Australia's refugee solution: An expensive joke? BBC point of view

[geovalin]

Australia's refugee solution: An expensive joke?

By Lauren Crothers Phnom Penh

The scene is Phnom Penh, on 26 September 2014.

Overhead, a chandelier drips with crystals. Champagne glasses clink.

It was here that ministers from Australia and Cambodia forged a deal that would set in motion a resettlement programme for hundreds of refugees turned away by Australia and detained instead on the remote South Pacific island of Nauru.

The plan, widely criticised since its inception, would see genuine refugees transferred to Cambodia on a strictly voluntary basis.

They would then be provided with a start-up assistance package to help them integrate, find work and build new lives.

Australia made an initial aid pledge of A$40m ($31m; £20m), which was then topped up with another A$15.5m in resettlement costs.

Cut to a year later, however, and there is a distinct lack of interest on the part of the refugees.

Just three Iranians and a Rohingya man have taken up the offer and moved. Four more have volunteered.

But the Rohingya man has now asked to be sent back to Myanmar, also known as Burma, which he fled because his people are not officially recognised and he feared violent persecution.

According to Ian Rintoul, a director of the Sydney-based Refugee Action Coalition , this "speaks volumes for Cambodia's inability to provide a viable secure resettlement arrangement".

source: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-34287321

[jcisco]

Well that doesn't really fill the whole picture, but I think it paints enough to get its point accross. My feelings on the offshore processing of refugees by Australia to be a shameful act, and quite embarrassing. While it is a burden on the taxpayers of Australia and some complain about integration issues, for genuine refugees, I think collectively Australia can handle it. As for economic refugees, there is some merit to their case, but not so much, especially with out far beyond their home they go.

Sad all the same, we are all humans, but running and trying to claim an upgrade seems like a bit of a a cop out. conflicting indeed.

[ezzra]

Australia doesn't owe nothing to no body and certainly no to and economic refuges, you can't even call the that,

as they're simply a gate crushers looking to settle in a rich country they have never lifted a finger for or even knew

where it was, on top of all that, they want to be settled in major cities and not up country smaller towns, and they

demand full social benefits as if they own the place, so Austrasia will do best to minimize the impact of such people,

[ronwparker]

Australia have a bad record and under Abbot's government I was deeply cynical about the P.R about refugees!

[steven100]

I believe off shore processing is a good idea because it's a deterrent to illegal immigrants ........ that's why less migrants are trying to get onto boats for Australia as they know they will end up in PNG.

I heard that the previous PM was working on a deal to increase / fill up the accommodation in Cambodia.

I know it cost alot but it stopped the boats coming which will have saved millions ........

[abrahamzvi]

I believe off shore processing is a good idea because it's a deterrent to illegal immigrants ........ that's why less migrants are trying to get onto boats for Australia as they know they will end up in PNG.

I heard that the previous PM was working on a deal to increase / fill up the accommodation in Cambodia.

I know it cost alot but it stopped the boats coming which will have saved millions ........

Millions of what, Dollars or people? We are talking about human beings here running for their lives. Isn't Australia big and rich enough to give shelter and refuge to honest asylum seekers? We are not referring to economic refugees. As sorry as one can and should be for them, one can't expect Australia, to other countries to allow them illegal entry, but to genuine asylum seekers???

[steven100]

I believe off shore processing is a good idea because it's a deterrent to illegal immigrants ........ that's why less migrants are trying to get onto boats for Australia as they know they will end up in PNG.

I heard that the previous PM was working on a deal to increase / fill up the accommodation in Cambodia.

I know it cost alot but it stopped the boats coming which will have saved millions ........

Millions of what, Dollars or people? We are talking about human beings here running for their lives. Isn't Australia big and rich enough to give shelter and refuge to honest asylum seekers? We are not referring to economic refugees. As sorry as one can and should be for them, one can't expect Australia, to other countries to allow them illegal entry, but to genuine asylum seekers???

Isn't Australia big and rich enough to give shelter and refuge to honest asylum seekers?

The problem being that most who try to enter illegally are not genuine refugees running from persecution, they are illegal immigrants.

[meltingpot2015]

An asylum seeker only becomes an "illegal immigrant", if after assessing his/her claim, it is discovered that his/her claim is not genuine. Even then he/she is allowed a grace period to leave the country.

[Mudcrab]

A refugee has the right to claim asylum in the first place of safety.

Travelling through multiple safe countries to try and reach Australia invalidates the claim to be a refugee.

They then become illegal immigrants.

Simply wanting a better life is not a criterion applied to become a refugee, as desirable as it may be.

The myth that Australia is big enough and rich enough is just that....a myth.

Just ask any pensioner or homeless person of which there are thousands.

Having said that I do think that Australia should take the 12,000 oppressed minority refugees from Syria as announced...from the genuine refugee camps....not from the hordes that seem to be invading Europe at present.

[shirtless]

I believe off shore processing is a good idea because it's a deterrent to illegal immigrants ........ that's why less migrants are trying to get onto boats for Australia as they know they will end up in PNG.

I heard that the previous PM was working on a deal to increase / fill up the accommodation in Cambodia.

I know it cost alot but it stopped the boats coming which will have saved millions ........

Millions of what, Dollars or people? We are talking about human beings here running for their lives. Isn't Australia big and rich enough to give shelter and refuge to honest asylum seekers? We are not referring to economic refugees. As sorry as one can and should be for them, one can't expect Australia, to other countries to allow them illegal entry, but to genuine asylum seekers???

[Mudcrab]

Australia have a bad record and under Abbot's government I was deeply cynical about the P.R about refugees!

Australia had a bad record under the previous Labor governments....50,000 illegal immigrants and over 1,000 people drowned.

That number is now zero.

Pretty good record under Abbott I think.

Saved a lot of lives.

[shirtless]

Australia is already full of migrants , for all the bleeding hearts out there if you want them pay for it. Im tired of so called asylum seekers they have crossed through many safe countries so by definition they are not refugees or asylum seekers they are opportunist or economic migrants.

[car720]

Australia is already full of migrants , for all the bleeding hearts out there if you want them pay for it. Im tired of so called asylum seekers they have crossed through many safe countries so by definition they are not refugees or asylum seekers they are opportunist or economic migrants.

It is also how they keep the White Australia policy alive, unofficially. Yet ask the average Australian if they disagree with this philosophy. The reason Australia is a rich country is because we don't let other buggers come and steal it. We have enough home grown (politicians) thieves.

[steven100]

The off-shore processing is a good idea ....... it helped to stop the boats !!!!!

Enough of these damn do gooders !!!!! if Sarah Hanson is so concerned .... take a couple in !!!

[alex88]

For those who say asylum seekers pass many safe countries on the way to Australia, no they don't. Australia is the only accounted that allows refugees between the Middle East and tyere. There are no countries an asylum seeker can stop at on the way.

[rosst]

I believe off shore processing is a good idea because it's a deterrent to illegal immigrants ........ that's why less migrants are trying to get onto boats for Australia as they know they will end up in PNG.

I heard that the previous PM was working on a deal to increase / fill up the accommodation in Cambodia.

I know it cost alot but it stopped the boats coming which will have saved millions ........

Millions of what, Dollars or people? We are talking about human beings here running for their lives. Isn't Australia big and rich enough to give shelter and refuge to honest asylum seekers? We are not referring to economic refugees. As sorry as one can and should be for them, one can't expect Australia, to other countries to allow them illegal entry, but to genuine asylum seekers???

Genuine asylum seekers ? How to recognise them, they all tear up and burn all their passport and ID documents.

The genuine refugees are the Christian minorities being persecuted by the Islamic murdering bastards.

[alex88]

Most asylum seekers fly into Malaysia and then cross into Indonesia from where they take a boat to Christmas Island in Australian territory. Both Malaysia and Indonesia imprison asylum seekers upon discovery.

[RachaRob]

Australia does have a program of receiving genuine refugees not illegal immigrants

[meltingpot2015]

This is not about the stop the boats policy or how well Tony Abbott did in introducing the stop the boats policy.

Also, what is all this talk about "illegal immigrants" and asylum seekers. This Cambodia deal is about those who have refugee status. These Refugees have gone through the OZ government asylum seeker process and been declared a refugee by the OZ government.

The OP is about the Cambodia Deal to resettle REFUGEES in Cambodia.

Of the Millions of dollars spent on the deal, how many of us genuinely think that that money goes to resettling refugees and not in the pockets of those making the deals and their henchmen.

Australia has always given a fair go to those arriving in their shores from far....listen to their national anthem. Just because Oz is going through economic tough times it dosen't mean we should stop anyone claiming refugee status, because it would mean more resources for your mates. (If there are homeless Ozzies then its up to the government to sort that out)

You guys who have this intention (that less refugees mean more for Ozzies in need) probably mean well, but as you know the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

And, Yes!, as the title of the OP says, The Cambodia Deal was an expensive joke. Without saying Refugees to Cambodia (because out of sight is out of mind), how about saying Refugees to Australia.

[fxe1200]

Australia is constantly violating "The 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees" of the UN. Whatever they do with the immigrants reaching Australian soil, it should be within the legal framework of the UN, which Australia also signed, not more, not less.

[Tassie Norm]

I believe off shore processing is a good idea because it's a deterrent to illegal immigrants ........ that's why less migrants are trying to get onto boats for Australia as they know they will end up in PNG.

I heard that the previous PM was working on a deal to increase / fill up the accommodation in Cambodia.

I know it cost alot but it stopped the boats coming which will have saved millions ........

I agree with the turn-back policy but not on the basis of cost. People smuggling: people paying big money to scumbag opportunists to travel on board unseaworthy/overloaded vessels. Prior to the current policy same scumbag money-makers who have never put a foot in the water paid risk taking skippers to do the dirty work. Telling them they would be rescued by Oz navy, perhaps locked up briefly (comfortably and fed and legal aid) and then repatriated to Indonesia. They cared nothing for the paying 'customers'. For those who disagree please nominate an Asian nation that would provide the same courtesy.

