’s generosity and foot prints are there for all to view.
There is a thriving Industry called “migrant Agencies” which cater for all illegals who wish to enter Aust through the front door. They prepare all the documentation at a heafty price, and follow you through the mountains of red tape ( legally ) so that you are forever indebted to them. The 457 Visa is a notorious conduit for anybody who wishes to be permanent residents. They have processed the thriving sex trade, fly-by-nighters, and burgeoning taxi, student, hospitality, skill’s trades with absolute impunity. It is high time we overhauled the sham and provide a viable solution to immigration laws that are meaningful, just, and importantly humane. How about it Chis Evans ?

Dave says:

08:34am | 19/10/09

The Howard government policy towards boat borne asylum seekers was that “There is nothing for you here, do not come”.  This statement was supported by the governments action on the ground - the Pacific Solution and Temporary protection visas.  The Rudd government policy is to treat asylum seekeers who make it to Australia humanely, to process their claims swiftly and to offer permanent residence.  The fine print of the Rudd policy is that Australia will be paying Indonesia a fortune to make it virtually impossible for any Asylum seekers to actually access Australia’s new and imporved friendly and humane system.  Howard’s system discouraged anyone from coming to Australia.  Rudd’s system offers them false encouragement.  This is a step backwards masquerading as a step forwards.  Added to this is that the misguded UN security coucil bid prevents us from speaking out against the Sri Lankan tratment of Tamils.  Rudd’s foreign policy has his interests at heart, not those of ordinary Australians and certainly not those of asylum seekers.

Dave says:

08:41am | 19/10/09

What a load of typical crap!

Just more of the inane ‘If you don’t support us you’re a racist’ crap that these hand-wringers and professionally offended people trot out every few weeks, irregardless of the actual issue.

This has ZERO to do with accepting refugees and migrants from all parts of the world. I’d gladly live and work with 20 000 Sri Lankan migrants without batting an eyelid, or Afghanis, Somali’s - wherever.

The actual issue, which the hand-wringers and refugee advocacy groups don’t want you to focus on is that these people are not Asylum Seekers they are Economic Migrants trying to jump the queue ahead of those 60 000 Migrants we take in every year who do the right thing, fill out all the paperwork, pay all the fees and line up like everyone else.

‘Alex’ and his friends flew from Sri Lanka to Malaysia. If they were actual Asylum seekers fleeing Sri Lanka with genuine fear of their lives then they would have or should have claimed Asylum there. The didn’t. They then moved into Indonesia. Again, they could have claim Asylum there. Again they didn’t. They then paid $14000 a pop to get on a leaky boat with the intention of hitting any point of Australian territory or get intercepted by the Australian Navy in our waters and force them to take them into port. Once in Australian Territory they would have the full resources of a battery of Pro Bono/Legal Aid Lawyers and the Refugee/Illegal Immigrant Industry working for them.

But it didn’t work out this time did it?

And what did they do? After taking advice from immigration/refugee lawyers in Oz and Canada on their mobile phones?

Threaten to blow up their boat and incinerate everyone on it - including their kids. That didn’t go over well in the press. So they trotted out the coached 9 year old. Again, people didn’t fall for that crap so they moved onto a hunger strike….which lasted all of what….two days? Again, it fell flat with western/Australian audiences in the press.

But no, lets not actually discuss the facts here at all, lets instead just call every Australian racist for not pandering to these people. It beats actually having a sensible discussion on the topic doesn’t it? Australia is the land of the ‘Fair Go’....these people are trying to circumvent that - and thats just not on.

Eric says:

09:06am | 19/10/09

The Aborigines let in boat people—and look what happened to them!

Heléna says:

10:52am | 19/10/09

agreed @Eric lol!

@Jeff out of interest where did you emigrate from??

I won’t presume to know but suspect that you did not find yourself in the same situation as for example Afghan or Iraqi refugees who do not have access to consulates, let alone the diplomatic process and rules that you endured?

they do the best they can, with whatever means they can to escape to a country where they hope to have a safe future, if by cashed up you mean selling everything their family owns from their jewellery, to their rugs and pots and pans - well I’m relieved - I am not so wealthy

I really do not understand why people believe that refugees are queue jumpers, what person would choose to sell everything they own, and pay extortionate fees to secure passage in an overcrowded, barely seaworthy vessel if they had any other option, either to fly in luxury to another country and then seek asylum or to have the freedom and availability of a consulate to initiate immigration

Sven says:

11:27am | 19/10/09

Yes this is a sad state of affairs. I am not about stopping people fleeing oppression, mass murder or a dictator Government, but why is it only 1600 people have been able to flee these situations? Surely there are more than the 200 odd currently in Indonesia, who need to flee the situation in their homeland.Where are the rest of them?? If Rudd really wanted to help, he would ring the TNI puppet again and say if you and your Government sanctions these people smugglers operating out of your country, then every person caught leaving Indonesia coming toward Australia, in Australian Territory, will be returned to you as your problem to deal with, not send Indonesia more money to placate them into accepting responsibility for what they should be doing anyway. At the end of the day these are people they are dealing with, not live exports to be passed on from one country to another.

