As the full omnishambles of both the Government’s and the Opposition’s asylum seeker policies is revealed, it seems the answer was there, right in front of us, all the time.

They seem quite happy. Pic: AFP

Refugees just needed to absorb one tiny bit of Australian culture. The redneck motto: Go back to where you came from.

A study has revealed most Sudanese refugees want to go home, some temporarily and some permanently.

It’s a reverse wedgie on the F**k Off We’re Full mob.

The push and pull factors that that pundits and pollies try to hard to understand – and by understand, I mean understand how to shoehorn them to fit their own ideas – have effectively flipped around for this group.

The STATT research found refugees who have arrived over the past decade are discriminated against and isolated.

Researcher Robert Onus said they felt employers and landlords discriminated against them for being African. They struggle to get homes and jobs. There’s the push factor.

At the same time a referendum last year made South Sudan the world’s newest country, a new land in the wake of the devastating civil war, a land that offers new hope to those who fled their homes.

Mr Onus said this pull factor was even stronger than the push:

“My expectation was that we would find a lot of people that wanted to return because they were motivated by discrimination here and lack of opportunity,” he told the Daily Telegraph.

“But it’s more that they have an enthusiasm to contribute to their own country’s development and to spend time with family over there.”

Sit down. Take a deep breath. That sounds a lot like good news. It sounds as though maybe this is how the system can work sometimes; we look after people in trouble and sometimes it will be possible for them to return home.

Even better; what if we could provide any asylum seekers in the community or in detention with a range of useful skills. Skills that will help them here if they stay, or help them rebuild if they go home.

It looks like we’ll be stuck with some sort of royally rooted asylum seeker policy for some time. We may as well polish the proverbial. 

Twitter: @ToryShepherd
Comments on this post will close at 8pm AEDST.

Most commented

101 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • simonfromlakemba says:

      10:53am | 27/11/12

      Well South Sudanese, not Sudanese in general. It’s a new country and new beginning. If they can use a 1st world education and thought process in helping their new country out I think its a great result.

    • subotic 13X says:

      11:36am | 27/11/12

      Did somebody say “Marcus Garvey”?

      Do you want a mule with those 40 acres?

    • Borderer says:

      12:38pm | 27/11/12

      Personally I applaud the refugees returning home, not because I’m sick of them but because they want to change things for the better, something we could all aspire to.
      The difference between them and the boat arrivals is they were brought here throught the UNHCR program and were vetted as genuine refugees. The country shoppers can not be refugees because they are not choosing the nearest safe haven, they are travelling enormous distances with the singular intention to get to Australia, bypassing other countries and refugee camps along the way.
      The part that iritates me the most is that they take the place of genuine refugees. We should support refugees, particularly in order to encourage them to improve their home country by returning once it’s safe to do so, however the program is currently being hijacked by country shoppers paying criminals.

    • PJ says:

      04:20pm | 27/11/12

      Offering Refuge was not meant to be permanent or part of the Gillard Government Mass Immigration Plan for the creation of Labor voters.

      It was designed to be a temporary thing until the Refugee no longer needed refuge.

      So it’s a good outcome if they can go home.

      Clearly, thinks are far from perfect here in Australia.

    • Fred says:

      10:56am | 27/11/12

      You forgot to include that this group of Sudanese who want to return home represent a tiny minority of the sudanese population in australia. You paint the picture of a mass exodus of africans back to their homeland to help rebuild…which by the way is a great outcome for these people. The same principle should apply to all refugees…as soon as your homeland is safe to return, australia will make the arrangements for you to do so…sri lanka, afghanisation, iraq, iran (although im not sure why we are accepting thousands of iranian refugees). If only this principle was applied to the lebanese migrants we accepted in the 70’s we would have saved ourselves a lot of trouble.

    • Andrew says:

      12:07pm | 27/11/12

      @Fred, Try being anything other than a Muslim in Iran and tell me if life is all peachy. Even if there is no official government religion, most of those countries have a habit of turning a blind eye to some of the more extremist elements in their country.

      Just being Muslim in such places is not always enough, there are a few distinct varieties of Islam, and if you are not the “right type” in the area you live in (or as you drive past a checkpoint) you can be in for a world of hurt.

    • HC says:

      03:27pm | 27/11/12

      @Fred

      And while we’re at it, why don’t we ship those bloody convicts back to England, surely they’ve served their sentences by now?

      If people want to return, great, if people want to stay, also great, all are welcome, work hard, play harder and ignore the bogans at the back of the bus.

    • PJ says:

      04:02pm | 27/11/12

      Shite and Sunni

    • Dr B S Goh, Australian in Asia says:

      11:00am | 27/11/12

      We should stop worrying about the minimal racism in Australia.

      It is not surprising that GENUINE refugees would wish to return to their countries when the danger of death is over.

      Out of the 200,000 refugee students from China in Australia at the time of the Tian An Men Square in 1989 when Bob Hawke gave them the chance to stay in Australia in my opinion the majority of them had returned to China.

    • dweezy2176 says:

      12:29pm | 27/11/12

      And the word is GENUINE. Good look to this handful that want to return to their homeland(s)! Unfortunately, we are still stuck with the thousands of queue jumpers and economic boatfolk!
      Still, a feel good story is an improvement on our usual dose of bleeding hearts and rusted on Labor apologists.

    • acotrel says:

      01:33pm | 27/11/12

      ’ our usual dose of bleeding hearts and rusted on Labor apologists’

      Do you mean the Australians who actually see refugees as being human beings ? And not those who think its OK to play on voters; paranoia and phobias for political purposes ? Common decency will prevail and Abbott will crash and burn !

    • dweezy2176 says:

      02:15pm | 27/11/12

      @acotrel .. I’ll take that as a reply from someone who doesn’t live in a street where they are the only Caucasian/English as a First Language speaking occupant.
      My opinions are based on a daily dosage of ethnic tainted proliferation which I admit compromises me to the hilt. In fact I have been COLINISED beyond redemption and Tony Abbott played NO part in it!

