Raiders discussion on immigration.

[Panjabi]

You've made valid points, but..

Why should Fred Nerk who paid some guy jump on a boat and come into this country when lots of others have applied for residency through the appropriate channels and are waiting patiently for their opportunity?

Im all for refugees using the correct means to apply for asylum to a enter a country, but the problem is are these resources available to them, now im purely speculating but i can't imagine any consular facilities being readily available to genuine refugees in places like Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan and Haiti.

Comparing our numbers to Europe's is irrelevent as they are accessible by many more people AND they have more infrastructure to handle them.

Granted, but 459,568 people applied for asylum last year and we had 4290 applicants, you do the math, its a small drop in the ocean. As for infrastructure, many places in Australia are crying out for an increase in population, and in many cases refugees that are settling there are providing a boost to the lifeblood of the community. eg 60 Afghan temporary visa holders working at the Fletcher Abatoirs at Dubbo.

I think your 4xxx number is a little under-stated as well, but I'll do some research.

Figures were taken from the UNHCR, Asylum Levels and Trends in Industriased Countries, First Quarter 2004.

 

[hrundi99]

Im all for refugees using the correct means to apply for asylum to a enter a country, but the problem is are these resources available to them, now im purely speculating but i can't imagine any consular facilities being readily available to genuine refugees in places like Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan and Haiti.

Perhaps you're confusing what I'm saying. There are 2 groups of people who turn up in our waters wanting to land; refugees and "illegal immigrants". I don't expect genuine refugees to apply for immigration. They tend to have more pressing matters at hand than lining up to fill in paperwork.

It is the "queue-jumping" illegal immigrants who should be going to the back of the line. They are clearly trying to cheat the system.

Granted, but 459,568 people applied for asylum last year and we had 4290 applicants, you do the math, its a small drop in the ocean. As for infrastructure, many places in Australia are crying out for an increase in population, and in many cases refugees that are settling there are providing a boost to the lifeblood of the community. eg 60 Afghan temporary visa holders working at the Fletcher Abatoirs at Dubbo.

Mathematically it may seem like a drop in the ocean but remember that our population is only 20 million, whereas Europe's is around 750 million.

Subsequently, the proportion of applicants/population is as follows:

AU 13,000/20mill = 0.00065 applicants/citizen
EU 460,000/750mill = 0.000613 applicants/citizen

Not that different is it? If your EU figure is in fact the annual figure then we are actually receiving more per capita.

The Dubbo program sounds good but it is safe to assume that most people who enter the country stay in the big cities.

Figures were taken from the UNHCR, Asylum Levels and Trends in Industriased Countries, First Quarter 2004.

I've just perused the Federal govt's migration website and their statistics are as follows:

Migration program

There are two programs designed to help people wanting to come to Australia permanently. One is the migration program which is made up of:

- a skill migration stream, which has a number of categories for people who have particular occupation skills, outstanding talents or business skills;

- a family migration stream, where people can be sponsored by a relative who is an Australian citizen or permanent resident;

- special eligibility migrants, who are former citizens or residents wanting to return to Australia, or certain New Zealanders.

The migration program for 2004-05 has 120,000 places available for migrants, with a strong focus on attracting skilled people and people who agree to live in regional areas of Australia.

Humanitarian program

The second program is the separate humanitarian program which is designed for refugees and others in special humanitarian need.

A major component of the humanitarian program is the offshore resettlement program, which assists people in humanitarian need overseas for whom resettlement in another country is the only option.

The onshore protection component is for those people already in Australia who arrived on temporary visas or in an unauthorised manner, and who claim Australia’s protection.

The size of the 2004-05 humanitarian program is 13,000 places.


Those numbers look a lot healthier. I think the 4xxx number may be for Q1 only.

References:
http://www.geohive.com/global/poplink.php?xml=idb&xsl=idb&par1=eu
http://www.immi.gov.au/migration/index.htm

 

[Steven Gerrard]

Have I entered the wrong thread? :|

 

[hrundi99]

I dunno #1.

Did you turn up on a boat?

:lol:

 

[Raider_69]

I dunno #1.

Did you turn up on a boat?

:lol:

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
GOLD

 

[Kris_man]

I dunno #1.

Did you turn up on a boat?

:lol: :lol:

mate, i'd hardly call illegal refugees enemies, thier not exactly waging war against us now are they?

i agree totally, but my point was: history shows that children grow up with a strong feeling of loyalty to their parents. if they feel their parents have been f*cked over, they'll be pissed off at the guys who did it. my point is, Australia can be as nice as it wants to these kids, but they'll likely grow up to hate Australia anyway. as unfortunate as it is, Australia shouldn't be held responsible for the suffering that some of these kids are going through. their parents should have thought of that before they you know what.