Gregory says:

11:59am | 19/10/09

You have to ask, whats wrong with them living in Indonesia or any neighbouring country? Oh thats right they only want to take advantage of our welfare system.

h says:

12:41pm | 19/10/09

Marcus I wouldn’t give too much credence to online opinon poles. I remember a few of them telling us the Howard Govt would romp it back in winning 80% of the vote in 2007 - fact is many internet voters are retirees. Remember that old episode of Front Line when they did a poll about their viewers attitudes to the Vietnamese?

Most of reasonable Australia is not voting or positng comments online (amusing that I may have just declared myself unreasonable), they are working, looking after kids, doing the grocery ect and generally not spending their time-poor lives writing hate mail about a bunch of people from overseas they never met.

I would suggest the majority of comment on news websites comes from hack staffers in a politicians office backing their party.

Richard Ure says:

01:25pm | 19/10/09

Blog commenters can say things like “‘Tough’ would be having the navy sink these boats as they invade Australian waters not escorting them to a processing facility”. Is it worth building a story around that type of thinking and pretending it is representative of the compulsorily voting electorate?

If we received more asylum seekers like most other countries that do not enjoy water borders, perhaps we would not be so paranoid about being overrun. If our refugee intake were a percentage of annual migrant intake rather than an absolute number, that might keep this non-issue in perspective too.

Jeff from Meroo says:

01:41pm | 19/10/09

@Heléna, were I came from or why is completely irrelevant.  The point is I followed the process.  Australia can’t take in every single war torn refuge on the planet and therefore (no matter how many we take in), for each queue jumper that gets via an illegal boat trip is one less spot on the list for a law abiding, legal, vetted, true war torn refuge.

Gregory and Nick make a very good point…  the “refugees” are not running away from war or famine or whatever…  they are running TO Australia for our welfare.  Else they would have stopped across the first boarder they crossed that got them away from whatever they were running from.

@H - so can we all assume you are a hack staffer in a politicians office backing your party?

Jeff from Meroo says:

01:48pm | 19/10/09

@Richard - you missed the entire point.  For every percentage you take the wrong way, a percentage of people that are most probably more deserving get left behind.  How is that a type of thinking?  That is a fact and if you could pull your nose out of the clouds you’d see it staring you in the face.

Shano says:

02:04pm | 19/10/09

Jeff from Meroo commented 8:39am
SPOT ON MATE

Shano says:

02:24pm | 19/10/09

Helena you need to check your facts about how much the price of an airline ticket is worth in comparison to the “extortionate fees” these people smugglers charge. it’s obvious the immigration is going to have a much lower pouting bottom lip if you arrive with another 150 screaming desperate souls, rather than in a clean shirt on flight 561 from Jakarta.
It’s all a psychological ploy correctly played out getting results for the people smugglers, hence why they charge more than the price of the airline ticket. They can almost guarantee your passage into Australia with the shittier boat the better.

Glen says:

02:56pm | 19/10/09

You are a refugee if you leave to save your life and go to the first safe haven.  You are an economic migrant if you pass safe havens and go to the place where you think you can have a better life.  To be a boat person or plane person you have to be cashed up and to make it to Australia you will have passed safe havens.  These are not refugees they are economic migrants and should be turned back immediately.  Rudd doesn’t have a tough stance, he simply has words to hide the fact that he has an open door policy.

Shano says:

03:17pm | 19/10/09

@Dalma Smith - “Why cant we all admit we are a rabid bunch of redneck racist”
It’s got absolutely zero to do with race. Its EVERYTHING to do with due process. I hate burocracy as much the next guy, but with Immigration it is an imperitive, that people are screened. I’m totally okay with immigration, and I am not the one who should be the most upset. It’s the guy in Kenya with what’s left of his family, waiting for the phone call to get on a plane - all because those shitty leaky boats cant travel 10,000 km’s to Ashmore reef , hence NO PEOPLE SMUGGLING TRADE.
Don’t call me racist
I’m a queuist

Shane From Melbourne says:

03:29pm | 19/10/09

If I was to pay someone to commit a crime, legally I would just as responsible as the person who committed the crime. So why haven’t all these refugees who have paid the people smugglers to commit the crime of people smuggling been charged? If it is not possible to charge them due to jurisdiction then they should be denied visas on grounds of criminal character.