    • Phillb says:

      03:09pm | 27/11/12

      acotrel I too see refugees as human beings and as such understand they can be lying, scheming people that only look out for what’s best for themselves.  Just because they went through hell, does not mean they are saints or should be put on a pedestal more then any other person.
      I feel sorry for them and what they went through in their own country.  I cannot believe they are still asylum seekers when they travel to the other side of the world to do so.

    • Dr B S Goh, Australian in Asia says:

      03:16pm | 27/11/12

      @ acotrel. We are going to spend billions on the 7,500 boatpeople over the next five years who has gate crashed into Australia since the new policy was announced in Aug. I am prepared to bet with you that we will get at least another 10,000 before elections next year.

      Australia must follow the USA policy on Cuban and Haiti boatpeople since 1996. And it stopped the boatpeople, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wet_feet,_dry_feet_policy

      There are extremely bad situation for many refugees in the World, see for example: http://edition.cnn.com/2012/11/25/world/asia/myanmar-rohingya-violence-rivers/index.html?hpt=hp_c3. The Rohingya need Australia’s help. The UN is asking for just $41m to help these absolutely desperate refugees with many children starving to death.

      Australia should not take in a single boatpeople but instead use our the money we can spare on some of the 40,000,000 refugees worldwide many living in atrocious conditions.

    • Dr B S Goh, Australian in Asia says:

      04:38pm | 27/11/12

      @ dweezy2176. I am in favour of Australia maintaining its humane refugees policy at about 13750 per year and maybe 20,000.

      But we must wake to the fact that the boatpeople are entirely a different ball game. The Hon Bowen had stated most of the new migrants in his constituency are against the boatpeople.

      The issue of the boatpeople should be: (1) Absolute and unconditional control of our borders (2) Australia alone should choose the refugees in need of our help (3) We must not allow the boatpeople to hijack our humane refugee program.

      The problem we have is clear. We must have an absolutely tough border policy and on boatpeople or none.

      As I stated many times there will be a critical food crisis in Asia before 2050. If we do not destroy now the popular belief in Asia that Australia welcomes boatpeople then we are at risk of being swamped by a tsunami of millions of boatpeople when Asia descends in total chaos and wars.

      The Greens of all people should understand the mother of all environmental problems, the continued global population growth.

    • AdamC says:

      11:06am | 27/11/12

      “As the full omnishambles of both the Government’s and the Opposition’s asylum seeker policies is revealed ...”

      This is bias towards ‘balance’. Only the government’s asylum policies are a shambles. Mainly because they refuse to adopt the policies of the opposition. (Also, is it convention to capitalise ‘Government’ and ‘Opposition’?)

      Where I live there are a lot of African refugees, presumably including South Sudanese. They certainly seem to be a very disadvantaged group. Given that South Sudan is now independent, the underlying conflict that caused their original flight has been resolved. However, having been resettled in Australia, it would be a bit difficult to return home, I should imagine. South Sudan is vastly poorer and less developed than Australia, just for starters.

      It illustrates to me why resettlement in developed, western countries is not usually the best way to deal with asylum seekers.

    • Tatty_Anne says:

      11:25am | 27/11/12

      Temporary resettlement in developed countries in probably more palatable than constant military conflict involving the west.  But when a country is lucky enough to stabilise, then supporting the return of refugees with grants for rebuilding would be a good outcome. 

      Do you think the UNHCR will support that?  There’s a whole refugee industry at stake.  tongue laugh

    • Om says:

      12:06pm | 27/11/12

      “Only the government’s asylum policies are a shambles. Mainly because they refuse to adopt the policies of the opposition.”

      Yes, yes. Labor have adopted the coalitions policies and nothing has changed. Guess it’s too hard for you to see the forest for the trees.
      Remember Abbott - all you have to do is pick up the phone to Nauru?

      What’s that you say? TPV’s?
      Asif that would make any difference to people who are already faced with years in detention and risk their lives on boats. Grasping at straws you are Adam.
      The problem would still be here no matter who was in power.

    • marley says:

      12:45pm | 27/11/12

      @Tatty-Anne - the UNHCR’s preference for refugees in temporary situations is, first - voluntary repatriation when safe; second - local resettlement in a neighbouring company; and third and definitely last, resettlement in a third country like Australia.  When it decides the third is the only prospect of a “durable solution,” it puts names for offshore resettlement programs.  But it is its least preferred option.

      That said, once a person is resettled in Australia, the UNHCR is certainly not going to want to get involved in sending him back home to an unsettled situation.  They’ve got enough on their hands without having to deal with former refugees who have other options.

    • Tatty_Anne says:

      01:21pm | 27/11/12

      @ Marley, thanks for the correction.  I had a dig at the wrong organisation - should have typed ‘present Oz government’ or maybe ‘developed western countries refugee advocates’....are they aware of the UNHCR preferences?  grin

    • marley says:

      01:59pm | 27/11/12

      I think there’s a lot of ignorance about the UNHCR.  It has about 800,000 people on its books it would like to resettle - that’s out of what, 25 million or so refugees worldwide (depending on how you count).  It knows it can resettle maybe 100,000 a year because only a handful of nations are game to take people out of the camps, so it picks those it thinks are most in need.  It spends most of its time and effort trying to either help people go home when conditions stabilise, or looking after those who are stuck in camps and the like and aren’t going anywhere.  It’s a lot more realistic about refugees than a lot of advocates are.

    • Om says:

      02:17pm | 27/11/12

      marley says:
      ” second - local resettlement in a neighbouring company”
      Can I be re-settled in IBM?

