So many questions ...

Where, pray tell, should these refugees go if Australia refuses to take them, Ken?

Why do you think that these refugees will be unable to find work in their new country?

Refugees finding work?

I listened some time ago to someone on ABC radio who said that the following people who had arrived in Ausralia,as refugees,had the following statistics:

People who were unemployed and on Government assistance, and the country of origin. (These people were said to be unemployable for the most part.) These are only people of working ages

Turkish = 65%
Lebanese = 55%
Vietnamese= 55%
Russian=50%
Former Yugoslavia=50%
Chinese=45%

All these nationalities are on welfare to that extent, according to an authority that I cannot confirm.

It was said that many of these people did earn money from some forms of cash payment, but because they were between a rock and a hard place, they illegally claimed the dole as well.

Maybe David you can give me better stats.

I don’t know if the Govt crackdown on dole cheating has improved the stats lately.

Alex it is up to you to determine if we reach the 12,000 quota, I am not sure. You tell me. Look it up.

Alex it is up to you to determine if we reach the 12,000 quota, I am not sure. You tell me. Look it up.

We’ll I am happy to be corrected - but I don’t think we do, which rather puts the skates on most of your floodgates argument - notwithstanding arguments that could be put about the level of the ‘quota’ being way too low for a rich country like ours with such low unemployment…

I was actually more interested in an answer to my first question - Where do they go if we don’t show any compassion as a country? I asked the second question to ascertain whether there was some latent racism in your train of thought. Suffice to say, I’m not entirely sure I was wrong.

Ken, you do realise, don’t you, that there may be other factors for high unemployment among these social groupings which may be rectified through a more compassionate approach?

Ken, let me join you in the barricades.....

I am reasonably sure that Australia fulfils its self-imposed quota of 12,000 refugees per year - which does indeed make it a very generous policy by the standard of other wealthy nations.... albeit perhaps that’s not saying much.

Given how many hundreds of thousands of people have been plucked out of refugee camps worldwide and given a new life in Australia they could never otherwise have hoped for, I do find it perplexing (well, no I don’t - it’s perfectly explicable by reference to pure partisanship) that some people prefer Australia’s compassion to be judged according to how we choose to document and process that relatively modest number of asylum-seekers who make their own way here.

Remembering that these people usually travel through several other countries, often at great peril to their lives and to the profit of people smugglers, I don’t see why it should be so unreasonable for Australia to want these people to be processed offshore:  both in the interests of discouraging the trade, and enforcing our laws.

To support the Government’s proposed laws does not make you a racist, a bigot or lacking in compassion.  Australians I know who would vigorously support the protection of our borders, have no dificulty whatsoever with - indeed are equally vigorous in their indifference to and acceptance of - our refugee resettlement programme.

From what I understand, the proposed laws will see to it that asylum seekers who arrive in Australia uninvited, will be sent offshore to be processed by UN officials.

A law which simply changes the venue of detention where a handful asylum seekers are vetted seems to me a relatively trifling issue - unworthy of the ink which has been split over it.

It won’t be the death of democracy, or compassion, or Christian values, if these laws are passed.  Australia will continue to welcome in 1,000 refugees from Asia and Africa from every month - how many jumbo jets is that?; and the media will continue to ignore that fact in its quixotic quest to expose Australians as the bigots they surely must be - if we could only prove it.

High unemployment amongst immigrant problems does concern me.  But it doesn’t surprise me.

The laws of supply and demand function here too.  If you pay people to be idle, you will get some idle people.

The material ambitions of most Australians cannot be met with the weekly dole, but I expect it must seem quite generous if you are used to the poorer way of life found in other countries.

We must expect it to take some time before the “great Australian dream” lures migrants in the vortex of the workforce.

What’s the rate of unemmployment amongst Kiwi migrants BEFORE and then AFTER the Government banned them from applying for the dole for 2 years after arrival?  The mining industry would have even greater labour shortages if the thousands of our Trans-Tasman friends who now populate the nation’s remote minesites, were still able to sun themselves on Bondi.

Is my cyncism sufficient to disguise the latent racism I am sure the diligent Mr Castor will find in my words?

I await the knock on the door.....

My point about prayer, however, was not about whether or how many refugees we should accept, or even what we should do with the person (and their family) when we discover to our surprise that they are in Villawood detention centre.

The current legislation under consideration has them being deported to Nauru before they even get to that inconvenient Sydney suburb.

If you want to talk about the other political questions (or even this one), you could start a thread here , (kendavecastoraustin)

Hi Ken,

12,000? I reckon we should take a great swarm of refugees - say a million, take a sizeable cut in all our lifestyles and do our darndest to love them, educate them, and give them new opportunities.

Sadly, we don’t really do that for the handful we get - rather we regard them begrudgingly, do nothing about making them part of our lives (that would cost something), then complain that they don’t integrate properly into the society that isn’t welcoming them, talking to them, befriending them…

M

Ken, let me join you in the barricades.....

