Asylum seeker handouts scrapped: Australian taxpayers to save $25 million a Year

[nero_bolt]

Long over due and the only people that will be crying is the lawyers that were bleeding the system  and the bleeding heart lefties..

Why should our tax  money pay for illegals with no papers to rort the system 

Well done Scott Morrision

TAXPAYERS will save $25 million a year after the Abbott government today scraps free immigration assistance to ­asylum seekers.

Immigration Minister Scott Morrison last night said Australia’s protection obligations did not extend to providing free immigration help to those who arrived in Australia ­illegally.

He said, as promised before the election, that from today, people who arrived illegally by boat or air would no longer be helped through the Immigration Advice and Application Assistance Scheme.

But he said the withdrawal of the taxpayer help would not prevent people receiving legal assistance, saying those who wished to provide immigration advice and application assistance pro bono were free to do so.

The government continues to roll out its Operation ­Sovereign Borders suite of policies after notching at the weekend 100 days without a successful people smuggling venture making it to Australia. The government expects the withdrawal of the free assistance will save the budget $100 million over four years

If people choose to violate how Australia chooses to run our refugee and humanitarian program, they should not presume upon the support and assistance that is provided to those who seek to come the right way, and they should certainly not receive additional assistance, as they did under the previous government,’’ Mr Morrison said.

‘‘Services that have commenced will be ­completed, but the IAAAS will not continue for any additional part of the process that would incur an additional fee

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/asylum-seeker-handouts-scrapped-australian-taxpayers-to-save-25...

[freakiness]

---

@diamond-halo wrote:

How fortunate it is then, that those asylum seekers who choose to enable people smugglers have other options then, eh?

---

You can't be serious, surely.

[debra9275]

The thread was about asylum seekers, ( those in detention) & legal aid being cut, not sure how it turned into legal aid for people smugglers lol

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@debra9275 wrote:
The thread was about asylum seekers, ( those in detention) & legal aid being cut, not sure how it turned into legal aid for people smugglers lol

---

It was about those asylum seekers who arrived here illegally by boat or plane. It is not about all those who seek asylum.

Those that arrive here by boat, generally do so by enabling the trade of people smuggling to perpetuate. I don't know enough about how those who arrive by plane do so, so feel unqualified to comment on that aspect.

The government, in my opinion has no right to stop individuals from choosing to represent those requiring legal assistance, but it does have a right to determine if they (the government) will pay for it.

As the government has made it clear that we will no longer enable people smugglers, they need to make the prospect of people who may engage them, less desireable. If arriving here by engaging people smugglers is made to be undesireable, hopefully, this practise will stop.

To my knowledge, most, if not all of the boats operated by people smugglers originate from Indonesia. This means that at some point, the people who get on those boats, must pass through Indonesia.

There are many camps for people to seek refuge and asylum in Indonesia. Thousands of other people, whose lives have no less value than any other person, wait in these camps for their turn to be processed. Fortunately, the numbers at these camps are now starting to decrease as some are processed and resettled, but even better, as Peace in Burma seems more certain and sustainable, and aid is being given to reestablish communities and assist with the resettlement, some of these people are starting to return to their true homes.

The purpose of asylum is to seek safety. Not a lifestyle. To choose a lifestyle, you need to immigrate.

Why, should those with contempt for our laws be given priority over those who respect our laws and arrive here by accepted methods? Why, is the life of a person who can pay for passage to Australia, valued more highly than the life of someone who either doesn't/can't pay, or chooses not to do so with respect for our country's stance?

Over 400 kids over there who have sponsors waiting for them, (so not even reliant on Government resources) are waiting to come to Australia to learn skills to take back to their countries to contribute to their current communities or to rebuild their communities when it is safe for them to return "home". Why are their lives valued less (by some) than others? Why should they have to wait longer, put their lives on hold for longer, because some people believe they don't have to wait to be processed?

