Qantas to operate evacuation flights from Lebanon via Cyprus to Sydney

[Lynda2475]

Or, if you qualify for an Australian pension, one can live quite comfortably in many parts of the world. Some may not even call Australia "home".

So if this is the case why not ask their home government for help instead of exploiting the Aus government to whom they do not pay any taxes? Take take and no give. Selfish.

Personally I do not think you should be eligible for a pension if living overseas. I know many hard working Australians who pay tax their whole life and get no government handouts, why are we supporting people who don't even live here or contribute in anyway to Australian society? Its a rort that should be closed.

 

[DejaBrew]

We can debate the relative merits of ignoring travel advisories issued by the Department of Home Affairs until the cows come home, but last I checked, ignoring such advice - whilst highly ill-advised - is not a criminal offence. I believe it's also the right of Australian Citizens to request consular assistance whilst overseas. So like it or not, the Government of the day cannot simply ignore a situation where its Citizens are imperilled.

FWIW, I firmly believe that anyone in that area should have been trying to get out and to safety long before this. However, I also firmly believe that we cannot simply turn a blind eye to Australian Citizens who are in need of assistance. And if you want to be completely cynical about it, not providing any sort of evacuation options would likely be political suicide for a sitting Government from either side of politics.

 

[Lynda2475]

I do not believe the Aus Government should be obliged to help anyone who willfully ignores travel warnings. We have to stop rewarding stupidity.

Ask the average Aussie punter and i bet they would prefer tax payer dollars be spent on health care, education or public transport over rescuing people who willfully put themselves in need of rescue.

 

[kangarooflyer88]

What’s happening in Cyprus? I thought the war between the Greeks and Turks were settled a while ago!

 

[p--and--t]

What’s happening in Cyprus? I thought the war between the Greeks and Turks were settled a while ago!

Staging point for cooperating nations evacuating their citizens.

 

[kangarooflyer88]

I do not believe the Aus Government should be obliged to help anyone who willfully ignores travel warnings. We have to stop rewarding stupidity.

Ask the average Aussie punter and i bet they would prefer tax payer dollars be spent on health care, education or public transport over rescuing people who willfully put themselves in need of rescue.

Like it or not Australia has both an ethical and a legal obligation to assist citizens stranded overseas. Now certainly an argument can be made that it is foolish to travel to a country that is in active conflict, but then the question is where do you draw the line? What about an Australian who travels to China to attend a conference only for them to be detained on national security grounds the same way the two Michaels were detained not too long ago? What about Australians who travel abroad and get their passport stolen or worse cannot return to Australia because their passport is expired or damaged? Fact of the matter is Australia is a tiny, remote nation in the grand scheme of things, Australians can and do deserve to explore the world.

There are a lot of ex-pats around the world, I consider myself quite fortunate as a Canadian to count myself amongst the diaspora here in Australia. People live in other countries for better work, education or other opportunities. Just because we may not live in the country we were born or hold citizenship does not mean we are any less a citizen of the country.

 

[p--and--t]

...I go off Qantas a little bit more by the day.

Weirdest comment I've read in a long time

 

[Lynda2475]

Like it or not Australia has both an ethical and a legal obligation to assist citizens stranded overseas.

There are many instances where the government has not actively assisted Australians overseas one only needs to look at the Covid era.

Australia's constitution does not have a bill of rights, and there is no specific law that requires the government to bring you home at tax payer expense if stranded abroad. If they do so it is out of good will, and this should not be relied upon.

Your other examples are OT but I will say losing a passport is a completely different situation. Whilst an oversea consulate (or partner consulate where Australia doesn't have one) will assist you with paperwork allowing you to return home (and noting an Australian Citizen can enter Australia without their passport in certain circumstances) the Government doesn't pay or fly them home. The traveler pays fees for their replacement passport.

WRT to being arrested oversea the government will provide information re local legal representation the Aus Government doesnt provide you with legal counsel free of charge or extract you. They may in some cases negotiate via political channels.

 

[kangarooflyer88]

There are many instances where the government has not actively assisted Australians overseas one only needs to look at the Covid era.

I believe they did organize "recovery" flights during that period with Qantas operating flights are far away as Argentina from what I recall, and I believe the government did subsidize some or all of the travel costs associated there. At the same time, Australian law compels all governments to bring its citizens home under the 1957 and 1961 UN Treaty on Reducing Statelessness. If someone is a citizen of a country, they cannot be left in "limbo" in a country where they aren't wanted. For instance, suppose an Aussie overstayed their visa in the U.S. and did not have the means to go home, how would that work? Certainly the government has to cover the costs associated with repatriation.

Australia's constitution does not have a bill of rights, and there is no specific law that requires the government to bring you home at tax payer expense if stranded abroad. If they do so it is out of good will, and this should not be relied upon.

Immigration rules certainly do. If you are a citizen of a country and no longer have the right to stay in that country you can be deported at the government's cost.