    • wakeupcall says:

      02:53pm | 27/11/12

      Ah, the real Marley is revealed? He says that even when it is safe to return home the UNHCR does not want to send them, back. Why? It did so when the Kosovars came here - they were the ‘real deal’ too - just wiki it if you doubt me. The UNHCR was involved then, without complaint. What is the difference - one white one black? The ‘new reverse racism’? Kosovars were sent home. No refugee advocates or Kosovars complained. Now we see what is really involved? Refugee advocates want pity cases so they can appear compassionate and get paid by the Government to appear to help. Multiculturalists want to racially and socially re-engineering the population. Rich capitalists simply want more people to drive down wages and drive up demand, prices and profits. Politicians want more voters - workers or welfare recipients - they preferably welfare recipients - they are more beholden. The Church wants more Christians and the Mosques want more Muslims. The Government simply wants your taxes, or for you to work in your retirement, to pay for refugee and immigrant welfare. Why no censorship today Tory? Can’t believe it! The new improved free speech Tory?

    • george says:

      02:54pm | 27/11/12

      of course ignoring that the Liberal Policy for Nauru and Manus has been implemented.

    • marley says:

      03:18pm | 27/11/12

      @wakeuppls - the Kosovars were accepted on a temporary basis,  on a one-off deal,under pressure from ethnic groups and advocates.  They were offered a temporary safe haven on the condition that they would return home when the situation settled down.  That was always the deal.

      The Sudanese were accepted on a permanent basis as part of our on-going offshore resettlement program.  That too was the deal.

      The UNHCR knew that the Kosovars would be going back and never ceased to carry a watching brief for them because the Kosovars were never accepted by us as refugees.  The UNHCR expects,  not unnaturally, that the Sudanese will stay because we said they could, because we gave them Australian permanent residence status,  and because they are now our responsibility,  not the UNHCR’s.   

      This has nothing to do with any master plots by the government - the Sudanese are just the beneficiaries of an offshore resettlement program that has brought in recognised refugees to Australia since WWII.

    • wakeupcall says:

      04:07pm | 27/11/12

      Marley - What nonsense. The deal is what we make it. We can change ‘the deal’ (sounds like hippie stuff to me?) any time we like. We are a sovereign nation. That is clear domestic and international law. No later Parliament can bind an earlier one except through the Constitution. Law 101. Do you dispute that? Go on then prove me wrong. We are a sovereign nation. Full stop.

      Yes. Those already made permanent are different but many new asylum seekers arrive each day. That is what I am discussing - you know that.

      You make a very weak argument Marley. You appear to be getting desperate now. I expect Tory to censor me soon as you are obviously losing the debate.

      The question is: do we end permanent resettlement or not. The refugee Convention does not oblige it. Dispute that if you can. The ALP wants TPVs now that they are swamped in a mess of their own creation, but can’t be seen to backflip.

      Labelling and pathologising is not argument Marley. I am a realist and do not subscribe to conspiracy theories.  You seem to have nothing today. Running out of steam? With Punch’s permission I hope to point out all the flaws in Marley’s arguments each and every time I am allowed.

    • marley says:

      05:59pm | 27/11/12

      @wakeuppls - look, I don’t know what your issue is,but your comments are almost incoherent.

      Of course we’re a sovereign nation, and of course we can make our own decisions about who comes to this country.

      We decided, as a sovereign nation, to admit the Kosovars on a temporary basis.  We then, as a sovereign nation, told them the time was up, the situation was safe, and they needed to leave.  Those are the facts.

      We, as a sovereign nation, have also decided we will have an offshore resettlement program which offers permanent residence to recognised refugees.  The Sudanese were accepted under that program, and granted permanent residence.  We might rescind the program at some future date, but those Sudanese are legal permanent residents of Australia and quite possibly citizens, and I wouldn’t want to be the one to try and rescind their status when they came here perfectly legally.

      Yes, of course we can end the offshore resettlement program. Yes, of course we can walk away from the Convention.  Whether we should or not, is a debate.  But until we walk away,  we have obligations.  And we haven’t walked away yet.

      My comments have been about “what is,” not “what could be.”  We are signatories to the Convention, we have a Migration Act which incorporates part of that, and in addition we have voluntarily chosen to have an offshore resettlement program.  So I’m simply explaining what the situation is for people who are either asylum seekers or offshore refugees today.  And I doubt you’ll find any errors in my explanations of what the current/currrent situation is.  Postulating what might be the situation if we walked away from the Convention has nothing to do with the here and now..

    • Len says:

      11:06am | 27/11/12

      Hang on…i thought there were stats doing the rounds about the ‘higher’ percentage of african refugees who had gained employment in australia as opposed to the very low number of middle eastern refugees still suckling on welfare after 5 years of arrival? This story certainly contradicts that.

    • marley says:

      11:48am | 27/11/12

      @Len - actually, it doesn’t.  West African refugees do much better than Afghans and Iraqis;  Somalis don’t do as well as other African refugees, and presumably neither do South Sudanese.  Iranians do better than Iraqis, and so on.  You have to look at the information in a bit more detail t get the picture.

    • dweezy2176 says:

      12:35pm | 27/11/12

      Behave! Labor is trying to deflect from the boats and AWU! Pointing out the discrepancy(s) in statements isn’t going to gain brownie points for the Labor spin machine!

    • acotrel says:

      01:40pm | 27/11/12

      @dweezy
      ‘Behave! Labor is trying to deflect from the boats and AWU! Pointing out the discrepancy(s) in statements isn’t going to gain brownie points for the Labor spin machine! ‘

      Why are you so completely indoctrinated that you believe the LNP bullshit so implicitly ? Asylum seekers and the AWU/Gillard stuff are manufactured issues - Abbott has nothing else.

    • subotic says:

      02:11pm | 27/11/12

      West Africa?
      Afghans?
      Iraqis?

      None of those countries even comes close to sucking the welfare out of Australia like the Kiwis do…..