 

[skeepe]

The problem is, how do you determine the illegal immigrants from the refugees? All we hear about is Iraqi and Afghani "queue-jumpers" these days. In fact, the government has decided that it's safe to send back some Afghani's rather than let them seek asylum in Australia.

This is what I have a problem with. As mentioned previously, if you're in a war-torn country, you're hardly likely to run to the nearest Australian consulate, apply for asylum and sit around until you reach the head of the queue. You're going to want to get the hell out of the country, yes?

Here's a far-fetched example. Say Australia is ravaged with war, you're stuck in Townsville and you want to escape and take refuge in New Zealand (maybe that last part's a little too far-fetched). You have two options, the first is to head to the nearest NZ office, which may be in Brisbane, Sydney or even as far as Canberra, and apply for asylum. The second option is you know someone who has a boat and is leaving right away. Any sane person would take the second option. Yet the Australian government expects that everyone would take the first (I've heard Alexander Downer say words to that effect in an interview).

I guess that's why I'm against a lot of this detention stuff. How can it take a year or two to determine if someone who has come from Iraq is a genuine refugee? If they've come from Iraq, it's a pretty good bet that where they've come from isn't safe for them to live anymore.

 

[DJ Raida]

This thread is too long for me to bother : /

 

[Kris_man]

yay, i got my own thread.

 

[Tokyo_Raider]

I hate this stuff.

Honestly, this attitude that so many Australians show of such blistering exclusivity is sickening. If some poor bastard wants to risk everything - everything - by packing his family into a leaky boat and sailing across the ocean just for a shot at living the life that we all live (or driving me around Sydney in his taxi or whatever), then I say give him a passport right there on the beach. These are the Australians that we WANT, surely?

Why is Australian culture so worthy of protection, anyway? What do I care if people want to come here and speak Arabic, eat bulgogi, wear kimono or indulge is bizzare Swedish pine oil induced sex orgies? Does no damage to me. Way I see it, if Australian culture is such a valuable thing then it will be attractive to new immigrants and inherently protected. If not, then who would miss it? The Hansonite loony fringe always strike me as people who would be well served by trotting off overseas for a year and teaching English or something. Nothing like seeing how well everyone else is doing to make you realise that your just not that special after all.

I travel to about 30 countries every year. I speak only a couple of languages, point at a lot of menus, commit social blunders that would have me machine gunned and lobbed into a harbour by any other measure, but people look after me and give me a chance. Why can`t Australians seem to manage to offer the same?

And what the hell happened to this idea of a fair go???

Rant rant rant.

 

[Kris_man]

Why is Australian culture so worthy of protection, anyway? What do I care if people want to come here and speak Arabic, eat bulgogi, wear kimono or indulge is bizzare Swedish pine oil induced sex orgies?

i just think that any nation, individual, group or anything, needs unity to survive. a divided nation won't work.

 

[Bay56]

boyo you can tell the footy season is over :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Tokyo_Raider]

i just think that any nation, individual, group or anything, needs unity to survive. a divided nation won't work.

And if people decide that they like to wear veils or not eat pork or speak some Azerbaijani dialect at home there is some inherently dividing about this?

You know, my wifes family are from a very different culture with virtually no underpinning cultural anchors with my own, yet they are closer to my extended family than, say, my sister-in-laws family. Don't overstate, even in your own mind, the importance of national culture or even religion as a dividing force - there are far, far more imoprtant factors than that.

It often strikes me that the most divisive factor in the Australian immigration debate is in fact the red neck Hansonite reactionary push that spends so very much of their time trying to discover irrelevant dividing factors rather than attempting to unify the whole.

Etc etc etc

 

[legend]

I think you have it the wrong way around Tokyo Raider. The Labor party and Greens are far more divisive with their desire to cater to minorities and put them on a pedestal to the detriment of the average Australian.

I, like most Australians, like to see everyone treated equally and I think 99% of the time we get that under the current government but the fact is they can never really please everyone.

I am a Liberal party supporter but I'd like to know the 'reactionary' policies you speak of.

 

[Tokyo_Raider]

The Labor party and Greens are far more divisive with their desire to cater to minorities and put them on a pedestal to the detriment of the average Australian.

And which detriment have you personally suffered, Legend?

 

[ball boy]

:sleeper: boring

 

[raiders_lover_18]

A decent intelligent discussion.. Don't Diss it.

 

[ball boy]

sorry

 

[Kris_man]

And if people decide that they like to wear veils or not eat pork or speak some Azerbaijani dialect at home there is some inherently dividing about this?

no, there is nothing inherently dividing about it, but in a country where that is not the norm, then yes, it does go some way (albeit an extremely minute way) to dividing the nation. the fact is that people, on the whole, like to stick with their own kind. that's how this whole debate started: i was sticking up for Sydneysiders who have divided themselves into loose segregated groups based on ethinicity or religion, as it's only natural, and pointless to fight it.

 

[DJ Raida]

Im with ball boy


This thread :arrow: