a few thoughts on things..
Identifying problems is easy. Proposing and implementing effective solutions, not so much. Kudos for a good presentation of at least this aspect of the issue.Follow this up with a workable proposal and you might be getting somewhere.
What you're ignoring is that under current law, anyone who arrives by boat and is accepted into the country under refugee status gets their entire family into the country as well, despite their not being on the boat. This is where the whole idea of "Queue-Jumping" comes in. This came when Howard's Temporary Protection Visas legislation was overturned by the current government, and helps to account for the large discrepancy in the number of boat v air arrivals, and allows the politicians, whether rightly or not, to get away with arguing that a much larger refugee intake is a direct result of those who arrive by boat. I'm not saying I agree with either policy, but it's incredibly single minded to ignore the changes in law when arguing about the relevance of boat people numbers in this election campaign.
A good, clear presentation.@Amy, could you please point me to a source/reference for your claim. I'm keen to read more about this.
@intuitivereason: criticising, is the easy part.i would have to argue that identifying problems SHOULD be the easy part, but isn't. whether it's media, political spin or plain ignorance, many factors cloud the issue, often making the problem appear as something else entirely. that's what this piece has tried to do - clear the crap out and present it as it is. u have to give credit where it's due!whoever could set up a workable proposal should be running for parliament.
@amy: ANYONE who is granted a permanent humanitarian visa, not just those who arrive on boats, is allowed the opportunity to have immediate family members resettled.@jez: http://www.immi.gov.au/visas/humanitarian/offshore/immediate-family.htm
The argument about family members resettled is spurious. Those in refugee camps or where there is access to the UNHCR are always considered in family groups and often include extended family particularly where you may have orphaned children. Those who arrive in boats are often single and then apply for their family to join them. This is because the family have pooled whatever resources they have to send the person most likely to survive such an ardous journey (i.e younger men) and who can, IF granted refugee status, then apply for their family to join them. IF they had come from a place where the UNHCR had a facility they would have applied as a family group. The end result is exactly the same. The issue is whether we treat this extremely small number of people who make such a perilous journey with respect and decency or whether as a nation we vilify and abuse them. I know which I prefer.
Unfortunately, no matter how clearly you dismiss the myths of the right-wing nut bags (BTW, I think Gillard and Abbott are just being politicians, not nut bags), they will continue to perpetuate them.....A typical case is the label "Illegal Immigrant". An Asylum Seeker only becomes an illegal immigrant IF they are found to have no case for Refugee status. Under the current regime, the Government knows where they are and can put them back on a plane back home (or somewhere) as soon as this is determined. However, based on your figures, means less than 15% of all Asylum seeking arrivals get sent away; "over 85% are found to be refugees".Thanks for your efforts
My workable proposal: process onshore in the community. Problem solved yet?The ratios for refugees : population seem to be just 1:1, not 1:1000.