    • Sir Viv says:

      04:25pm | 27/11/12

      @subotic

      It’s 2012 my friend. Kiwis haven’t been eligible for welfare benefits in Australia since Howard cut it off in 2001.

      However Australians are eligible for welfare benefits in NZ.

      Kiwi’s that have lived here 10+ years who lost homes in the QLD floods got ZERO in the way of Govt help.

      Aussies in Christchurch were given full govt assistance.

      That’s the ANZAC spirit right there.

      Leave the Kiwis alone man, they are Australia’s no.1 tax slaves.

    • Leigh says:

      11:23am | 27/11/12

      If it wasn’t for the luvvy-duvvy fools who think they speak for everyone, these people would have known that they would be discriminated against.

      Lack of opportunities? Once again, the lefty do-gooders lied to people who were so different from us they were always going to struggle in a Western country – any Western country.

      “..what if we could provide any asylum seekers in the community or in detention with a range of useful skills. Skills that will help them here if they stay, or help them rebuild if they go home.”

      What if Australia provided skills for Australians! Since the Howard Government we have not been providing skills for our own people. We rely on taking skilled migrants from other countries instead of looking after and using our own people.

      These so-called refugees (who now thing home is OK after their ‘terrible’ experiences here should be sent home as Sri Lankans are being sent home. They should never have been here in the first place.

    • andye says:

      12:36pm | 27/11/12

      @leight: “If it wasn’t for the luvvy-duvvy fools who think they speak for everyone, these people would have known that they would be discriminated against.”

      So… the problem with racism is actually all the people who aren’t racist setting unrealistic expectations?

      The logical backflips required to blame something on those people who aren’t actually doing it is mind boggling.

    • Reg Whiteman says:

      12:53pm | 27/11/12

      I disagree entirely. Whenever there’s a vacant house in my street you often hear the neighbours say, “I just hope a nice family of Sudanese or Somalis move in.”

    • PsychoHyena says:

      01:35pm | 27/11/12

      @andye, I agree. What if we applied that logic to victims of crime Leigh, would it be there fault? Hey, based on your entire argument it’s not the government’s fault that Australians aren’t getting skilled, it’s all the luvvy-duvvy fools who think they speak for everyone.

      Tell us Leigh, apart from providing them with the opportunity to blow your argument out of the water, what opportunities have you personally provided to an Australian?

    • acotrel says:

      01:48pm | 27/11/12

      @Andye
      ‘So… the problem with racism is actually all the people who aren’t racist setting unrealistic expectations?’

      Why is it that those on the right are more concerned about people drowning on the way to Australia by boat ? LNP supporters are more sharing and caring ? Barnaby Joyce cares about what happens to the asylum seekers - I WANT TO BE SICK !

    • andye says:

      02:20pm | 27/11/12

      @acotrel: “Why is it that those on the right are more concerned about people drowning on the way to Australia by boat ?”

      The “compassion” only exists in that argument in order to attack the left. It is about as obvious and transparent as it gets. In the next breath the refugees with be demonised.

      After all, don’t they throw children overboard?

    • Jess says:

      02:25pm | 27/11/12

      @Reg.
      I quite like having neighbours of a different culture move in next door. ‘Nice family’ should be the key words. If it’s a nice family they will usually have the same goals as every other family - happy healthy families. Plus migrants usually make different tasty tasty food. mmmm

      Plus if your neighbourhood is full of nice families the new family generally asslimilates into the community. Did I mention tasty tasty food?

      Plus you can help them fit into the neighbourhood and tasty food.

    • Tim says:

      02:37pm | 27/11/12

      Andye,
      so people wanting to stop drownings are only doing so because they actually hate the refugees?

      Wow.

    • PJ says:

      02:53pm | 27/11/12

      It cannot be just ‘discrimination.’

      Discrimination presents itself in pockets, it’s never a State wide or Nation wide issue.

      Discrimination does not explain the school rate drop outs, or the fact that African Refugees are frustrated at every level.

      Discrimination is exactly what you can expect the Socialist Left to say, who think about people in terms of the colours of their skins.

      Coming to Australia was presented to the African Refugees as an opportunity. Clearly, that opportunity was offered, but it was never provided.

      Let me give you a scenario to explain what should be in place.
      Imagine you invite a Somali to your home for a BBQ.
      You throw him and his wife out the back with the kids, while you do the salads and the Snags are cooking outside.
      The Wife is wearing shorts and a bikini top,
      The kids are naked in the pool,
      There’s Pork about to be served
      and you put your arm around his wife as you walked them out to the family.
      No, no no no no.

      It’s exactly the same for an invitation to join your Community.

      It’s not enough, clearly, to throw them to the top of the Social housing list, and offer a generous resettlement package.

      There needs to be a controlled, process orientated approach to integration, where everything has been set up in advance and all sections of the process are trained up and aligned. None of this exists.

      I can tell you this because I was a volunteer as a Drivers assistant for 3 months, primarily delivering food. Shambles.

      So you can see, increasing the numbers from 13,750 to 20,000 with an extra 7000 specifically selected from Africa is just going to make things worse, for everybody.

      I have always criticised or cautioned people on here for chucking out the Race card. Because doing that just makes everyone feel crap and clearly there is a lot more involved than just the odd bit of discrimination.

      Because of poor integration planning we now have three riots and that incredibly bad crime statistic to overcome before we can build mutual trust.

      There also needs to be some expectation management on behalf of the Refugees.

    • Leigh says:

      03:36pm | 27/11/12

      There is no ‘racism’ involved. All cultures prefer their own kind. This is   perfectly normal, and does not involve the accepted meanings of racism in the slightest. People who think that they are ‘special’,and don’t think that way, are only kiddings themselves.

      Yes. Those people on the right (my side) are are only saying that they are concerned about illegals drowing; they should be telling the truth, as I do - my only interest in these people is that they should be stopped. If they drown, that’s fewer to stop, and its their own fault.

