While the issue of asylum seekers has mainly challenged Australia’s political power and resources, the debate is mostly ethical and putting human dignity first is integral. Whilst both political parties have very similar policies in regards to the topical issues, which are in essence going partially against the Church’s stance and human dignity. Australia has the economy, land, low population and living style to support more asylum seekers/refugees, especially when we have a ranking of 48 in the world on the scale of how many refugees we currently have accepted.
With both political parties having fairly similar opinions on the refugee situation, only having slight differences, only a few differences separate the two, with labor wanting to increase the refugee intake per year to almost double of what the coalition currently has in place which is 13,750 and labor plan to raise it up to 27,000. (Australian Labor Party) Also labor also plans to reinstate the UN’s refugee convention, which Abbott is currently undermining, which is technically international law. In one way this breach of international law Abbot has broken is refusing to take refugees that has been allocated to Australia by the UN, for it is overstepping the coalitions humanitarian intake policy. Also labor will work to implement a system to release the children from off shore and on shore detention centres. As well as cutting down the time it takes for an asylum seeker going through the process to become a
The piece written by Michael Gordon in The Age on October 19 2011, argues that ten years after the Australian federal election that sparked the asylum seeker controversy, asylum seekers are still being demonised and alienated by both of Australia’s major political parties. Gordon writes in an assertive, controlled and a somewhat concerned tone throughout the article with his target audience aimed at ‘The Age’ readers who have considerable knowledge and understanding of the ongoing debate. Current parliament members from both federal parties could also be his target audience as Gordon provides a solution to the crisis, in that the failure of the Malaysia
Asylum Seeker policy has become key political battleground in recent times. This stems from the end of Australia’s ‘White Australia’ policy in the 1970s; a policy which saw restrictions placed on non-European migration for over 70 years (Crock & Berg, 2011). Following the conclusion of the Vietnam war, a myriad of boats arrived in Australia, carrying asylum seekers from south east Asia. This lead to a stark increase in public concern over the arrivals and consequently, the term ‘boat people’ was born and spread through the media and public/political discourses alike (Grewcock, 2009).
Different Australian government officials all have contrasting views towards asylum seekers. However, the Turnbull government is set to disobey the Australian people’s wants, and keep the asylum seekers away.
The religious and societal point of views differ quite a lot, which is why this contemporary issue is causing a lot of controversy. The religious approach is that Australia should give aid to asylum seekers and show hospitality as well as compassion. Whereas, most of Australians disregard asylum seekers and think that the government should stop giving them aid. Religious communities take on the gospel teachings and implement them into their views and how they practice it in society. While, societal views are based on selfish beliefs and the uncertainty that society has on asylum seekers. Societal views portray how asylum seekers are gaining more benefits than the general public, which is not true. Though, religious parishes put aside the asylum
In the last few years the Australian society are debating whether asylum seekers should be given asylum in Australia. Asylum seekers are people who have fled their home to find refuge in another as a political refugee. Asylum seekers are not committing any crimes when arriving to Australia and they greatly contribute to the Australian society. How it is expensive to support asylum seeker’s welfare and some asylum seekers and some asylum seekers can cause overpopulation in Australia.
For many years refugees have been demonized by the country through the spread of fear and misconception. Furthermore, the disgusting treatment of refugees in the detention camps by the Australian Government has been roundly criticised by the international community.