Getting back to the topic on hand, what I cannot understand is why governments are staging all these flights from Cyprus. I mean if they can make their way from Cyprus why can't they continue onward travel to somewhere else in the world? For instance, I think you can fly from Cyprus to Australia using existing routes, here's are some itinerary I found to Sydney from Cyprus:


Could someone explain what I am missing here?

If anything, I would argue that to the extent that governments should be providing consular assistance, it should simply be to the extent of leaving the war zone. Once you are in a safe third country, you're on your own.

-RooFlyer88

 

[justinbrett]

They're likely not configured for passengers.

Believe it or not the KC-30As are used for pax all the time, probably more than they are used for aerial refuelling. In any case the seats remain, the refuelling bladders are in the cargo hold and the aircraft cabin has a full kit out of seats, minus IFE to reduce weight.

Those A330s are definitely NOT suitable for general public use - cause the seats and everything have been stripped to make room as offices for the PM... yes they were former QF jets but those configs would have been stripped during the conversion phase

First 10 minutes of the Channel 7 spotlight documentary in 2022 shows what it looks like

Absolutely incorrect. They have J and Y seating just like any passenger airline. You really wouldn’t notice a difference.

 

[Lynda2475]

I believe they did organize "recovery" flights during that period with Qantas operating flights are far away as Argentina from what I recall, and I believe the government did subsidize some or all of the travel costs associated there.

Yes hey provided some repatriation flights BUT most people had to find and fund their own way home commercially within very restricted options. They certainly didnt guarantee to bring everyone home.

And its great they did this BUT its different because Covid and the subsequent lockdowns were unexpected and first for the jet age.

At the same time, Australian law compels all governments to bring its citizens home under the 1957 and 1961 UN Treaty on Reducing Statelessness.

That is not an Australian law. Some Aussies unsuccessfully tried to use this treaty in a law suit in Covid and failed.

Most notably because being stranded overseas doesn't make you stateless, the government never denied they were Australian but did in many cases restrict their ability to return home via limiting flights and quarantine places.

If someone is a citizen of a country, they cannot be left in "limbo" in a country where they aren't wanted.

But that is not the case here, these are not tourists or government employees unexpectedly stranded, they are dual Lebanese/Aussie citizens, who usually reside in Lebanon. Their Lebanese government isnt asking them to leave. They didnt heed Aus government advice to leave over the last year, but now they feel unsafe they suddenly feel more Aussie and want a free ride home.

For instance, suppose an Aussie overstayed their visa in the U.S. and did not have the means to go home, how would that work? Certainly the government has to cover the costs associated with repatriation.

Usually if deported due to overstaying you visa/visa waiver you are put on a commercial flight and that airline bills you. The government doesnt put on a special flight to bring you home or buy you a free ticket.

I know someone detained at LAX for overstaying their visa, they were held and put on the next flight which had capacity back to Australia FYI it was an AA flight and they were pursued for the costs by AA, it certainly wasn't a freebie.

The government will pay in cases like a prisoner swap or unexpected natural disaster or coup. But even blind freddy saw this war coming.

If anything, I would argue that to the extent that governments should be providing consular assistance, it should simply be to the extent of leaving the war zone. Once you are in a safe third country, you're on your own.

I actually agree with you on this.

 

[QF_Flyer]

I do not believe the Aus Government should be obliged to help anyone who willfully ignores travel warnings. We have to stop rewarding stupidity.

Ask the average Aussie punter and i bet they would prefer tax payer dollars be spent on health care, education or public transport over rescuing people who willfully put themselves in need of rescue.

Remember how everyone was complaining in 2020/2021 that people couldn't come home? That was the Government too, they controlled the border and capped incoming commercial pax. It's a lose-lose, I agree there should be some self-responsibility, but whatever happens it's going to p155 off someone

 

[kangarooflyer88]

That is not an Australian law. Some Aussies unsuccessfully tried to use this treaty in a law suit in Covid and failed.

International treaties which Australia has ratified are as a matter of law, Australian law, that is how they become ratified. Every single international treaty Australia has ratified has a corresponding bill that has enabled the legislation to take force as a matter of Australia law (called enabling legislation).

But that is not the case here, these are not tourists or government employees unexpectedly stranded, they are dual Lebanese/Aussie citizens, who usually reside in Lebanon. Their Lebanese government isnt asking them to leave. They didnt heed Aus government advice to leave over the last year, but now they feel unsafe they suddenly feel more Aussie and want a free ride home.

Certainly an argument can be made about citizenship and how people gain citizenship in a country like Australia (or Canada for that matter). Perhaps these countries make it far too easy for someone to gain, and we need to tighten the rules here.

Bringing us back again on the topic of Cyprus, which is where this Qantas will bring "stranded" Aussies back home, what I cannot understand is why Cyprus? Like whoever came up with this idea, have they actually look at the departures board for Beirut Airport? I can't seem to find any non-stop flights between Beirut and Larnaca. And if you have to transit in Amman or Dubai to make your way to Cyprus, then why not continue on to Australia? If anything, I could see an argument that maybe Qantas should operate some A380s to its usual European routes to bolster capacity between Europe (where everyone is presumably now awaiting transfer) and Australia.

