Coalition to Deny Asylum Seekers Government Help to Navigate Migration Process

A Coalition government will harshen its stance against asylum seekers even further, denying those who arrive by boat the right to free government advice and help with lodging appeals.

                           

The Coalition's scrapping of taxpayer-funded assistance for asylum seekers, to be announced on Saturday by opposition immigration spokesman Scott Morrison, will save the budget about $100 million over the next four years.

 

Even under the harsh border protection policies of former prime minister John Howard, such protections existed for asylum seekers, but Mr Morrison said they had gotten ''out of hand'' with the ''deluge of boats'' under Labor.

       

An Abbott government would not prevent refugee advocates from giving free legal advice to asylum seekers, but taxpayers would no longer be paying for it, Mr Morrison said.

       

''This level of support is not provided to those who currently legally arrive in Australia,'' Mr Morrison said. ''They have to pay for it themselves.''

 

Click Here To Read Whole Article

 

Oooh Waaah!

 

That's going to put the cat amongst the pigeons.

Message 1 of 107
Latest reply
106 REPLIES 106

Coalition to Deny Asylum Seekers Government Help to Navigate Migration Process

if we can't pay for it, what do you suggest we do?

 

Increase taxes?

 

Get another loan?

 

Sometimes lakeland, ya just have to cut the bleeeding.

 

 


Some people can go their whole lives and never really live for a single minute.
Message 21 of 107
Latest reply

Coalition to Deny Asylum Seekers Government Help to Navigate Migration Process


@crikey*mate wrote:

if we can't pay for it, what do you suggest we do?

 

Increase taxes?

 

Get another loan?

 

Sometimes lakeland, ya just have to cut the bleeeding.

 

 


victoria was well run beforehand , and it was payed for. what they lose on legal aid they gain freeing up custody centre cells.

Message 22 of 107
Latest reply

Coalition to Deny Asylum Seekers Government Help to Navigate Migration Process

Cikey , does the below still apply and to asylum seekers ?

if so how could an asylum seekers who arrived by boat legally be denied legal represention/advice if they could not pay for it (in the event that the Free variety could not be found) ? or do they go ahead without it ?,

wait for however long it takes to find 'free' help ?  and what are the costs (including the human factors) of that ?

what acts/conventions need to be changed  if any ? does it comply with refugee convention ? Human Rights ?

 

I know that our legal aid system is struggling....we still in writing words to the effect that we have the right to legal representation without discrimination and regardless of our financial suituation don't we ? it's not denied us 'in writing' if we can't afford it .

 

http://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/content/pdf/social_justice/submissions_un_hr_commi...

 

Summary of issue
· Sections 189 and 196 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) require the detention of
almost all unauthorised arrivals, regardless of their individual circumstances.
· As such detention is 'lawful' under Australian domestic law, the courts have no
power to order the release of these detainees, unless it can be shown that they are
not in fact unlawful non-citizens.
· In A v Australia (560/93), the HRC found a breach of article 9(1) in a case
concerning the prolonged detention of an unauthorised arrival who was detained
in Australia for over four years whilst his asylum claim was being reviewed.
· Section 256 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) requires the provision of legal
assistance upon request. Section 193 requires all detainees to be notified of their
right to make such a request with the exception of those who have arrived
unlawfully by boat or plane (that is, without a valid visa).
· Departmental officers have adopted a policy of failing to inform unauthorised
arrivals of their legal rights. Legal assistance is not given unless it is specifically
‘requested’.
1
· Legal advisers, including HREOC itself, cannot initiate contact with detainees in
‘separation detention’ to inform them of their legal rights.
Relevance to the ICCPR
· Article 2(1): Rights of aliens;
· Article 9(1): Liberty of person;
· Article 9(4): Judicial review of detention.
· Article 14: Right to legal assistance

Message 23 of 107
Latest reply

Coalition to Deny Asylum Seekers Government Help to Navigate Migration Process

 

Shadow attorney-general George Brandis says "Why should there be carte blanche for people who are not Australian citizens, who have come to this country illegally, have chosen of their own volition to place themselves in the hands of people smugglers to get here rather than take advantage of the Australian government's humanitarian entry programs?" he said.

 

The Coalition has not specified how the saved money would be used.

  Refugee advocates, Greens describe move as cruel

The Greens have vowed to block the changes in parliament, arguing without appeals asylum seekers could be sent to their deaths.

 

Greens Leader Christine Milne condemned the policy.

"This is an incredibly cruel attitude that Tony Abbott is taking, and without the Greens strongly standing there in the Senate and

 

Adam Bandt in the House of Reps there won't be anyone standing up for strong advocacy for human rights, and for decency and for fairness," she said.

 

Refugee advocate Julian Burnside QC says asylum seekers usually do not have the money to pay for professional advice, so they either represent themselves or get help from an agency.

 

"The problem is that roughly 50 per cent of people who are knocked back by [Immigration] Department officers in their claim for asylum go to the Refugee Review Tribunal (RRT) and get the assessment changed. In other words, Department officers simply get it wrong," he said.

 

"For a person without representation to go to the RRT is likely to end up in an unfair result if they don't know what they're doing, can't speak the language, and don't have professional help.

"The result of that will be that a number of people who are genuine refugees will be returned to face persecution because they haven't had a fair go in our assessment system."

 

Mr Burnside added his work with refugees is pro bono, so there is no profit motive to his thoughts against the idea.

 

The Refugee Action Collective's Chris Breen says the proposal is unfair and unjust.

"It sounds outrageous. It sounds discriminatory. The legal services for asylum seekers, quite literally, save lives," he said.

"Tony Abbott's announcement appears to be just the latest in a horrific series of announcements. We would urge both Rudd and Abbott to step back. We can do better than this."

 

But Opposition Leader Tony Abbott defended the decision.

"Why should people who come to this country illegally get legal aid to run immigration applications and appeals when so many Australians who find themselves before the courts for whatever reason don't get legal aid," he said.

 

The ABC tried to contact Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus, but did not receive a response.

 

 

 read in fullhttp://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-31/coalition-would-stop-funding-immigration-advice-for-asylum-see...

Message 24 of 107
Latest reply

Coalition to Deny Asylum Seekers Government Help to Navigate Migration Process


@lakeland27 wrote:

@crikey*mate wrote:

I'm in favour of assylum seekers, regardless of how they arrive, I say let em all in.

 

However, did you know that Legal Aide is in crisis and is now severely restricted? Not even all people "entitled" to access that can do so for their particular grievance. The belts have been tightened for everyone.

 

Even Australian Citizens are denied free legal advice and assistance in many circumstances.


most of that legal aid funding is state based ? i know the legal aid cuts the napthine (formerly Ted ) liberals made are causing chaos, i have friends in the profession who are doing twice the pro-bono work they were a year ago. there is other anecdotal evidence that the cuts the LNP like to apply to legal aid cause chaos such as http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-30/victoria27s-justice-system-at-its-breaking-point/4925874?secti...


I was just reading that the Federal Gov once used to contribute 50% ...it was cut by John Howard and now is at 32% .

http://www.afr.com/p/national/legal_affairs/coalition_takes_aim_at_rights_during_FX9eOv6Yd6WOYfs5s2V...

Message 25 of 107
Latest reply

Coalition to Deny Asylum Seekers Government Help to Navigate Migration Process

does it comply with refugee convention ?

 

from what I could find it states that asylum seekers should be informed of their  right to legal counsel and where possible, receive free legal assistance.

 

Regarding the earlier question in reference to the  right of asylum seekers to employment, it states:

 

Asylum-seekers should preferably be granted permission to work if the length of the

asylum procedure is likely to exceed a certain period or where the “package” of support

offered to asylum-seekers requires independent financial resources to maintain an

adequate standard of living.

 

 

Also, Martini, TPV holders do have the right to work and have access to job matching by Centrelink  or will that no longer apply?

Message 26 of 107
Latest reply

Coalition to Deny Asylum Seekers Government Help to Navigate Migration Process

Do you find it unfair to deny free legal aid to a person who has entered the country unlawfully and in most cases without any form of identifying documentation?

 

I know of quite a few cases where Australian citizens have been denied Legal Aid.  Those people were tax payers in the past and fell on hard times.

 

Iza, if, for instance a person invaded your home and was taken to court, would you fund their defence?

 

You may say that that is a different circumstance, but is it, and how is it different?

I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.
Message 27 of 107
Latest reply

Coalition to Deny Asylum Seekers Government Help to Navigate Migration Process

It needs careful consideration legally because these decisions may involve the most basic of human rights ..

that being that right to life itself 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

that's how it's different Podster, we don't have the death penalty or torture people ...not even  criminals and those of the worst kind.

Message 28 of 107
Latest reply

Coalition to Deny Asylum Seekers Government Help to Navigate Migration Process

 i've been reading some legal opinion that seems to imply this is open to a high court challenge . these have been quite effective in the last few years, and may quash this idea among others.

Message 29 of 107
Latest reply

Coalition to Deny Asylum Seekers Government Help to Navigate Migration Process

So do you mean that you would carefully consider a demand from your house invader to, occupy your home, and when you decided that you did not want that and had a legal challenge issued against you, you would fund thast legal challenge?

 

Simple answer, yes or no?

I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.
Message 30 of 107
Latest reply