    • PJ says:

      04:00pm | 27/11/12

      Leigh

      Actually those most people are pro Refugees and Anti Illegal Immigrants.

      Because the latter is clearly a p1$$ take bonanza at multiple levels.

      Nevertheless, the majority of Australians in the poles I have seen were horrified at the deaths of illegal immigrants.

      These deaths were caused by an egotistical Government, that would only offer Malaysian Concentration Camps, and no compromise or facilitation to find a solution to make policy. In consequence people died.

    • andye says:

      04:01pm | 27/11/12

      @Tim: “so people wanting to stop drownings are only doing so because they actually hate the refugees?”

      haha, I was going to respond to this, but someone else already did, it seems.

      @Leigh: “Yes. Those people on the right (my side) are are only saying that they are concerned about illegals drowing; they should be telling the truth, as I do - my only interest in these people is that they should be stopped. If they drown, that’s fewer to stop, and its their own fault.”

      Tim, I think many of the people making the argument are not doing so out of compassion. Seeing as how Leigh just admitted as much, I am not sure I need to add anything else.

    • PJ says:

      05:18pm | 27/11/12

      andye

      Cheap trick Mate.

      We don’t write off all Americans because you invented the KKK, so you shouldn’t do the same because of one comment on here.

      Clearly there are issues with Refugee settlement in Australia.

      Most migrants from anywhere struggle for the first year to get a foot hold. I certainly did. And over that year I entertained the notion of returning home many times, disillusioned and unaccepted, i thought.

      We may have to entertain the possibility that our Refugee Resettlement program is crap, rather than blaming white people.

      Because it we get sensible about this, we might be able to identify the true issues to address. Otherwise this problem with remain, forever, only bigger.

      Because If it truly is white people, then there’s nothing we can do accept stop the program. Or increase the program to such an extent that the white people are a minority that can be overcome and ignored. But that’s ethnic cleansing and colonisation, rather than providing refuge.

      Lets start with a proper Problem Statement or Problem Statements, so we know what the issues are, from there we can do the analysis then work the solutions.

      That study I would suggest is fundamentally flawed and one eyed. Perhaps it’s goal is to use ‘shame’ to drive a request for more funding.

      But with the Department of Immigration already blowing $1 Billion in expenses in this area in 2010/11, then clearly more dosh is not the answer. Because in 2011 we had three riots, complete with knives and machetes in Victoria and the ‘5 times more likely’ Stat.

      We should make a call to have the true issues identified and analysed, or quit.

    • Tim says:

      05:40pm | 27/11/12

      Andye,
      You do realise that not everyone who talks about this issue is ruled by the Leighs of the world?

      I would say he’s in the minority from either side of politics.

      I personally call for an end to allowing boat arrivals to claim asylum because its extremely dangerous, costs us billions and is inherently unfair.

      I don’t know how anyone could actually support that.

    • ronny jonny says:

      11:23am | 27/11/12

      I suppose they want the taxpayer to pay for the tickets? I suppose it would be cheaper than paying welfare for the 50 years.
      Goodbye.

    • AliceC says:

      12:39pm | 27/11/12

      Andhow do you know they would stay on welfare all their lives? Got some facts and figures RJ?

    • Anne71 says:

      01:00pm | 27/11/12

      AliceC, ronny jonny has probably learned all he knows from Alan Jones and other such experts.  Don’t expect a rational contribution to the discussion from him.

    • Anne71 says:

      01:00pm | 27/11/12

      AliceC, ronny jonny has probably learned all he knows from Alan Jones and other such experts.  Don’t expect a rational contribution to the discussion from him.

    • ronny jonny says:

      04:22pm | 27/11/12

      Labour force participation rate for Sudanese born is 40.3%, a tad on the low side for my liking.
      Straight to the insults, shame on you two.

    • Don Paul says:

      11:24am | 27/11/12

      I knew it would be only a matter of time till some dunce turned a positive story (S. Sudan independance—> expats returning home) into yet another tired old negatively charged political piece.

      FWIW, this is good news - a desirable outcome for South Sudanese, why don’t all just wish them luck and congratulations.

    • ibast says:

      11:34am | 27/11/12

      The US:  “Give me your tired, your poor,
      Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
      The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
      Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
      I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

      Australia:  “Fuck off, we’re full!”

    • St. Michael says:

      12:53pm | 27/11/12

      Ibast, you might recall the dialogue from Lethal Weapon 3:

      Murtagh: What happened to “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free?”
      US Customs Official: They changed the sign.  It now says “No vacancy.”

      America is no more friendly towards unwanted immigrants than Australia is.  The only reason it’s got more of them is because it can’t police the Mexican border sufficiently to stop them.

    • Llort Ableman says:

      01:30pm | 27/11/12

      The subtle, yet intended, original meaning of that novel little ditty:

      Give me your tired white anglo-saxons, your poor white anglo-saxons,
      Your huddled white anglo-saxon masses yearning to breathe free,
      The wretched white anglo-saxon refuse of your teeming shore.
      Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost white anglo-saxons to me,
      I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

    • ibast says:

      02:45pm | 27/11/12

      The point Michael, is when they were trying to build their nation, they recogonised the importance of growth and population and the ability of immigration in readily achieving that goal.

      Our politics has become so popularly reactive it panders to those too dumb to understand how critical immigration was to the economic success of the US and should be to Australia.

    • marley says:

      06:54pm | 27/11/12

      @ibast - most people recognise how important controlled immigration is.  It’s the uncontrolled immigration that’s the problem.  And it’s not just a problem in the US or Australia; it’s a huge problem for the South Africans, for the Europeans, quite large chunks of Latin America and for North Africas, not to mention India. 

