Should They Be Deported?

107 REPLIES 107

Should They Be Deported?

Having a job is not part of the criteria of being able to live in Aus as a refugee.

 

They've been denied refugee status and this saga should never have happened (the laws should be obeyed and

 

if they are crossed then it shouldn't take millions to decide that).

The Australian legal system is an absolute joke when you can just keep appealing when it was decided that they

 

are NOT refugees (it should be one appeal max and then out).

 

If having a job was part of the criteria then we would be overrun by so called refugees that would have a job

 

waiting for them (they were told they were illegals and yet they got a job to try and fool everyone into letting

 

them stay in sympathy and it simply didn't work).

 

I always found it really "strange/weird" how some refugees came here with no money but were shop/house

 

owners within a very short period and yet others would front the dole office and demand to be paid and they

 

just wanted paid,they didn't want to work.stubborn_smiley_by_mirz123-d4bt0te_zps12f1a5a3.gif

 

Message 51 of 108
Latest reply

Should They Be Deported?


@lyhargr_0 wrote:

Cause they are illegal  immigrants, their kids are not Au citizens

 

As much as I feel sorry for them, they came here illegally, they were told in the first place, they were not refugees, they have now been told this SEVEN times and they still refuse to accept this decision  ..... They have cost the Au taxpayer millions of dollars in legal fees, its time for them to go back home and apply through the LEGAL channels to migrate to Au, if they still wish to do so


It is NOT illegal to arrive in another country and ask for refuge.  The mode of arrival is irrelevant; that is an international law Australia has signed up to. 

I have friends working at the airport and every day people arrive on tourist visa, and as soon as they reach immigration they ask for asylum.  That is also not illegal. 

 

Number of people who were deported back to Shri Lanka, Afghanistan and other countries have been killed after it their country was declared safe. 

 

If the government just quietly allowed these people to stay years ago, the case would not receive all this publicity.  Considering that the government is turning away any boat that tries to get to Australia, there are plenty of people who spent thousands of dollars on that journey, and now sit back in Indonesia to tell others who might think about doing the same.  I think that is pretty good deterent.  No need to send this family to possible death. 

Message 52 of 108
Latest reply

Should They Be Deported?


@*kazumi* wrote:

@lyhargr_0 wrote:

Cause they are illegal  immigrants, their kids are not Au citizens

 

As much as I feel sorry for them, they came here illegally, they were told in the first place, they were not refugees, they have now been told this SEVEN times and they still refuse to accept this decision  ..... They have cost the Au taxpayer millions of dollars in legal fees, its time for them to go back home and apply through the LEGAL channels to migrate to Au, if they still wish to do so


It is NOT illegal to arrive in another country and ask for refuge.  The mode of arrival is irrelevant; that is an international law Australia has signed up to. 

I have friends working at the airport and every day people arrive on tourist visa, and as soon as they reach immigration they ask for asylum.  That is also not illegal. 

 

Number of people who were deported back to Shri Lanka, Afghanistan and other countries have been killed after it their country was declared safe. 

 

If the government just quietly allowed these people to stay years ago, the case would not receive all this publicity.  Considering that the government is turning away any boat that tries to get to Australia, there are plenty of people who spent thousands of dollars on that journey, and now sit back in Indonesia to tell others who might think about doing the same.  I think that is pretty good deterent.  No need to send this family to possible death. 


No it NOT illegal to ask for asylum but it's up the the government of that country whether you are granted it or not. In this family's case they have been refused asylum on SEVEN occasions   ......   Do your airport "friends"  also know the number of people who, once they ask for asylum, are ACTUALLY granted it?   ....  Perhaps they could find this out and let you know ..............

Message 53 of 108
Latest reply

Should They Be Deported?

 

what makes luna tick?

Message 54 of 108
Latest reply

Should They Be Deported?


@chameleon54 wrote:

Many other countries including Britain and some European countries are struggling with the social carnage poor border control can have. It is one of the main reasons the Brits voted for Brexit.

 

In an idealistic, Utopean paridise ( ie. A Greens world ) the idea of us all living together in perfect harmony, without race or borders sounds magical, unfortunately the reality is completely different.  If Governments bow to the social media whining of the niave and open their borders to anyone who comes, the countries citizens must accept very high unemployment rates, drastically reduced wages, falling standards of living, drastically reduced standards of social welfare, swamped health systems, housing crisis and social disruption as new migrants pour in bringing their national battles and religous hatreds to our shores.

 

I suspect if those who support an open border policy actually had to live with the concequences they may begin to understand the folly of their niave ideas. Unfortunately the regret would come too late as once the Genie is released from the bottle, it cant be put back in again..


Actually, immigration creates jobs.  Why do you think that countries that historically were accepting so many migrants are the most successful ones? 

Most migrants are young an healthy, they do not swamp the health system, on the contrary they are much more likely than locally born people to start businesses, employ people, and pay tax.  Europe is doing just fine; actually, considering that most European countries have aging population and near zero population growth, young work ready people was exactly what they needed.  Germany actually had negative population growth.

The social problems are caused by corporations being too powerful, keeping wages low, and taking profits to tax haven countries. 

The refugee problem was caused by invasion of Iraq and the following destabilisation of the region, which Australia played part in.  We have destroyed these people's homes, livelihoods, and then said too bad when they need help. 

Message 55 of 108
Latest reply

Should They Be Deported?


@*kazumi* wrote:

@chameleon54 wrote:

Many other countries including Britain and some European countries are struggling with the social carnage poor border control can have. It is one of the main reasons the Brits voted for Brexit.

 

In an idealistic, Utopean paridise ( ie. A Greens world ) the idea of us all living together in perfect harmony, without race or borders sounds magical, unfortunately the reality is completely different.  If Governments bow to the social media whining of the niave and open their borders to anyone who comes, the countries citizens must accept very high unemployment rates, drastically reduced wages, falling standards of living, drastically reduced standards of social welfare, swamped health systems, housing crisis and social disruption as new migrants pour in bringing their national battles and religous hatreds to our shores.

 

I suspect if those who support an open border policy actually had to live with the concequences they may begin to understand the folly of their niave ideas. Unfortunately the regret would come too late as once the Genie is released from the bottle, it cant be put back in again..


Actually, immigration creates jobs.  Why do you think that countries that historically were accepting so many migrants are the most successful ones? 

Most migrants are young an healthy, they do not swamp the health system, on the contrary they are much more likely than locally born people to start businesses, employ people, and pay tax.  Europe is doing just fine; actually, considering that most European countries have aging population and near zero population growth, young work ready people was exactly what they needed.  Germany actually had negative population growth.

The social problems are caused by corporations being too powerful, keeping wages low, and taking profits to tax haven countries. 

The refugee problem was caused by invasion of Iraq and the following destabilisation of the region, which Australia played part in.  We have destroyed these people's homes, livelihoods, and then said too bad when they need help. 


Au takes in far more refugees than many other countries    bty this family are  Tamil, they  NOT from Iraq

 

Not sure where you gert your info from but the Au unemployment rate is UP not down atm

 

Charity begins at home and Au farmers need all the help they can get BEFORE we bring in yet more people that Au possibly cannot support, cause there is not enough water or food being produced as  most of our farmers have gone to the wall because of the drought.

 

Not sure if you live in farming area 'cause if you did, you might have a better idea of what is happening in the bush atm

Message 56 of 108
Latest reply

Should They Be Deported?


@*kazumi* wrote:

@chameleon54 wrote:

Many other countries including Britain and some European countries are struggling with the social carnage poor border control can have. It is one of the main reasons the Brits voted for Brexit.

