Rejects To Be Deported

[icyfroth]

MORE than 1000 failed asylum seekers who have had their claims rejected but are still in Australia have been put on notice, with the Abbott government threatening to put them into detention and deport them if they refuse to return home voluntarily.

Immigration Minister Scott Morrison last night said the people in community detention or in detention centres had failed in their claims - some multiple times including judicial reviews - and had no right to be in Australia any more.

More than 30,000 asylum seekers are living on the Australian mainland after the masses of boat arrivals under the previous Labor government - residing in community detention and receiving welfare benefits paid for by taxpayers or in detention centres at a cost to taxpayers.

Mr Morrison said more than 1000 of these people had been "sitting in the network and in the community after having their claims rejected".

"The government will take the steps necessary to remove failed asylum seekers from Australia who wish to stay indefinitely at taxpayers' expense," he said.

"Once you have had your asylum claims assessed and rejected not just by the department but also on appeal, it's time to go home, as you have been assessed as not being owed protection.

Link To Article

...assessed as not being owed protection...I wonder what they were assesed as?

The name of that boat has got to be photoshopped hasn't it?

[catsnknots]

---

@bluecat*dancing wrote:

Murdoch press. Sensational clap trap in yet another attempt to dehumanise and demonise our fellow human beings.Although, I am impressed that they managed to get the elusive Morrison to come out of hiding....

---

reproducing comments from elsewhere maybe? 

[catsnknots]

---

@crikey*mate wrote:

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@crikey*mate wrote:

I was under the impression that if an application wasn't successful then they were supposed to be deported.

---

According to the article they are giving them fair notice to make arrangements of their own. Those that can't be deported due to" diplomatic or legal reasons but the government would not be deterred and put the failed asylum seekers in detention."

---

what's the alternative?

I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm just trying to understand.

They applied, the answer was "no", some after appeals and enquiries.

If we're just going to let them stay anyway, why the need to apply in the first place?

---

Some countires that these rejected refugee applicants come from have refused to take the people back. 

[boris1gary]

crikey,

while we all will probably never agree on the question, at the very least we could all use language that is respectful and compassionate to these people (not meaning you or anyone on the boards in particular).

[***super_nova***]

---

@catsnknots wrote:

---

If we're just going to let them stay anyway, why the need to apply in the first place?

---

Some countires that these rejected refugee applicants come from have refused to take the people back. 

---

Some people are stateless.  For instance when some people escaped previous conficts 50+ years ago (Palestine for instance) to countries that let them stay but never allowed them or their children born there to have citizenship.  If these children then move on to escape war in the country of their birth (Syria for instance) they cannot be repatriated. 

In any case, Australia has sent number of people back to Afghanistan and Shri Lanka who were subsequently killed.  Just because people's applications are rejected does not mean it their fear was not justified.

In any case, letting people to live in the society on the meagre less than basic dole payment is still much cheaper than having them in detention. The cost to tax payers is more than 10x for people in detention.

[newstart2380]

---

@icyfroth wrote:

MORE than 1000 failed asylum seekers who have had their claims rejected but are still in Australia have been put on notice, with the Abbott government threatening to put them into detention and deport them if they refuse to return home voluntarily.

Immigration Minister Scott Morrison last night said the people in community detention or in detention centres had failed in their claims - some multiple times including judicial reviews - and had no right to be in Australia any more.

More than 30,000 asylum seekers are living on the Australian mainland after the masses of boat arrivals under the previous Labor government - residing in community detention and receiving welfare benefits paid for by taxpayers or in detention centres at a cost to taxpayers.

Mr Morrison said more than 1000 of these people had been "sitting in the network and in the community after having their claims rejected".

"The government will take the steps necessary to remove failed asylum seekers from Australia who wish to stay indefinitely at taxpayers' expense," he said.

"Once you have had your asylum claims assessed and rejected not just by the department but also on appeal, it's time to go home, as you have been assessed as not being owed protection.

Link To Article

...assessed as not being owed protection...I wonder what they were assesed as?

The name of that boat has got to be photoshopped hasn't it?

---

Boat looks safe enough to me, send them back if they are not genuine refugees.

A person becomes a refugee under international law once she or he crosses an international border and is assessed as meeting the definition of a refugee, either by a national government or an international agency

[i-need-a-martini]

So where are they going to be deported to exactly?

The article also had this in it: While there is the potential for deportations, Mr Morrison conceded involuntarily returns may not be possible for diplomatic or legal reasons..