|
Post by spaceflower on Oct 18, 2016 12:31:06 GMT
Australia is a rich country (GDP $47,318 per capita) and a sparsely populated continent (4.2/km2) They could afford to receive some more refugees. Instead they dump them on the island Nauru with the aim to make life so miserable for the refugees that they want to return home. (Or commit suicide, either way Australia is rid of them. Of course many of these are not political refugees according to Geneva convention. But they if they don't get asylum, they will be sent back. But should they be punished for seeking asylum? The Naruan government stops media access. www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-09/nauru-visa-fee-increase-censorship/5191108 People are desperate. www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2016/08/australia-abuse-neglect-of-refugees-on-nauru/I thought Australia was a civilized nation. But which country is nowadays? Human rights are only for citizens, not for unwanted migrants. Migrant smuggling must be deterred at any price. Of course, there are some who see Australa’s policy as a model to follow. Is there a hardly habitable island in Europe to send migrants to? A “Mediterranenan solution” modelled after the “Pacific solution”. "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!" I don't think this is the attitude of USA or any other state today.
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Oct 19, 2016 1:29:47 GMT
Just as a hit and run post, that wasn't the attitude of the US when the Statue of Liberty was installed, either.
|
|
|
Post by raspberrybullets on Oct 20, 2016 22:20:19 GMT
As the only Australian represent on this forum, I'll chime in.
The situation is horrendous. They even threatened doctors and other health workers who speak out about the abuse and issues going on on Nauru. Earlier this year some children had to be flown to Australia for medical treatment, the doctors refused to realse them because they'd be sent back and they said it would harm their health. At some point they banned journalists as well. The current government likes to blame the former labour goverment by saying they did nothing to "stop the boats" which they claim causes more death by droning etc - so by deterring asylum seekers this way they are actually "doing good". It makes me so sick. And it's not like the Labour government has any better policy. The only good policy would be to close these centres down.
Many of the children are not getting even a basic education because they get abused if they try to attend the schools at Nauru. Their have been allegations of gaurds raping and abusing women, and children. Earlier this year a woman who was raped and pregnant was given the option to have an abortion. She didn't know if that was what she wanted to do and refused and wanted to see a psychologist, so they flew her back to Nauru under the care of the same guards who allegedly raped her. The situation is horrendous and horrific beyond reckoning.
I hate that so many Australians vote based on whether they'll have a few extra dollars in their pockets each week, rather than on making sure people have some basic human rights. Having said that, there are many Australian's who do not like this at all. I'm sure a big part of the reason the detention centres were moved off shore is becasue "out of sight, out of mind". The detention centres used to be in the country, granted in mostly out of the way areas, but still accessible and easier for people to be horrified. Now they are far away where nobody can see.
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Oct 25, 2016 0:26:51 GMT
There's a huge amount of outrage at the moment here as well because a few dozen child refugees from the Calais Jungle have been moved here. Some of this outrage is due to the fact that the so-called 'children' being brought here might be a good deal older. Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by raspberrybullets on Oct 25, 2016 9:47:12 GMT
I dunno, are they older or aren't they? Not sure what sort of thoughts to have. Either way, people have the right to seek asylum.
|
|
|
Post by spaceflower on Oct 25, 2016 11:55:22 GMT
Those in "the Jungle" don't want to seek asylum in France, they want to work (illegally) in UK.
But many of these young people (minors) have relatives in UK, so it seems reasonable to let them in.
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Oct 25, 2016 21:19:39 GMT
I can't quite understand why they see the UK as more desirable than France .. what's wrong with France?
|
|
|
Post by raspberrybullets on Oct 26, 2016 8:45:17 GMT
I'd rather live in France than the UK if I had a choice. Especially the south.
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Oct 26, 2016 21:55:16 GMT
Yeah Mind my sister lived in Marsailles for a while for work and I think she ended up feeling a bit isolated and was glad to move back .
|
|
|
Post by raspberrybullets on Oct 27, 2016 11:10:19 GMT
Yeah, it can be hard to live somewhere if you can't integrate into the society.
|
|
|
Post by spaceflower on Oct 28, 2016 1:18:40 GMT
I can't quite understand why they see the UK as more desirable than France .. what's wrong with France? They may talk English but not French. I'd choose UK before France any day for this reason. Their family/relatives live in UK. They have contacts who can give them work in UK but none in France.
|
|
|
Post by Mari on Oct 28, 2016 16:07:43 GMT
Other than that the French financial situation is bad, especially for immigrants, as is the treatment of immigrants. Hence the protests that arise every couple of years.
|
|
|
Post by Moose on Oct 29, 2016 20:54:57 GMT
Well our financial situation isn't great and is about to get a whole lot worse
|
|
|
Post by Mari on Oct 30, 2016 16:49:35 GMT
Your rates of employment are a lot better though. A LOT better.
|
|
|
Post by tangent on Oct 30, 2016 18:39:32 GMT
The Brexit vote reduced the value of the pound by about 17%. Economists reckon that should result in a 4% to 5% rise in inflation when currently imported raw materials dwindle. Paul Krugman, a respected economist thinks this will eventually mean a permanent reduction in GDP of 2% to 3%. Effectively, this means average wages will be down by 2% to 3%. But a lot might happen in the meantime that, in my opinion, might make it worse.
|
|