I am not comfortable with the Cambodia 'scheme' but, long term, the word will get around. Don't f*** with the Aussies..........

[steven100]

Australia is constantly violating "The 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees" of the UN. Whatever they do with the immigrants reaching Australian soil, it should be within the legal framework of the UN, which Australia also signed, not more, not less.

Australia has done and will continue to do everything possible to protect it's borders. What country really cares what the UN thinks ? they are considered a bunch of whingers as everyone knows.

where is the UN now ? I don't see them in Hungary or Croatia !!!!!!!

[novo58]

i believe that like me ....most Australians have absolutely no problem with the country accepting its fair share of refugees.

However they should be true refugees, who can produce valid identity documents from their country of origin to prove that they are in deed fleeing persecution or oppression. There are plenty that qualify living in refugee camps all over the world ......................but those who seem able to travel thru several countries and board boats usually in South East Asia by paying someone ( just how much DOES it cost to get on one of those boats in the first place and where do these people get that money from), and then also seem to have lost /destroyed ALL their identity documentation ------

well to my mind they are NOT true refugees but do in fact fall under the title of illegal immigrants.

As for the current situation in Europe ......................................how many MUSLIM countries are accepting any of these refugees ????

Any countries in the Middle East accepting any????

Any predominantly Muslim countries in South East Asia accepting any ?????

[Mudcrab]

Lets cut through the crap.

Australia , like most Western countries has had a gutful of Muslim "refugees".

Simple as that.

They have seen what has happened internally and in other countries. Call it what you will. White Australia policy...anti muslim policy.

Really it is irrelevant what the bleeding hearts call it.

This is the reality.

And the silent majority are waking up finally.

[weegee]

A refugee has the right to claim asylum in the first place of safety.

Travelling through multiple safe countries to try and reach Australia invalidates the claim to be a refugee.

They then become illegal immigrants.

Simply wanting a better life is not a criterion applied to become a refugee, as desirable as it may be.

The myth that Australia is big enough and rich enough is just that....a myth.

Just ask any pensioner or homeless person of which there are thousands.

Having said that I do think that Australia should take the 12,000 oppressed minority refugees from Syria as announced...from the genuine refugee camps....not from the hordes that seem to be invading Europe at present.

You have covered that in a nutshell...My thoughts exactly.

They sure are having a good time trying to control the refugees in Europe at the moment...arent they? It will also take months to clean up all the rubbish they just throw on the ground with no respect for the country they are crossing also....

Those small countries in Europe, cant afford the refugees either....

[Mudcrab]

For those who say asylum seekers pass many safe countries on the way to Australia, no they don't. Australia is the only accounted that allows refugees between the Middle East and tyere. There are no countries an asylum seeker can stop at on the way.

India, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand....how many more do you want?

[Mudcrab]

Most asylum seekers fly into Malaysia and then cross into Indonesia from where they take a boat to Christmas Island in Australian territory. Both Malaysia and Indonesia imprison asylum seekers upon discovery.

Both Malaysia and Indonesia are Muslim countries....no passport or immigration controls required for Muslims. Free passage and no threat of persecution. i.e place of safety under the UN convention. But also no free handouts/social security/dole payments. No wonder they don't want to stay.

[kinmaew]

I agree rich countries need to help and its easy to say solve the root cause in those countries and you fix the problem. But tell me, for people with no skills, how on earth will they even buy a house in AUS with the cheapest thing you can get for AUD 500k - or is the expectation that they will be on DSS for life? From the bleeding left wing apart from yelling "Let them in", please tell me what is your integration plan for people with no skills and no education (Except reciting the Koran from cover to cover)?

[meltingpot2015]

For those who say asylum seekers pass many safe countries on the way to Australia, no they don't. Australia is the only accounted that allows refugees between the Middle East and tyere. There are no countries an asylum seeker can stop at on the way.

India, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand....how many more do you want?

Most asylum seekers fly into Malaysia and then cross into Indonesia from where they take a boat to Christmas Island in Australian territory. Both Malaysia and Indonesia imprison asylum seekers upon discovery.

Both Malaysia and Indonesia are Muslim countries....no passport or immigration controls required for Muslims. Free passage and no threat of persecution. i.e place of safety under the UN convention. But also no free handouts/social security/dole payments. No wonder they don't want to stay.

Nice try..none of the countries you mention in post #26 are signatories to the 1951 UN Convention relating to the status of refugees.

[farangmick]

Australia doesn't owe nothing to no body and certainly no to and economic refuges, you can't even call the that,

as they're simply a gate crushers looking to settle in a rich country they have never lifted a finger for or even knew

where it was, on top of all that, they want to be settled in major cities and not up country smaller towns, and they

demand full social benefits as if they own the place, so Austrasia will do best to minimize the impact of such people,

English language not your best subject at school, I guess?