 

In an idealistic, Utopean paridise ( ie. A Greens world ) the idea of us all living together in perfect harmony, without race or borders sounds magical, unfortunately the reality is completely different.  If Governments bow to the social media whining of the niave and open their borders to anyone who comes, the countries citizens must accept very high unemployment rates, drastically reduced wages, falling standards of living, drastically reduced standards of social welfare, swamped health systems, housing crisis and social disruption as new migrants pour in bringing their national battles and religous hatreds to our shores.

 

I suspect if those who support an open border policy actually had to live with the concequences they may begin to understand the folly of their niave ideas. Unfortunately the regret would come too late as once the Genie is released from the bottle, it cant be put back in again..


Actually, immigration creates jobs.  Why do you think that countries that historically were accepting so many migrants are the most successful ones? 

Most migrants are young an healthy, they do not swamp the health system, on the contrary they are much more likely than locally born people to start businesses, employ people, and pay tax.  Europe is doing just fine; actually, considering that most European countries have aging population and near zero population growth, young work ready people was exactly what they needed.  Germany actually had negative population growth.

The social problems are caused by corporations being too powerful, keeping wages low, and taking profits to tax haven countries. 

The refugee problem was caused by invasion of Iraq and the following destabilisation of the region, which Australia played part in.  We have destroyed these people's homes, livelihoods, and then said too bad when they need help. 


Its true that in the short term migration does create jobs. More people means more houses being built on the fringes of major cities, more roads, more schools with higher staffing levels to accommodate children with poor English skills, more Public Servants to assist the new comers with assimilation into a new culture, more health professionals and social workers, particularly when those from different cultures have alternate views to ours on the rights of Woman ( and how they should be treated ) etc. 

 

The problem is none of this employment actually contributes to economic sustainability. It costs A LOT of money to provide services for all of the new arrivals. 

 

While this may be a drain on the social budget, the real problem with rapid immigration such as Australia has, is that it lowers the standard of living for everyone, particularly those in our major cities ( where new arrivals settle ) The crazy rises in house prices in Melbourne and Sydney simply would not have occurred if population was stagnant under natural growth. The roads would not be clogged and people would not be spending hours travelling to and from work. 

 

Australia may be a big country, but most of it is arid desert. We simply don't have the natural resources of water and productive food capacity to carry a large population. The results of rapid immigration are being seen on the Eastern seaboard with major population centres running out of water due to increased populations relying on static, drought affected reservoirs and storage's.

 

Another problem is many migrants are either low skilled or their qualifications are not recognised in Australia, meaning they are competing with our own children for a diminishing supply of low skilled jobs ( diminishing due to technology changes )  The migrants will often work for below award wages and this is driving exploitation of not only migrants, but young and low skilled Australians, creating an underclass who are living in relative poverty.

 

Sure some migrants eventually start businesses, employ people and make a valuable contribution to our society, but an open door policy to immigration, without checks, balances and limits is really just a giant Pontze scheme. Any economic stimulation created by immigration through the housing and development industry is just a mirage, lowering the standard of living for all Australians.

 

Australia already has a generous migration programme, but it relies on mutual obligation, where those coming to the country should show some respect for our laws and immigration systems. Those who choose to thumb their noses at our sovereignty and laws are probably not the most suitable people to allow into our country.

Message 57 of 108
Latest reply

Should They Be Deported?

Actually most people who arrive here by the boats are not low skilled and they were not broke either.  To get to Indonesia and then pay for the boat journey they had to have money..  Few months back there was a story on SBS about 2 of the people who were sent to the USA  under the deal.  The young woman was an English speaking accountant, who had no trouble getting a job, and is doing pretty well.  The man had a bit more difficult time of it, he owned an electronics store in one of those Syrian towns that was all but raised to the ground .  But he also could communicate in English, and he got a job in a warehouse, and started training an forklift operator, saving to start business. 

Many of the refugee kids who come here with no English catch up very quickly, and many excel at school, have no problem graduating from uni. 

 

If anybody's kids have problem competing for unskilled jobs with Muslim with no language skills, then we really have a problem with our young people. 