Personally, if the monies saved by cutting this assistance is only $25 million per year, then I believe this to be petty, however when one considers the overarching effect of removing even more power from the people smugglers, by making that option less desireable, then the value is far greater than anything preceded by a dollar sign.

[acacia_pycnantha]

The purpose of asylum is to seek safety. Not a lifestyle. To choose a lifestyle, you need to immigrate.

Sure we have a good life here relative to that experienced in some parts of the world and I can undesratnd why people would actually rsik their lives to get here and to live here.

Between the lines of "let none of them in" and "let them all in" there must be some sort of  line to be drawn, albeit in sands which drift according to the prevailing sentiment of the times.

[i-need-a-martini]

As this thread apears to have turned into a thread about justifying expense on asylum seekers because Aussies don't get the same expense, I thought it timely to remind everyone that the IAAA scheme (that Morrison has cut) does not provide free lawyers or Legal Aid. The department is there to provide legal advice and general assistance for basic things like filling out forms, translating, referrals to legal aid.

Once a lawyer is engaged (either through legal Aid or otherwise) then they (and their costs and the court costs) need to be paid. This is usually done through charity groups or probono by Refugee Advocacy groups as I mentioned early on in this thread. Tax payers have never footed this bill. In the same way that tax payers don't pay for resettlement or care once these people leave the camps. 

[izabsmiling]

tax payers do fund charities though don't they Martini

the same way the tax dollars we all contribute are supposed to be used where and on whom they need to be used on.

The message I'm getting from a lot of places is that our tax dollars shouldn't be used the way they are intended.

and that big business is needy and entitled to tax cuts ...less money into the Charity service our Government is supposed to and obligated to supply with our money .

I suppose big business has a tax offset if they donate to charity.

The rest of us may not be able to offord to donate if things keep going as they look like going

[i-need-a-martini]

Sure Iza.

But when I donate to the various charities I EXPECT them to use my funds to help people like asylum seekers.

[izabsmiling]

me too. I also expect my Government to know and honor it's job and responsibilities and the appropriate use of our tax donations.

Not put shame on it being used as it is supposed to be used  and seemingly promote the agenda of ;

CCC Alliance is a group of successful families and individuals that collaborate regularly on wealth management and family office matters.

By Families, For FamiliesSM

Founded in 1994 by two family offices, CCC Alliance has grown into a diverse group of individuals ranging from innovators of the new economy to families of industrial pioneers. Designed initially as a private forum for families to share best practices and combine their buying power, CCC Alliance has developed into a dynamic peer network, collaborative purchasing organization, and source of insight and opportunities.

Because we are built "by families, for families" we understand the importance of a comfortable, confidential and solicitation-free environment. CCC Alliance does not have corporate memberships for brokers, consultants or financial advisors. We serve the interests of member families only.

 http://www.cccalliance.com/

http://www.cccalliance.com/

http://wgfa.wharton.upenn.edu/default.aspx

Global Family Alliance 

and such

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@acacia_pycnantha wrote:

The purpose of asylum is to seek safety. Not a lifestyle. To choose a lifestyle, you need to immigrate.

Sure we have a good life here relative to that experienced in some parts of the world and I can undesratnd why people would actually rsik their lives to get here and to live here.

Between the lines of "let none of them in" and "let them all in" there must be some sort of  line to be drawn, albeit in sands which drift according to the prevailing sentiment of the times.

---

I was under the impression that there was a "line".

Don't we have a "set number" of people we can/will process/accept a year?

[*crikey*mate*]

Martini, according to the newspaper article, the translation/form services etc are not being cut.

There was a quote in it somewhere back there.

I think the plan is premature, but if no new people are arriving who are affected by this, then once the current ones are processed, there shouldn't be anymore going to the offshore detention or in need of the services anyway.

BTW, I bought up the aussie equivilent as it was claimed the practise was inhumane. I was pointing out that many people don't have access to free legals,

and for the 40% (your statistics) who don't gert access to pro bono - where does that money come from?

and there is more to legal costs than a lawyers fees