Abbott in Government

[drsmithy]

That's utter tripe.

No, it's reality.

Things like the dole and especially rent assistance, have been decreasing in real terms for decades. The pension has mostly kept up, but that's because it needs to so the benefit to baby boomers can be maximised.

Meanwhile, handouts to people earning decent to high wages (homebuyers grants, baby bonuses, family tax benefits, paid parental leave), to say nothing of tax rorts like negative gearing and the halving of CGT and taxes on superannuation, have become steadily more generous.

Suggest any of those things be taken away - PHI rebate, car leasing, etc - and the screaming from the entitled well-off and wealthy can be heard all over the country.

I know the usual suspects like to present this fantasy that "dole bludgers" are somehow living large on the public's dime, but that actual facts of the matter show nothing of the sort.

Anyone who thinks otherwise should try living on the equivalent of the dole for a month or two. I bet most of the people posting here spend more than it amounts to just on booze and pre-prepared food.

I think you describe them as asylum seekers.

No, I describe asylum seekers as asylum seekers. If they're not refugees then they get fed into the regular immigration system.

Given the demonisation of refugees by both sides of politics, to say either has an "open arms" policy towards them is just comical.

 

[JohnK]

No, I describe asylum seekers as asylum seekers. If they're not refugees then they get fed into the regular immigration system.

Given the demonisation of refugees by both sides of politics, to say either has an "open arms" policy towards them is just comical.

Both sides have failed.

Just out of interest what is the actual percentage of "genuine" asylum seekers that try to sneak in by boat?

 

[Pukka]

Both sides have failed.

Just out of interest what is the actual percentage of "genuine" asylum seekers that try to sneak in by boat?

0% because the ones that arrive by boat are " illegal arrivals"

 

[drsmithy]

Both sides have failed.

Just out of interest what is the actual percentage of "genuine" asylum seekers that try to sneak in by boat?

"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." (Page 8)

 

[whatmeworry]

Why doesn't Australia just pull out of the refugee convention?

 

[drsmithy]

0% because the ones that arrive by boat are " illegal arrivals"

"There is no offence under Australian law that criminalises the act of arriving in Australia or the seeking of asylum without a valid visa." (Page 3)

 

[Pukka]

"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." (Page 8)

Is this current? As it seems to be at variance with what the reverend TA is preaching at the moment

 

[drsmithy]

Is this current? As it seems to be at variance with what the reverend TA is preaching at the moment

Since reality is usually "at variance with what the reverend TA is preaching at the moment", you'd have to err on the side of "yes, it's current".

 

[Pukka]

Since reality is usually "at variance with what the reverend TA is preaching at the moment", you'd have to err on the side of "yes, it's current".

Lol good to know something else for his to do list then

 

[drron]

Of course if you hand pick those that will adjudicate you can get any result you want-
Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian

 

[serfty]

I know this is a waste of time but here goes:

"There is no offence under Australian law that criminalises the act of arriving in Australia or the seeking of asylum without a valid visa." (Page 3)

Scott Morrison correct on 'illegal entry' of people without a visa - Fact Check - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

The verdict

Mr Morrison is correct.


Based on the definition set out in the people smuggling protocol, people who have come to Australia without a valid visa have illegally entered the country.
That is the case even though these people have not committed any crime, nor broken any Australian or international law.

 

[drsmithy]

I know this is a waste of time but here goes:Scott Morrison correct on 'illegal entry' of people without a visa - Fact Check - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

"Entry into Australia is governed by the Commonwealth Migration Act 1958."


"People entering Australia without a visa are not referred to as "illegal" in the Act."


"Irrespective of these sections, it is not a criminal offence under the Act to arrive in Australia without a visa."


"The description of foreigners previously as illegal and currently as unlawful in the Migration Act does not mean they have broken the law."


"Mr Morrison correctly states that Article 31 includes the term "illegal entry".


It is used in the context of stating that parties to the convention cannot penalise refugees as a result of their "illegal entry or presence" as long as they present to authorities "without delay" and "show good cause for their illegal entry or presence"."


"Experts contacted by ABC Fact Check say it is not appropriate to use "illegal" when specifically describing asylum seekers or refugees.


Professor Jane McAdam, director of the International Refugee and Migration Law Project at the University of New South Wales, says that "asylum seekers are not illegal under international law"."


"Mr Morrison can rely upon the definition of "illegal entry" in the people smuggling protocol, which Australia signed and ratified, so long as he makes it clear that he is doing so.


However, experts warn that the use of the terms "illegal" and "unlawful" in this context is potentially misleading, as they are words usually applied to criminal acts."


"However, on a practical level, he says that "illegal implies that a criminal offence has been committed, which asylum seekers have not, and for that reason it is preferable to use different vocabulary"."