The Papua New Guinea’s Supreme Court ruling that Australia’s detention of asylum seekers on Manus Island is illegal and that the centre must close has once again raised in Australian society the very divisive issue of asylum seekers and their treatment. Commentaries following the Supreme Court decision have portrayed Australia’s approach to asylum seekers as inhumane and uncaring. With continual political, humanitarian and media attention, the histrionics surrounding the issue are rife and many of the crucial facts as to Australia’s response to asylum seekers and the purpose for our offshore processing centres long forgotten. It’s time to restore a factual basis and balance to the discussion. Can Australians be proud of our
The importance of the subject lays on the fact that, today more than ever, the current humanitarian crisis caused by children and families fleeing the war zone in Syria worries the whole world. And lately, the Australia's policy towards asylum seekers arriving by boat has attracted the most attention. The former Australian Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, said “Australia’s strong stance on asylum seekers, which includes a policy of turning back boats and offshore processing of refugee claimants, had stopped the people smuggling trade to Australia and opened up more places for those in genuine need” . Internationally, Australia has always been considered as a model in terms of immigration. Indeed, its broad immigration program, its discretionary offshore humanitarian resettlement program and the respect of its international legal obligations made mark in history. However, this ideology seems to belong to the past given the recent affairs. Asylum policies implemented by the Howard Government (1996-2007), and more recently the Coalition Government known as Operation Sovereign Borders, have tremendously reduced the flow of asylum seekers reaching Australia by boat. It is described as "inhumane, of dubious legality and
Good morning delegates of the youth parliament and observing members. Today I stand before you to discuss an issue that continues to evoke high emotions and create deep divisions within Australian society. I refer to the matter of refugees and Australia's immigration policy. Not since the second world war has the world faced such an upheaval with so many people displaced. In 2015 there were 65.3 million people forcibly displaced from their homes because of conflict and persecution. Developing countries hold 84% of refugees while wealthier countries like Australia prioritise the need to reduce asylum seekers within their borders. The current policy contravenes the proper treatment of refugees and asylum seekers; because regardless of their mode of entry, once here Australia has a duty to provide protection.
Australia, one of the countries which drafted the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, has been criticized by its asylum seekers policies in recent years. This criticism comes from public medias and NGOs both inside and outside of the countries and exerts pressure for the Australian government and politicians. The discordant opinions toward Australia’s asylum seekers policies caused intense domestic as well as international relationship of Australia, and the medias play as an important inflammatory role during the recent process.
Over the past couple years, the refugee crisis has gotten worse, but is this something Australia should be a part of? It might be hard but is it worth it in the end? Should Australia have a part in this and if whether the anti-immigration laws should be prohibited? In this speech, I will be discussing a range of diverse opinions and reasons on this subject. What I will be addressing will be the current problems of migration, Australia’s laws of migration
This film was shown to me by Sharleen Davids, whom as a Primary School teacher at Darlington Primary, it was made compulsory viewing. By means of assisting with teachers’ understanding of the circumstances of an asylum seeker. In essence, this film was beneficial; especially as a great proportion of the students at her primary school are refugees. Respectively, the film was produced by refugees advocate Jessie Taylor. Taylor travelled to Indonesia, where she met with asylum seekers. A collection of the stories she heard were shaped into a documentary named, ‘Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea’ (2006). The film makers involved created a stir with the ad line: 'The film that Tony and Julia don't want you to see’. (Peter Galvin, 2013) The
Asylum seekers are the world's number one problem and debate going on right now in most countries, Australia right now does not allow most asylum seekers in and turns them away bringing up one of the bigger questions in our time yet are asylum seekers people as well? Should we let them in? And do they pose a threat to Australia's economy? I think we should let them in
As more migrants attempt to seek asylum in our country, more are detained in poor, unsanitary detention centres, some of them having worse conditions than the situation they were experiencing from where they originated from. The decision between allowing or stopping the boats is clouded between what is right for human beings and what is right for our country. If we allow the boats to arrive in our nation, our population may overflow, increasing unemployment and poverty due to lack of jobs however, if we stop the boats, asylum seekers will continue to live in poor conditions which is incredibly unjust. The nations surrounding Australia look upon our nation for help and guidance but if we don’t take in their refugees, what kind of a country are we? This is the hole we are trapped in.
Many refugees leave their countries due to war related issues, because they have no home, because they could be thrown in jail, be tortured or even be killed just because of their race, religion or political opinion. The last thing they need is to be discriminated and harassed by the country they sought refuge in. It is time for Australia as a country to see these human as people who are fleeing in fear rather than illegal