Here are some references for the details in these strips.
I will be correcting and updating over time.
The first number is the line number and the second the row number.
Arrivals by boat (calendar years):
Net migration (calendar years):
2009: Australian Bureau of Statistics
2008: Department of Immigration and Citizenship
Refugees (financial year)
Department of Immigration and Citizenship
Introduction (The Election Looms)
Abbott and the Boats
2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 3.1
4.2, 5.1, 5.2
6.3, 7.1, 7.2, 7.3
all these books and papers dispute policy's deterrent effect:
this paper has a more favorable view.
"There are two remaining caveats. First, even when the ebb and flow of conflict in source regions is taken into account, there are other forces that determine the trends in asylum
applications that are still not fully understood."
I'm hoping to write up some more on these papers at some stage. To my mind there is enough here to cast doubt on Tony Abbott's claim. The question here is just whether the policy stopped the boats. My research doesn't find that domestic policy has no effect - just that it's not as clear cut as Abbott would have it. Whether a return to those policies is a desirable is another matter.
8.2, 8.3, 9.1
how many documents do you want for this one?
start with these:
I could go on and on. And on.
Refugees Across the Globe
2.2, 2.3, 3.1, 3.2
International Refugees, Australia and the Boats
See notes for “The Graph”.
Calculation based on figures from:
Calculation based on total refugee population and our current intake.
and any number of others.
This is a little complex. The source is: http://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/docs/news&events/rw/2010/3%20-%20Myths%20and%20facts%20about%20refugees%20and%20asylum%20seekers%20media%202010.pdf
Which references this:
I have taken the low number. A more complete discussion is here:
"Are boat arrivals ‘genuine refugees’?
Asylum seekers who arrive by boat are subject to the same assessment criteria as all other asylum applicants. Past figures show that between 70 and 97 per cent of asylum seekers arriving by boat at different times have been found to be refugees and granted protection either in Australia or in another country. For example:
according to the Refugee Council of Australia, in 1998–99, approximately 97 per cent of Iraqi and 92 per cent of Afghan applicants (the majority of whom would have arrived by boat) were granted refugee status and given permanent protection visas
under the ‘Pacific Solution’ a total of 1637 unauthorised arrivals were detained in the Nauru and Manus facilities between September 2001 and February 2008. Of those, 1153 (70 per cent) were found to be refugees and ultimately resettled to Australia or other countries
since the Rudd Government came to power approximately 90–95 per cent of assessments completed on Christmas Island have resulted in protection visas being granted. For example, of the 1254 claims assessed on Christmas Island between 1 July 2009 and 31 January 2010, only 110 people were assessed as not being refugees. These figures suggest that 1144 (approximately 91 per cent) of those claims were successful.
In contrast, asylum claims from people who enter Australia by air on a valid visa and subsequently apply for asylum have not had such high success rates and the majority are not found to be refugees. This is demonstrated by the much lower onshore refugee recognition rates overall (air and boat arrivals combined) of around 20 or 30 per cent annually—the overall onshore refugee recognition rate for 2008 was 21.7 percent
In other words, past figures show that more asylum seekers who arrived by boat have been recognised as refugees than those who entered Australia by air."
The details are in the panel, although I plan to update this part with plenty more to back up this. The research on this issue is not hard to find and is very distressing.
I’m not a fan of people smugglers. I have had suggestions to reword this bit, and will consider this. But the rhetoric being thrown their way is laughable. There are many worse out there than those “smuggling” people: Gun runners, sex traffickers, drug smugglers – need I go on? I’m sure many of them are shonky, but they essentially provide a service to desperate people. More on this in the future.
There’s plenty more that could be said here too. I’ll say this much: Offshore processing is a disgrace. In terms of Nauru it essentially is selling our obligations to another country. Every aspect of processing is more difficult and it cuts down the resources available to refugees. It is hugely costly. Find me an upside.
8.1Again, watch: http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s2724620.htm