---

@donnashuggy wrote:

I think you will find that those that overstay their visas greatly outnumber those that have been granted asylum, I have a feelling that many Australians don't want genuine refugees here at all and are using the fact that some are economic refugees against the genuine ones unfortunately.

---

I don't agree. Unless you can provide some numbers/statistics to back that up it remains an opinion not a fact.

 

For sure there are a lot of Aust citizens ( I am not one of them) who don't want any refugees here either. A position I don't understand at all. Are they in the majority? or an outspoken minority?

 

 

 

Those aslyum seeker arrivals, who don't get granted aslyum still have to be accommodated & fed, schooling provided (for years most likely) and processed at the Aust Govt's expense.  

 

What do overstayers cost the Govt in accommodation and other costs? If they work for cash in hand their employers are not paying PAYG to the ATO and they should be.

 

 

 

OP have you changed your claim/terms now for comparision with visa overstayers.. from ALL those that arrive as aslyum seekers by boat to only those that have been granted asylum? 

 

The opening post:

 

Those that overstay their visa that fly in (majority)

 

or

 

Those that arrive by boat.......with the possibily of seeking asylum (unlikely) and sent back.

 

 

 

 

 

 Countries that experience internal conflict and civil unrest produce the largest numbers of refugees. Afghanistan is the leading country of origin for refugees, followed by Iraq and Syria. All three countries are experiencing protracted violence. 80 percent of refugees flee to developing nations.

 

 

Some countries that don't have an Australian Embassy or consulate:

 Syria - no embassy or consulate

 

Afghanistan - The Australian Embassy in Kabul operates from a number of locations that are not publicly disclosed due to security reasons. The Australian Embassy in Kabul has no visa function. 

 

Somalia - No Australian mission

 

Democratic Republic of Congo  - no embassy or consulate

 

 

 

---

@*mrgrizz* wrote:

to seek asylum don't you just need to walk into a Australian embassy/consulate and ask?

 

the same way as you defect from a communist country?

---

Considerations to decide if you are a Refugee

To be a refugee who is given protection, ALL of the things below must apply personally to you and your situation. Please click on each of the headings below to find out more information about each part of the test which is applied in Australia to decide if someone is a refugee.

How can number nine ever be confirmed for people without valid papers, and a checkable history?

If they give their real name the Aust authorities can make enquiries about them in their country of origin? if they don't give their real name ASIO won't be able to confirm any of their claims.

 

The UN Refugee Convention excludes people who have committed war crimes, crimes against peace, crimes against humanity or other serious non-political crimes from obtaining refugee status. Any person who is guilty of these crimes will be denied refugee status.

 

Additionally, all asylum seekers must undergo rigorous security and character checks before being granted protection in Australia.

 

It is therefore highly unlikely that a war criminal, terrorist or any other person who posed a security threat would be able to enter Australia as a refugee.

 

It is also improbable that a criminal or terrorist would choose such a dangerous and difficult method to enter Australia, given that asylum seekers who arrive without authorisation or without valid travel documents undergo more rigorous security and identity checks than other entrants to Australia.

So long as it is their real name. It is more difficult to obtain papers that are valid if you are not who the papers say you are, then to just say it, if you see what I mean.

For example, if someone with a clean record disappears in a war zone, then a person who knows that can say that is who they are and it could work out for them as an assumed identity.

Just thinking of possibilities here, not saying that is what anyone would do.

Britain has had cases where they identified accepted refugees as war criminals, after they had been living in Britain for some time, so somehow, they had an acceptable history.

I do not know their names but it was in articles in the Daily Mail last year.

Yes, must be hard to ascertain who is legit or not.. and probably one reason why it takes so long to assess asylum seekers.

 

The majority are probably who they say they are though?

 

 

"Yes, must be hard to ascertain who is legit or not.. and probably one reason why it takes so long to assess asylum seekers.

The majority are probably who they say they are though?"

I would expect so...it would be difficult to think of a credible story, good enough to pass intense scrutiny.

But the worry is that it can happen. So an assessment which can validate number nine, and if any doubt, it is a no, is a good thing.

---

@amber-eyed-girl wrote:
How can number nine ever be confirmed for people without valid papers, and a checkable history?

---

In which case the former liberal PM should be deported because he has.