      Our problems are minor compared to a lot of other countries, but the exponential growth in boat arrivals is a worry, just as the boat movement in the Med and the transborder movements in Eastern Europe are.  We’re not in the 19th century any more, and we don’t necessarily need the 19th century version of population growth to fuel our economies.  We need to be able to make proactive decisions on the direction this country will take, rather than fall back on the idea that, whatever happens, whoever arrives, “she’ll be right.”

    • John says:

      11:45am | 27/11/12

      After being unemployed for such a long time, I have realized I was so much happier being unemployed. I literally had all the free time and most relaxed life, until i went back to the work force. Now I’m a robotic, dehumanized, warn out, sleep deprived, stressed entity, looking at the rent prices and house price’s, I’m being to wonder whats the incentive to work, if you going to have repeat this depressive 5 day a week cycle for the rest of your life. This is not living, it’s like torturing the human soul.

    • subotic says:

      01:21pm | 27/11/12

      Aaaaah John, welcome to sweet, sweet enlightenment…...

    • Peter Ede says:

      11:47am | 27/11/12

      Let them return but end the entitlement to the Australian pension/welfare if people are returning to their home country to live more than 3 months a year.

    • Hammy says:

      11:48am | 27/11/12

      Brings a tear to my eye.  Watching taxpayer dollars return to the country they came from.  So heart warming.

    • Murray says:

      12:30pm | 27/11/12

      Migrants often move back and forward between their adopted country and the country of their birth, be they European,  African, Middle Eastern of Chinese. They do this for holidays, business and for family reasons amongst the many possibilities. This has been a great outcome for Australia as those movements have provided opportunities for Australia socially and economically and plugged Australia directly into major economies world wide. Bicultural, bilingual and globally minded people are an asset to Australia.
      I’ve taught a lot of refugees who have fled terrible conditions. I am proud that Australia has helped provide protection for the weak and the vulnerable. These are often highly motivated people who are determined to build rich and fulfilling lives that many of their friends and families kiled in conflict and persecution will never get the chance to do. Refugees have contributed enormously to Australia over time and will continue to do so, if they are allowed. Irrational fear of foreigners will hardly encourage people to embrace our beautiful country.
      In regards to Iran, there is ongoing persecution of religious minorities and political dissidents. Iran is still a theocratic police state which arbitrarily imprisons critics. People forced to flee Iran because they believe in religious tolerance and democracy should surely be welcome here.

    • wakeupcall says:

      04:23pm | 27/11/12

      Rubbish. This shows that they were not genuine in the first place or that conditions have changed and they are no longer in need of protection so can returned home if on TPVs. You have mixed up immigration policy with asylum policy.  The old argument that refugees are the same as immigrants and that we need more immigrants to make us rich and solve our aging problem has been soundly refuted by the Fraser Institute and many others who estimate that immigrants as a whole (much more self-reliant and less expensive than refugees) costs about $6,000 per year each between $16-23 billion per year In Canada. Australia is the same or similar. http://global-economics.ca/fiscal-transfers-to-immigrants-in-canada.pdf

      This is not about you. It is a matter of public policy. I had to laugh. Someone tried to discredit the study the other day by calling it right wing! But the right wing want more immigrants and refugees - they see them as mere units of demand and supply not people - so they can depress wages and and boost demand, prices and profits - see Gina Rhinehart and Clive Palmer? Funny when both extreme left and right demand open borders! Who is the opressor then?

    • fake julia says:

      12:32pm | 27/11/12

      You should call Gillard

      She is interested at the South Sudan solution

    • TimB says:

      12:35pm | 27/11/12

      Out of curiosity, how many of these refugees came in via boat and demanded asylum, and how many of them waited in refugee camps until Australia opted to take them in?

    • marley says:

      01:14pm | 27/11/12

      @TimB - we both know the answers.  Q1 None.  Q2 All of them.

    • TimB says:

      05:09pm | 27/11/12

      Yes Marley, I suspected as much.

      The real question of course is whether Tory & co know that. The article tends to indicate otherwise.

    • Harry the Hat says:

      12:41pm | 27/11/12

      Bon voyage to all who leave. Couldn’t happen to a nicer group of people.

    • Brian says:

      01:01pm | 27/11/12

      Bring back TPV’‘s then they will know exactly were they stand , if they bother to come at all , enough is enough the bleeding hearts have had their way and now look at the state of things .

    • Millsy says:

      01:05pm | 27/11/12

      Well done Australia, you have made it worse in the country these people fled too, than the place they fled from.

    • Luke Duke says:

      02:05pm | 27/11/12

      Can’t be that bad over there then can it and they therefore wouldn’t be genuine refugees.

      Tory have you got a refugee or two living with you? The government will pay you a few hundred dollars a week to do so.

      If not you’re a racist.

    • Mitch says:

      01:07pm | 27/11/12

      “Even better; what if we could provide any asylum seekers in the community or in detention with a range of useful skills. Skills that will help them here if they stay, or help them rebuild if they go home.”

      Tory, you’re so idealistic its cute! There is not the political will in either major party, or in Australia already for this. Most people already complain “the reffos” get too much.

    • Tony of Poorakistan says:

      01:08pm | 27/11/12

      Its Good News Week!! 
       
      Excellent. Just goes to show we only need to issue TPVs, not these permanent residencies that come with a free house, free medical, free dental, free mobiles phones, free cars etc - you know, all the stuff our own citizens don’t get.

    • James1 says:

      02:54pm | 27/11/12

      Once you are accepted as a refugee, you get access to the exact same system of social welfare as every other Australian, nothing more, nothing less (and it doesn’t come with free cars, housing, or mobile phones).  You are either telling outright lies, or are confused between Sudanese refugees who all came to Australia through the proper processes and boat people.  Also, no one gets a free car for being a refugee - you have fabricated that.  As such, you are either peddling deliberate lies, or are ignorant of the facts.

      Which is it?

    • Jay2 says:

      04:37pm | 27/11/12

      Actually James1, depending upon where you are in Australia, you are incorrect.