That’d be the last line of border protection eh?

I am reasonably sure that Australia fulfils its self-imposed quota of 12,000 refugees per year - which does indeed make it a very generous policy by the standard of other wealthy nations.... albeit perhaps that’s not saying much.

I heard it said by Malcolm Fraser that we don’t actually reach this quota. Not sure what the true situation is - but if we don’t fill our ‘quota’ I would have thought that the ‘queue’ argument (whatever its merit) loses force.

Interesting (and someone can correct me if I’m wrong), but hasn’t the 12,000 quota been in place at the same level since 1999? (and isn’t it less than what its been in some prior years?). As far as other countries are concerned - are we actually ‘very generous’ in comparison (I’ve heard the opposite said).

In terms of mission, many of the people who are refugees come from countries that are very hard to reach with the Gospel (often for the same reasons that people are fleeing). I often think that one of the ways God is reaching different people groups is not by us sending a missionary to them - but rather by those people moving and coming to a country where they can hear the Gospel.

I await the knock on the door.....

Knock Knock. Excuse me did you order a pizza with extra anchovies?

Woops, just read Gordon’s post - a new thread anyone?

Alexander Downer said in the quote “we take about 120,000 migrants a year”.  That’s right 120,000 ! And 12,000 as a tenth of that as “refugee” status.

When we grow our country’s population we need to be able to supply adequate infrastructures. Those of us who live in Sydney realise only too well how inadequate our current infrastrucutures are.

In reply to Alex’ helpful questions, my understanding is that Australia’s humanitarian program (of which the refugee program is a subset) was set at 12,000 people per annum from the mid 90s to 2003/4.  In 2004/05 this was increased to 13,000 per annum.

Places not used in any given year are carried over to the allocation for the subsequent year.  Also, places can be brought forward from a future year to the current year to deal with fluctuations.

The net effect of this is that in any given year the actual humanitarian intake can be lower or higher than the quota, but over a period of time the intake will be equivalent to the quota.

A couple of helpful resources to inform our prayers:

1. For some international stuff: the 2006 State of the World’s Refugees report from the United National High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR)

http://www.unhcr.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/template?page=publ&src=static/sowr2006/toceng.htm

2. For some Australian stuff: the 2005 Refugee and Humanitarian Issues report from The Australian Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs:

http://www.immi.gov.au/media/publications/pdf/refhumiss-fullv2.pdf

Kevin said

When we grow our country’s population we need to be able to supply adequate infrastructures. Those of us who live in Sydney realise only too well how inadequate our current infrastrucutures are.

John the Baptist said to a people with a lot less material wealth than today’s Aussies:

The man with two tunics should share with him who has none, and the one who has food should do the same. Luke 3:10.

12,000? I reckon we should take a great swarm of refugees - say a million, take a sizeable cut in all our lifestyles and do our darndest to love them, educate them, and give them new opportunities.

Interesting suggestion Matt.  I think about 1,000,000 people migrate to the USA every year, both legally and illegally - it has approximately the same continental land mass as Australia.  They manage to do it, without any cut in their lifestyles.

[quote author="Alan Dungey"]I think about 1,000,000 people migrate to the USA every year, both legally and illegally - it has approximately the same continental land mass as Australia.  They manage to do it, without any cut in their lifestyles.

The US isn’t 80% desert. Australia’s usable landmass is considerably smaller.

That being said, I don’t like people being stuck in detention centres for no real reason. Why not ship them to Alice Springs or the like, where there is nowhere to go, but they can be part of a community while they are ‘processed’?

[quote author="Alan Dungey"]Remembering that these people usually travel through several other countries, often at great peril to their lives and to the profit of people smugglers, I don’t see why it should be so unreasonable for Australia to want these people to be processed offshore:  both in the interests of discouraging the trade, and enforcing our laws.

If we wanted to enforce our laws, and indeed our human rights obligations, why would the Govt want to process them offshore?

A law which simply changes the venue of detention where a handful asylum seekers are vetted seems to me a relatively trifling issue - unworthy of the ink which has been split over it.

lol… yeah, those silly liberal politians risking their political futures over such a “trifling” matter, because it is simple a ‘change of venue’ eh?

High unemployment amongst immigrant problems does concern me.  But it doesn’t surprise me.
The laws of supply and demand function here too.  If you pay people to be idle, you will get some idle people.

And by people, you mean immigrants right? Because, you know, they’d rather not work and just sit around leeching off Hard Working True (Anglo) Australians, right?

The material ambitions of most Australians cannot be met with the weekly dole, but I expect it must seem quite generous if you are used to the poorer way of life found in other countries.

Yep, I’m sure its paradise living on the dole alright! Never mind the costs of you know, actually living in this country… but hey, its all relative! I’ll take my mcmansion… you can have rice three times a day!!!

Yay Senator Fielding.