Richard Ure says:

04:40pm | 19/10/09

@Shane: Do we know “people smuggling” is a crime? Or is it a political inconvenience? If an airline brings a traveller without a visa to Australia, the airline is required to transport that traveller back to his destination but airline executives, or those otherwise responsible, are not thrown in jail for that activity.

There seems to be an assumption that once a person arrives at a border, they are entitled to enter. This is not correct and the emotive use of the words “border protection” promotes the spread of that belief. Why do we have (or some people have) so little confidence in the screening process to which all entrants without current visas are subjected?

Both parties have dug themselves into an unnecessary hole on this issue in the hope of gaining short term political advantage. And if distressed people (who can’t vote) are collateral damage, the politicians don’t care as they scramble for office.

KeIThY says:

07:56pm | 19/10/09

Redneck Wonderland: the rich are racists!

Jeff from Meroo says:

08:47pm | 19/10/09

@Richard:  If you don’t know if people smuggling is a crime or not, I would suggest that it is you who is pretending to be a representative of the compulsorily voting electorate.  To answer your second question, it is because 99% of people that make it here are granted visas, in most cases within months (not years like the rest of us queued up for). 

That alone isn’t a big deal,..  but the hurried processing to make room for the next boatload leads to problems like this one:  A boat shows up with a heap of Economic Migrants on it and one of them sets it on fire killing 5 people (injuring scores more).  Someone (at least one) is a mass murderer, yet every single one of them is given a visa.  Why?  Because there is no room at the inn, the “tough” policies don’t allow for anything else and the gov’t needs to make room for the next lot to be processed.

Now lets think about the list of people we’re going to take in this year..  whether it is a percentage or a fixed number, it doesn’t matter.  That list will have an end and someone’s name is dead set last on it at any given time.  Go ask that person (a true refugee) how they feel about being bumped to the top of next year’s list to make room for a mass murdering queue jumping Economic Migrant then come back here and let us know how well the screening process is working.

David K says:

10:30pm | 19/10/09

For those so concerned about queumpers tell me the difference between people fleeing war, famine and the rest of it and wanting a place of safety to raise their families or to wait it out and bringing in planeloads of 457’s to work for slave labour on building sites, vege gardens, maccas etc particularly in the west or the sex trade (that some of you frequent). These are the mob that are taking your kids jobs and its not even them thats doig it, its the dogs that bring them out to work here. These boatpeople always measure up. If its a choice between my family or me being killed or jumping in a boat, I am not going to stand passively by in a line. And so what if they want to come here. WE should be proud of it because we have such a great country. But the reason this mob dont want them here is because they suffer from envy and do not want to share anything or look after someone in strife.  WE are turnng into a country of dogs who have forgotten how to be Australian or whjat it me ans - a fair go. We have it all

M Cooke says:

10:39pm | 19/10/09

If Mr Rudd could not predict what would happen when he dismantled the Pacific Solution and put in his lax policies, then he is not a fit person to hold the position of Prime Minister of Australia , TIME TO BRING ON AN ELECTION.

Paul says:

11:08pm | 19/10/09

Wow. A whole lot of bogus mumbo jumbo. Is anyone giving even a seconds thought to the men and women, husbands and wives, sons and daughters, brothers and sisters of you all who are serving their country risking their lives protecting our borders, faced with the making work the clearly failing policy surrounding this issue. You know, when you sit in the comfort of your lounge and read in your broad sheet that ANOTHER boat has sunk themselves, or blown themselves up, there are young Australians out there with them, serving the government that you elected. How about we stop all the crap, and just work out how to stop all the crap!

davido says:

01:12am | 20/10/09

I have a lot of sympathy for the argument that genuine (i.e. non-economic refugees) will flee to the nearest country. Why arent those Tamil refugees going to Tamil nadu in India? Same language, same culture - - -  so what is the real issue here?

At the same time, we let in 180,000+ immigrants a year. Surely, those who come on a boat make up a tiny fraction of those coming to the country.

Paul says:

07:25pm | 21/10/09

What is now several thousand is no longer just a tiny fraction. We are simply sending the wrong message. Come by boat we will take you. Blow up your boat, we will take you. Deliberately sink your boat and phone in an SOS, we will take you. If these people are actually refugees, they dont take such actions. They are just happy to be away from the torture of where they have come from, and we should assist them. Those who pass through several countries to get here, often by plane to their jump off point in Indonesia, and then engage a people smuggler, are criminals!

ted says:

05:34am | 16/08/11

having a way out is good