      Asylum seekers specifically have access to:  “Prority Health”;  “Priority Dental”; a “$10,000 Furniture and Bedding Grant”, “A Refugee Health Nurse Program”; “The immigrant and refugee health clinics”; ” Torture and trauma counselling “; “Catch up Immunisation Program” “Access program to professional mental health care” and $1.4million dollars annually was spent on tobacco products for asylum seekers”.

      Now, without debate the pros and cons of such (and I haven’t listed all) programmes and access etc, I really can’t imagine $1.4million bucks being spent of tobacco products on Australian citizens unless anybody on this forum can clue me up and I will be just as ticked off!

    • marley says:

      01:25pm | 27/11/12

      You know, some of the comment here are really grating on me.

      Let’s be clear about who these people are.  These are genuine refugees, who’ve waited in refugee camps, often for years, and often in appalling conditions, to get a chance at a new life. 

      They are not economic migrants, they are not “boat people,” they are not self-selected asylum seekers.  These are the real deal, exactly the kind of people a lot of those hostile to asylum seekers say the boat people are displacing.

      We selected these people because we were satisfied they were genuine refugees and because we thought as a nation that we would help a handful out of the tens of millions of displaced people in this world. 

      Yes, some of them have trouble adjusting - they come from terrible situations, may not speak much English, and aren’t familiar with advanced western societies.  They may not have much in the way of skills, and they may be be traumatised by war.  Yet, they do better than some of the other refugee groups when it comes to employment. 

      And guess what, they have every right to be here.  They came on valid,refugee visas.

      If you’re not prepared to accept these people, then be honest and stop whining about how boat people are taking away places from the poor people in the camps.  These were the poor people in the camps.

    • Mitch says:

      01:38pm | 27/11/12

      As far as most of the anti-boat people crowd as concerned. There is no difference between refugees, regardless of their origins. This attitude is what more than a decade of politicians and social commentators demonising immigrants and refugees has bread in our country. Welcome to Australia.

    • Volumetric says:

      01:42pm | 27/11/12

      We are prepared to accept them and more. See Michael S just below here.

    • Ando says:

      02:47pm | 27/11/12

      Mitch,
      “As far as most of the anti-boat people crowd as concerned. There is no difference between refugees, regardless of their origins.”
      Nor the pro boat people. The fact is there is a difference between boat arrivals and camp refugees.

    • Mitch says:

      04:01pm | 27/11/12

      Ando, if I had to pick between “screw all refugees!” and “well, maybe we should check if these guys on the boat are genuine too” I know picking the second one would at least let me sleep at night.

    • Ando says:

      05:52pm | 27/11/12

      Mitch
      Sure there are anti immigration advocates on the right. There are also people in the middle that can be pro refugee but support measures for it to be controlled and targeted to the most needy.The Libs decision to reduce the refugee intake misjudges how large this group is.My point was that some on the left dont separate boat peple with refugees in African camps to avoid the hard decisions and help them win the moral highground. Be careful not to assume the majority are just “anti-boatpeople” because they dislike foreigner.

    • Michael S says:

      01:26pm | 27/11/12

      It’s a good news story. Refugees who came through the UNHCR channels, Australia gave them protection when they needed it; and now that the danger has passed, they’re going home. That’s the way refugee-ism should work.
      The only pity was that we couldn’t protect more. But unfortunately the unauthorised boat arrivals had taken their places.

    • Anubis says:

      01:33pm | 27/11/12

      This sort of adds strength to the arguments for Temporary Protection Visa, designed to provide them with safe haven in Australia until their country of origin has stabilised and have prospects for a better life.

    • Murray says:

      02:11pm | 27/11/12

      I have to disagree. If we want to have prodcutive community members, and I assume we do, people’s lives should be left in limbo waiting for the uncertain outcome of civil wars. The men in the newspaper article could well have been here for their whole lives waiting for things to settle, like Somalians. The security and certainty provided by residency enabled people to get on with education and work and contributing to the community. I fear that the TPVs are as likely to lead to a lifetime of disconnection from the community and disenfranchisement as people wait to go ‘home’, as they will to a story like this one.

    • Jess says:

      01:35pm | 27/11/12

      I’m totally making my kiva loans to South Sudan next month

    • PJ says:

      01:54pm | 27/11/12

      Yes, it was some rescue Australia enacted on behalf of the African refugees. Hardly a rescue at all as it turned out, because everybody is unhappy.

      In an interview with The Age, Detective Superintendent Boyle said African gangs were of growing concern. He said these new generation of gangs, under a guise of robbery, bash strangers for kicks.

      Others believe that alcohol or drugs rather than a gang mentality are to blame for any crime committed by this group.

      No one is denying the crime statistics. African youth are 5 times more likely to commit crime than any other group in Melbourne.

      The suburbs where African gangs are most prominent are Footscray, Sunshine, St Albans, Broadmeadows, Springvale and Dandenong, and they remain primary locations for the settlement of refugees.

      Abeselom Nega, who works with young African refugees was recently shown Victorian Police data demonstrating that Africans are over-represented in the crime rates. He rationalised the figures as follows:

      ‘‘These kids see a gang as their new form of community. They don’t fit into their parents’ community and they don’t fit into the Australian community. It’s as simple and as complex as that,’’ he says.

      It’s the same story all over the world it seems. The Daily News in Egypt reported similar issues in an article entitled “A marginalised community: Sudanese refugees in Egypt.”

      The drop out rates of African kids in Melbourne schools is something like 60%. Without a basic education, in a country where the Education system holds the certificates like keys to any job, the employment prospects of these Africans is very limited.

      The Government has thrown money at the problem. For example, for 2010-11, the Department of Immigration’s expenses for working in this area totalled more than $2 billion!