-RooFlyer88

 

[Lynda2475]

International treaties which Australia has ratified are as a matter of law, Australian law, that is how they become ratified. Every single international treaty Australia has ratified has a corresponding bill that has enabled the legislation to take force as a matter of Australia law (called enabling legislation).

While Australia has agreed to be bound by many major international human rights treaties, they do not form part of Australia’s domestic law unless the treaties have been specifically incorporated into Australian law through legislation.

Anyway refusing to facilitate/pay for repatriation travel does not render someone stateless - it has no bearing on their citizenship whatsoever. If a citizen (dual/multi or singular) makes their own way here they will admitted into Australia.

Opening up a loophole to freely repatriate any Aussie overseas who cant afford the fare home would be an unmitigated disaster.

Certainly an argument can be made about citizenship and how people gain citizenship in a country like Australia (or Canada for that matter). Perhaps these countries make it far too easy for someone to gain, and we need to tighten the rules here.

Simpler to restrict repatriation assistance to those who are actually both Citizens and residents, not non-resident citizens.

Bringing us back again on the topic of Cyprus, which is where this Qantas will bring "stranded" Aussies back home, what I cannot understand is why Cyprus?

Probably because a ferry between the two is in normal circumstances the cheapest way to travel.

 

[DejaBrew]

Bringing us back again on the topic of Cyprus, which is where this Qantas will bring "stranded" Aussies back home, what I cannot understand is why Cyprus? Like whoever came up with this idea, have they actually look at the departures board for Beirut Airport?

Given the island is the closest European Union member state to Lebanon, about 40 minutes by air, and 10 hours away by boat, it’s all about contingency planning for a whole bunch of countries, Australia included.

There is precedent for using Cyprus for evacuating foreign citizens from Lebanon, with some 60,000 people being evacuated through Cyprus in 2006 (including some 500 Australians, who were ultimately evacuated via boat after 2 failed air evacuation attempts). There are reports suggesting Canada will co-operate with Australia in evacuating nationals by sea, with the plan involving the contracting of a commercial vessel to ferry out 1,000 people a day. The US is trying to secure more commercial flights out of Beirut as well. Granted this is predominantly for their own citizens, but the point is that there are likely more options ex-Beirut airport than might otherwise show on the scheduled commercial timetables.

 

[jase05]

I can't seem to find any non-stop flights between Beirut and Larnaca

ME have two daily’s in the evening currently

 

[Sprucegoose]

contracting of a commercial vessel to ferry out 1,000 people a day

like Dunkirk - that will be exciting

 

[Sprucegoose]

legal obligation to assist citizens stranded overseas.

There is no explicit obligation for the Australian Gov to assist its citizens for whatever reason they require assistance overseas. The matters are deliberately grey, given you can't countenance all of the circumstances that may give rise to providing assistance.

Let's be totally cynical for a moment and agree that a bureaucrat's chief MO is to avoid any responsibility whatsoever. These circumstances suit the position crafted.
There are just some folk the government will want to avoid any exposure with.

argument can be made that it is foolish to travel to a country that is in active conflict, but then the question is where do you draw the line?

It seems that there will be an element that ignores all advice and warnings, then demonstrates a sense of entitlement and demands repatriation. Taxpayers' money should not be wasted on reckless people as you wouldn't waste yours. These matters politically still need to pass the public test, and the government will be very conscious of the local dialogue on these matters domestically, which assists in crafting its response.

WRT to being arrested oversea the government will provide information re local legal representation the Aus Government doesnt provide you with legal counsel free of charge or extract you. They may in some cases negotiate via political channels.

It may well come down to the DFAT official on the ground and a review of the sympathetic circumstances. I have known them to extend loans to facilitate services and repatriation, but I am unaware of any formal guidelines being whipped out and quoted.

You mentioned the Morrison government during COVID decided not to assist stranded Australians beyond what they did with arranged charter flights and so on. That is a good example of the government utilising its discretion in these matters. That did not pass the pub test, and that government subsequently lost office. So that's the whole process, in democratic motion. On the flip side, we saw the former PM Rudd, who rode back home with Assange on a charter flight paid for by the government, which needs to be repaid by Assange or other people. .

 

[odysseus]

Free of charge for those who, with any sense, would have already left...

...I go off Qantas a little bit more by the day.

They're just the company getting paid by the Aust government to do this.

Not sure what reason they would have to refuse the job?

 

[RooFlyer]

but then the question is where do you draw the line?

I'd say when the said citizen has so imperilled themselves as to make repatriation dangerous or impossible, especially so when they have ignored urgent imperatives to leave beforehand.

If someone waits until there is a real 'hot war' in Lebanon, no government should be obliged to risk people or assets in getting them out between rockets and gunfire in the streets.