Boat people - a "passing irritant" apparently

[i-need-a-martini]

Pre election Abbott considered this his number on priority. Day after day, the Labor government was pummelled on all sides about the issue. Those seeking asylum were demonised and the Australian people were made to feel unsafe in their own country because of  "illegals" that had to be stopped. Abbott had not just one but 3 different 'policies' in place to deal with the catastrophe that was occuring in this country.

But now that he is in charge, the issue is only a "passing irritant".

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/tony-abbott-says-boats-issue-with-indonesia-a-...

[**meep**]

---

@poddster wrote:

Do you think it is lawful to enter a country without passport, visa or any form of identification?

---

No, it is not.  It is illegal.

Article 31 - Refugees unlawfully in the country of refuge

1. The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of article 1, enter or are present in their territory without authorization, provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence.

[izabsmiling]

 conflicting views are evident 

[poddster]

I did not mention asylum in any shape or form.

Perhaps if you actually read and understood what was said and commented on that instead of confusing what was written with a different issue there would be more understanding. 

[izabsmiling]

---

@poddster wrote:

I did not mention asylum in any shape or form.

Perhaps if you actually read and understood what was said and commented on that instead of confusing what was written with a different issue there would be more understanding. 

---

did you post on the wrong thread ? We are,after all discussing asylum seekers in this one.

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@**meep** wrote:

---

@i-need-a-martini wrote:

---

@bsal6160 wrote:

You need to get your head around the difference between an illegal immigrant and a genuine refugee before making assumptions.

---

You need to get your head around the fact that it isn't illegal to enter a country by any means and claim refugee status. They only become illegal if their refugee application is refused. Which is almost never.

---

If it is not illegal to enter a country without authorisation, why are the asylum seekers kept in detention centres? 

would it be because they are considerd as illegal entrants until their claim for refugee status is approved?

---

so that we can validate their claims and need for assylum.

[**meep**]

But if it is not illegal to enter a country without authorisation, why the need to be detained?

[poddster]

Confusion reigns 😞

In fact the topic unlawful entry.

[cherry*135]

Who cares if the Indonesians get a bit miffed?

Would you like a country that is situated very close to Australia, with a populaton of  246.9 million, to become an enemy of Australia?

I wouldn't.

[izabsmiling]

---

i-need-a-martini wrote:

Pre election Abbott considered this his number on priority. Day after day, the Labor government was pummelled on all sides about the issue. Those seeking asylum were demonised and the Australian people were made to feel unsafe in their own country because of  "illegals" that had to be stopped. Abbott had not just one but 3 different 'policies' in place to deal with the catastrophe that was occuring in this country.

But now that he is in charge, the issue is only a "passing irritant".

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/tony-abbott-says-boats-issue-with-indonesia-a-...

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Poddster, I am sorry for the confusion .I will quote the opening post for you to read 

[lakeland27]

i would say 'confusion reigns' because 2 different attorneys general might interpret the immgr act differently . depends on the amount of pressure brought to bear.