      It’s been 4 months since the SMH reported ‘Refugee Restlessness Growing in Melbourne’  and Victoria Police Deputy Commissioner, Tim Cartwright warned:

      “Cronulla riots could be replicated in Melbourne suburbs due to high levels of crime among Sudanese and Somali born residents. Sudanese and Somali born Victorians are about five times more likely to commit crimes, official figures show, with assault and robbery the most common offences, illustrating a trend of increasingly violent robberies by disaffected African youths.”

      In April 2011, following three sudanese riots of up to 100 people around a Beauty Pageant in Clayton, community Leaders then had the solution, which they gave to The Age: “VIOLENT young Sudanese men will continue to wreak havoc unless the state government improves its relationship with youth service providers, community leaders have warned.”

      The parents have appealed to the Government to help them with their children.

      Then after all that. Nothing?

      Well, The Socialist Left buried the problem by making the usual claim that the white Australian was to blame because they are racist. The Greens said the Police were to blame because they are institutionally racist. The race card is a super bug and lays waist to everything. It crushes the finds and wipes out the future prospect of further action.

      Until we hear 90% of African Refugees want to go home.

      It doesn’t surprise me that the parents want to go home, back to a traditional life they understand and controlled. but the kids are lost between rejecting the controlling aspects of African traditions and the out of reach trappings of cashed up youth in western societies.

      Typically causes are manifold and never one dimensional. And this is what the solution must be as well. We need to address the Community Support Network, the Social Attitudes, the Policing and the responsibilities expected from the parents.

    • Black Dynamite says:

      02:04pm | 27/11/12

      For those Sudanese that are returning to south Sudan please take your Sudanese gangs with you.

      Black Dynamite.

    • OzTrucker says:

      03:32pm | 27/11/12

      At least we do agree on something then.

      I was just stoked to hear the stories about them running around with machete’s in Adelaide a few years back killing each other.

    • Rambo says:

      04:40pm | 27/11/12

      Agreed oztrucker

      I feel our culture has been enriched greatly with the violence and poverty we are importing. Jess kept going on about the tasty food, now where do I get that fly blown bush meat from?

    • wakeupcall says:

      02:15pm | 27/11/12

      At last some glimmer of sense from Ms Shepherd. Yes., these young men can be an asset to their former home. We should be sending them back when safe to do so and making sure we spend our money wisely and efficiently so as to train them to contribute to their home economy. But it is much cheaper and better to train them in their former home where costs are lower using foreign aid and locally engaged staff. Many more can be trained. That is real compassion. We should not encourage asylum seeking. But you will have to part company with the extreme right who simply want consumers here so that they can sell them houses at an inflated price and consumer durables from welfare money. Can you part company with the extreme right? Can you rejoin the sensible middle ? I doubt it. Do you just want more sad cases to make you look compassionate? Who is the real Tory Shepherd? Censor that Tory, like you usually do.

    • marley says:

      03:01pm | 27/11/12

      @wakeupcall - these fellows were not asylum seekers.  They were refugees selected out of the camps at a time when there was no apparent hope of their ever returning home.  All the retraining in the world is useless if you can’t leave the camp.

    • Gregg says:

      02:33pm | 27/11/12

      ” Sit down. Take a deep breath. That sounds a lot like good news. It sounds as though maybe this is how the system can work sometimes; we look after people in trouble and sometimes it will be possible for them to return home.

      Even better; what if we could provide any asylum seekers in the community or in detention with a range of useful skills. Skills that will help them here if they stay, or help them rebuild if they go home. “
      It has been a long standing UNHCR policy to house refugees as close to their homelands or even in them where safety permits, all sorts of good reasons and in fact of the 40M odd under UNHCR and other NGO care, some two thirds are classed as Internally Displaced Persons - IDPs , people in camps in their own countries.

      The UNHCR accept that by far the majority of people would want to be in their own birth country.
      It is probably another good reason to have TPVs and as for providing refugees with useful skills, I suppose that would really depend on what was best and then of course, given our own shortfall on education and other funding, everything comes at a cost so what is it we would drop off the wish list or should we just tax and borrow more $$$$?

    • Mik says:

      02:45pm | 27/11/12

      Refugees, by definition, people who have been forced from their homes and countries. Genuine refugees don’t want to be refugees but circumstances push them there. They would much rather that their homeland was safe for them and that they didn’t have to flee.

    • Mitch says:

      04:08pm | 27/11/12

      I have a question for all who advocate re-introducing TPV’s and repatriating refugees. Who decides when their home country is safe again? I can remember not that long ago Afghanistan was declared “safe” by the Australian government when it was anything but. Would the TPV crowd be comfortable ceding repatriation authority to a UN decision?

      In my opinion, leaving the decision in the hands of a government agency opens it wide up for the refugees to once again be political footballs depending on the electorates mood.

    • Penguin says:

      04:59pm | 27/11/12

      I like to point out to you that many of the boatpeople do not need visas to enter neighbouring countries and then hop over to Australia. So the issue of safety is not a life and death issue here and now.

    • Gordon says:

      05:04pm | 27/11/12

      Why is this polishing the proverbial? They needed refuge; they got it until life got better at home & they went back. Looks shiny to me. Happy to help.

      Think how much easier it would be if there weren’t people trying to game the system, and fwits egging them on.

    • Carz says:

      05:30pm | 27/11/12

      Of course most refugees would like to go home. Its not as if they have sought refuge on a whim. They did so because their lives were at risk. If you could eliminate the risk then you eliminate the need for them to flee.

    • Cat says:

      05:53pm | 27/11/12

      Tory I actually put that in a letter which was printed in the Advertiser some time ago. It is something I have known about (because of my job) for years. I have tried telling successive governments that this is the best approach to the “problem” but they do not want to listen…and they are being hampered by those who do not want to participate in such projects because their aim is to migrate to Australia.
      I think you just showed, once again, that refugees often do want to return home and rebuild their country - and they would like the skills to do it and the chance to learn English so they can access skills. We really fail people when we fail to do this.

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter