Coalition to Deny Asylum Seekers Government Help to Navigate Migration Process

[icyfroth]

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.

[**meep**]

---

@lakeland27 wrote:

 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.

---

could you share a bit more information?  where did you read that opinion?

[**meep**]

so why cant the humanitarian lawyers do it for free?

[izabsmiling]

---

poddster wrote:

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?

________________________________________________________________________________________________

You are comparing someone who has committed a criminal offence... ..to a person seeking asylum which they have a legal right to do under the UN Refugee Convention.A person (adults and children) who may be fleeing all manor of horror .In doing so they have not committed a criminal offence and I am not of a mind set to be able to feel that I suffer as a result of them fleeing suffering .That I come before them and their safety .I can't and won't do that.It doesn't compute.

Everyday tax payers fund crime prevention,law and justice and pay for the defence and associated Court Running cost of criminals of all kinds...many of these are Australians.They know the Laws .They may be the same kind of people who comment that our safety is somehow at risk as a result of Asylum seekers ....apparently some believe that they don't respect our Laws and our way of life,our culture,our women.The same Australians who often by the very things they say and do show that they themselves have no idea 

[i-need-a-martini]

---

@**meep** wrote:

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?

---

2 things:

One of the Coalition policies is that refugees no longer have a right of appeal. If the govt wants to deport them (and Abbott plans to deport those without papers), they cannot appeal to the high court. This is apparently to 'speed up the processing of other asylum seekers'. So even if they get a free lawyer it doesn't matter anyway as there is no legal avenue to turn to.

In regards to working on TPV. Sure you can work. But only for 3 month stints. So given that under the Coalitions policy, asylum seekers will never be given permanent residency, they are forever doomed to work in meaningless short term jobs and can only hope that when their 3 months are up, they will be able to find a job quickly. How easy do you think that will be after a few years?

[izabsmiling]

 Barnaby Joyce has preferenced One Nation before Labor ? that's curious ..or then again perhaps it's not.

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott has avoided questions about National Party frontbencher Barnaby Joyce's decision to preference One Nation.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/latest/a/-/latest/18660633/tony-abbott-dodges-questions-on-barnaby-joyces-d...

[**meep**]

---

@i-need-a-martini wrote:

---

@**meep** wrote:

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?

---

2 things:

One of the Coalition policies is that refugees no longer have a right of appeal. If the govt wants to deport them (and Abbott plans to deport those without papers), they cannot appeal to the high court. This is apparently to 'speed up the processing of other asylum seekers'. So even if they get a free lawyer it doesn't matter anyway as there is no legal avenue to turn to.

In regards to working on TPV. Sure you can work. But only for 3 month stints. So given that under the Coalitions policy, asylum seekers will never be given permanent residency, they are forever doomed to work in meaningless short term jobs and can only hope that when their 3 months are up, they will be able to find a job quickly. How easy do you think that will be after a few years?

---

Where is this information?

I understand that the visa is valid up to three years and can be renewed during which time the holder has the right to work,  special benefits and access to medicare.  Also from what I understand,  application for permanent protection visa is possible.

I am actually not in favour of TPV because three years is a long time to settle in a country, establish yourself within a community, make friends etc.  But if it only encourages genuine refugees and if there is a possibility of being granted permanent residency like it has been the case with some university students on TPV, maybe it could work but I am struggling with the idea of being accepted into a country and then forced to leave....But then, if we could accept more people under TPV and offer them protection until they can safely return, maybe would could help more people in genuine need.....I dont know.....

[**meep**]

and obviously, TPVs only apply to those who entered Australia  *illegally.  Our obligations under the Refugee and Hummanitarian Program would not be affected.

*as defined by the UNHCR

[chinchuckchick]

You are comparing someone who has committed a criminal offence..

Really?? So you know they are guilty?

[poddster]

There are lawful avenues of applying for refugee status and unlawful entry into any country is a criminal offence.

Seeing that there are lawful methods of applying for refugee status, do you think it is ok for people to break the law of this country and then when their application is not granted to grant them the funds to challenge the rejected application?

I notice you have neglected to answer my question as to the hypothetical home invasion, not that i expect an answer mind you.

[i-need-a-martini]

---

@**meep** wrote:

---

@i-need-a-martini wrote:

---

2 things:

One of the Coalition policies is that refugees no longer have a right of appeal. If the govt wants to deport them (and Abbott plans to deport those without papers), they cannot appeal to the high court. This is apparently to 'speed up the processing of other asylum seekers'. So even if they get a free lawyer it doesn't matter anyway as there is no legal avenue to turn to.

In regards to working on TPV. Sure you can work. But only for 3 month stints. So given that under the Coalitions policy, asylum seekers will never be given permanent residency, they are forever doomed to work in meaningless short term jobs and can only hope that when their 3 months are up, they will be able to find a job quickly. How easy do you think that will be after a few years?

---

Where is this information?

I understand that the visa is valid up to three years and can be renewed during which time the holder has the right to work,  special benefits and access to medicare.  Also from what I understand,  application for permanent protection visa is possible.

I am actually not in favour of TPV because three years is a long time to settle in a country, establish yourself within a community, make friends etc.  But if it only encourages genuine refugees and if there is a possibility of being granted permanent residency like it has been the case with some university students on TPV, maybe it could work but I am struggling with the idea of being accepted into a country and then forced to leave....But then, if we could accept more people under TPV and offer them protection until they can safely return, maybe would could help more people in genuine need.....I dont know.....

---

It's part of their policy announcements in regards to refugees that arrive by boat. The same won't apply to other refugees.

Under the Coalition's policy, around 30,000 people currently waiting for their refugee claims to be finalised in Australia would be denied permanent residency.

Those who are deemed to be refugees would instead be placed on temporary protection visas (TPVs), while those whose claims are rejected would be denied the right to appeal.

"The key to our position here, it's been a strong and consistent position for 10 years now, is that people who come illegally by boat will not be granted permanent residency," Mr Abbott said.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-16/asylum-seekers-to-be-denied-residency-under-coalition/4890968

So no permanancy/stability under any circumstances and if we don't like them for whatever reason we can deport them without appeal. 

And yes the TPV is renewed every 3 years but it is still a temporary visa. So if the govt deems that the refugee is safe to go back to their country, they will be deported (without appeal). There is no way of gaining permanency even if they are found the be genuine refugees (as most are of course)..