 

By the way, this family lived in a country town, and many refugees would be only to happy to settle in the regional towns.  If there are jobs, they do not even need to be forced to stay there for number of years; once they settle they will not be moving to the big cities; just like when people arrived and spent some time in the migration camps, many the settled in the area. 

 

The problem with farmers is that we were told for decades the climate is changing; we were warned that we will have longer droughts, more severe storms, and fires of such intensity we will not know how to fight and many farmers just dismissed the warnings.  Giving money to them now will not do anything for long term solution.  We were warned  that if we do not take action it will cost us big, and it is starting to cost us big, yet out government as well as the the US government are still in denial. 

Message 58 of 108
Latest reply

Should They Be Deported?


@*kazumi* wrote:

Actually most people who arrive here by the boats are not low skilled and they were not broke either.

 

I agree that many of the refugees that come here are not low skilled. What I actually said in my post was that often their qualifications are not recognised in Australia. I personally know a refugee who was a doctor and worked in a uni training other medical proffesionals. Really nice guy and an asset to Australia, but he works the counter of my local servo as his qualifications are not recognised in Australia. The owner of the servo was employing all Australians three years ago, but they all got the sack at once and where replaced by refugees. I was told by one of the sacked employees that the boss was recieving government subsidies to employ the refugees.

 

 To get to Indonesia and then pay for the boat journey they had to have money..  Few months back there was a story on SBS about 2 of the people who were sent to the USA  under the deal.  The young woman was an English speaking accountant, who had no trouble getting a job, and is doing pretty well.  The man had a bit more difficult time of it, he owned an electronics store in one of those Syrian towns that was all but raised to the ground .  But he also could communicate in English, and he got a job in a warehouse, and started training an forklift operator, saving to start business. 

Many of the refugee kids who come here with no English catch up very quickly, and many excel at school, have no problem graduating from uni. 

 

If anybody's kids have problem competing for unskilled jobs with Muslim with no language skills, then we really have a problem with our young people. 

 See above. The system is loaded against Australian residents in favor of refugees when the refugees wages are subsidised by the Australian tax payer.

 

 

By the way, this family Who have been found not to be genuine refugees lived in a country town, and many refugees would be only to happy to settle in the regional townsSounds nice in theory but it just aint happening. ...........Just ask the commuters and new home buyers in Melbourne and Sydney..........It is blatently obvious that migration policies have drastically distorted the housing and transport systems on the Eastern sea board to the extent that housing and commuting to work has become a major challenge for many existing Australian residents.

 

 If there are jobs, they do not even need to be forced to stay there for number of years; once they settle they will not be moving to the big cities; just like when people arrived and spent some time in the migration camps, many the settled in the area. 

 

The problem with farmers is that we were told for decades the climate is changing; we were warned that we will have longer droughts, more severe storms, and fires of such intensity we will not know how to fight and many farmers just dismissed the warnings.  Giving money to them now will not do anything for long term solution.  We were warned  that if we do not take action it will cost us big, and it is starting to cost us big, yet out government as well as the the US government are still in denial. 

 

And this load of dribble is based on what ?????  You obviously have absolutely no knowledge of Australias farming systems.

 

If we take the sheep industry for starters, over the last 20 years Australian graziers in marginal areas have moved away from traditional Merinos in huge numbers to replace them with South African breeds such as Dorpers and Damaras. These breeds are much more drought hardy than traditional merinos and British breeds and the change has been a direct response to changing climatic conditions. Around 20% of my own flock is Dorper based. I run the ewes in near coast, wet country and transfer the lambs at 12 weeks of age to my remote semi arid farm where they grow out well on the dry feed.

 

The cattle industry has seen similar changes. Thirty years ago the vast majority of cattle where finished on grass. Now the majority, including most of the beef sold in our major supermarkets is finished in feedlots where cattle finishing is not dictateded by fluctuating seasons . Again a major industry shift in direct response to climate change.