In summary: the term "illegal immigrant" is an emotive and inappropriate term used to stir up racist hicks into a "they took er jerbs" furor (as a misdirection away from the real "economic migrants" who actually are taking their jobs, not to mention helping drive up house prices, and who both Labor and Liberals let in by the truckload). Asylum seekers have committed no criminal offense. They cannot be charged with any crime for having arrived in the country without a visa. They have a right, under Australian law, to cross our border and claim asylum, regardless of whether they arrive by plane, boat, teleporter, or something else.

In 25 words or less, and basic language, so hopefully anyone can understand: You can't be charged with anything for arriving without a visa and claiming asylum. Therefore, it's not "illegal" in any meaningful sense of the word.

 

[JohnK]

Why doesn't Australia just pull out of the refugee convention?

Because the dogooders will call Australia racist!

At the same time saying nothing about Japan, China, India etc.

 

[jetlagger]

Because the dogooders will call Australia racist!

At the same time saying nothing about Japan, China, India etc.

Absolutely.. Perhaps the dogooders can house some of these apparent 'poor & persecuted" individuals in their homes/backyards etc.
First & foremost I wouldn't consider them (gatecrashers) as true refugees.
Australia is just a soft touch.

I am far from ever been/being racist.

 

[Moody]

Because the dogooders will call Australia racist!

At the same time saying nothing about Japan, China, India etc.

Not racist .... just uncaring.

Anyone from any country can arrive in Australia by any means and claim asylum under the refugee convention that we signed up to. To that extent we are one of the global "good guys", and with the advantages and lifestyle we enjoy here we bloody well should be. Of course anyone claiming asylum has to prove that they are subject to persecution in their country of origin, and there are many grey areas when it comes to assessment.

It also makes a fantastic political football for the spin-doctors with low morals to manipulate the opinions of voters with low intelligence.

 

[Moody]

Absolutely.. Perhaps the dogooders can house some of these apparent 'poor & persecuted" individuals in their homes/backyards etc..

What .... like the Aborigines did????

First & foremost I wouldn't consider them (gatecrashers) as true refugees.
Australia is just a soft touch.

Statistics tell us that "illegals" are far more likely to arrive by air than boat. Or are they the "right sort" of "illegals"?

I am far from ever been/being racist.

Free tip :- never ever finish or start with the statement "I'm not a racialist, but .....". It always backfires!

 

[jetlagger]

What .... like the Aborigines did????



Statistics tell us that "illegals" are far more likely to arrive by air than boat. Or are they the "right sort" of "illegals"?





Free tip :- never ever finish or start with the statement "I'm not a racialist, but .....". It always backfires!

Sure.. Thanks for the response.. Agree to disagree.
I'll stick to issues I probably know more about.. & leave the political editorials to yourself.

 

[medhead]

No, it's reality.

Things like the dole and especially rent assistance, have been decreasing in real terms for decades. The pension has mostly kept up, but that's because it needs to so the benefit to baby boomers can be maximised.

Meanwhile, handouts to people earning decent to high wages (homebuyers grants, baby bonuses, family tax benefits, paid parental leave), to say nothing of tax rorts like negative gearing and the halving of CGT and taxes on superannuation, have become steadily more generous.

Suggest any of those things be taken away - PHI rebate, car leasing, etc - and the screaming from the entitled well-off and wealthy can be heard all over the country.

Indeed. The screaming was heard loudly around here as well. We can safely say the last election result was more about self entitlement than the ETS.

I know this is a waste of time but here goes:Scott Morrison correct on 'illegal entry' of people without a visa - Fact Check - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Only a waste of time because it's fundamental wrong. Illegal entry does not make a person illegal. Morrison is demonising people, when the majority are LEGAL refugees.

Then there remains this BS focus on boats. Australia's population is predicted to increase by 2.3 million in the next 5 years. 60% by immigration. 1.5 million people are NOT arriving by boat in the next 5 years. Refugees are a small drop in the ocean of immigration to Australia. The xenophobic nutbags a need to get some prespective of reality.

 

[Pukka]

Indeed. The screaming was heard loudly around here as well. We can safely say the last election result was more about self entitlement than the ETS.


Probably true so judging by the result it would be a very brave government / opposition to make / threaten to make cuts in those areas it would be very unpopular with the voters

 

[JohnK]

First & foremost I wouldn't consider them (gatecrashers) as true refugees.
Australia is just a soft touch.

Here is why I don't think the overwhelming majority of arrivals are "genuine" asylum seekers.

Many of them pass through 6-7 safe havens on their way to Australia yet if they are rejected they choose to go back to the country that is supposedly persecuting them. Tells you something about their agenda.