 

The Australian grain industry has probably responded in the most dramatic way to climate change with farmers now using completely new farming systems compared to thirty years ago. Three decades ago, paddocks where fallowed ( cultivated and left bare ) for six months before crops where planted. Weeds where controlled with tillage, mechanically hoeing the young weeds from the ground. This constant disturbance led to soil erosion and fracturing of the soil structure resulting in regular dust storms as valuable top soil blew away in the wind.

 

Now most crops are sown with pin point accuracy using GPS computer steered tractors and zero tillage. Knife points cut a fine slit in the soil with the seed placed above the fertiliser and press wheels then close the soil back over, leaving a small furrow to collect rain and direct it on top of the seed. Computer steering allows farmers to place the seed between the standing rows of the past years crop stubble, shading the new seedlings from the hot sun.  Straw from the back of grain harvesters is also now mulched and spread to further protect the ground and new seedlings.

 

New varieties of grain have been bred with a short growing season in response to dryer Spring seasons and their low crop height allows the plant to put its energy into the grain instead of growing a long stalk. Agronomists are now employed by most grain growers to advise on frost damage ( caused by climate change ). Frosted crops are now slashed and baled into hay, rather than growing on for grain.  My family grow crops in very marginal country. The results in yields they are achieving now are often 30-50% BETTER than twenty to thirty years ago, with the crops often grown on half of the growing season rainfall of decades ago. Last year in severe drought my brother still harvested a financially viable crop on  less than 100 mm. of growing season rainfall.

 

I appreciate you may have formed your views based on the tabloid type media which produces sensationalist stories often based on political hype, but it would be helpful if you are going to post on subjects such as Australian farmers response to climate change to do a little bit of research first.

 


 

Message 59 of 108
Latest reply

Should They Be Deported?

". The system is loaded against Australian residents in favor of refugees when the refugees wages are subsidised by the Australian tax payer"

BS.

Wage Subsidies - up to $10,000 for employers
What is a wage subsidy?
A wage subsidy is a financial incentive of up to
$10,000 (GST inclusive) that is available to
qualifying businesses that employ eligible job
seekers.
Payments are available over a six month period
and you can negotiate how often you receive
them.
You may also be able to receive a ‘kickstart’
payment of up to 40 per cent of the total wage
subsidy after four weeks of a job starting.
What wage subsidies are available?
You can access the following wage subsidies
when you employ eligible job seekers through
an employment services provider:
 Restart wage subsidy – up to $10,000 (GST
inclusive) when you hire eligible mature age
job seekers who are 50 years of age and
over.
 Youth Bonus wage subsidy – up to $10,000
(GST inclusive) when you hire eligible job
seekers who are 15 to 24 years of age.
 Youth wage subsidy – up to $6,500 (GST
inclusive) when you hire eligible job seekers
who are 25 to 29 years of age.
 Parents wage subsidy – up to $6,500 (GST
inclusive) when you hire an eligible job
seeker who is a principal carer parent.
 Long-term unemployed and Indigenous
Australians – up to $6,500 (GST inclusive)
when you hire a long-term unemployed job
seeker who has been registered with
employment services for 12 months, or an
Indigenous Australian job seeker who has
been registered with employment services
for six months.
Is my business eligible?
Your business is eligible for a wage subsidy if it:
 has an Australian Business Number
 has not previously received a wage subsidy
for the same job seeker
 is not an Australian, state or territory
government agency.
What types of jobs can I offer?
The job can be full time or part time and needs
to be:
 for a minimum of 20 hours per week
averaged over the six months of the
agreement
 ongoing
 meets the employment standards for the
position (for example, is suitable work and
pays as a minimum the national award
wage).
Apprenticeships and traineeships are also
eligible for wage subsidies.
The job cannot displace an existing employee,
be a commission based, subcontracting or self-
employment position, or work for an immediate
family member.
Who can I hire?
To receive a wage subsidy the job seeker you
employ must be registered with an employment
services provider, such as jobactive or Transition
to Work. For mature age or Indigenous job
seekers only, the provider can be for etc


Message 60 of 108
Latest reply