world

Some Australian asylum seekers to be deported have cancer, terminal illnesses

16 Comments
By Matt Siegel

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2016.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

16 Comments
Login to comment

There is a limit - socially, economically and practically - about how many people can be successfully absorbed in any country, without bringing down the local resources which are scarce at best. Immigration should be cancelled and focus in developing their original countries to some basic standard so they are not forced to look somewhere. This is only feasible for civilized people willing to learn, accept challenges, work hard and succeed. Is not suitable for these people who only try to take advantage without any responsibility, like is happening in Europe right now. But again, nobody need these in any case.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

“Australia has a strong record of promoting and protecting human rights, at home and around the world,” Foreign Minister Julie Bishop said in a statement.

Or not. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/30/australias-bid-for-the-un-human-rights-council-was-conceived-in-a-parallel-universe

5 ( +5 / -0 )

They will be able to get treatment at Nauru and also enjoy the quiet, peaceful life for which Nauru is famous!

6 ( +7 / -1 )

so people that have terminal illness, most likely contracted in there home countries. come to Australia illegally then when they get deported claim human rights abuses because the Australian taxpayer wont pay there medical bills. One of the requirements to even get permanent residency/citizenship in Australia is to have a medical done. If you want free handouts that are not sustainable better to try asylum in Germany.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Let's face it thats one of the perks of being an isolated country which is never in the spotlight. Australia has been getting away with murder for a very long time when it comes to their immigration policies, among other things. No european country nor the USA, Canada etc could do what aussie politicians do without being labelled inhuman, racist etc.

They are the big boys in the region, have been bribing poor third world countries such as Nauru and PNG for a while now to 'look after' their asylum seekers. Thats like if EU nations or the usa were sending all their illegal immigrants to say Jamaica, Cuba, Haiti, Malta etc to be processed or wait for the procedure s to start. All ngo would be on their backs. Not much happening with oz. The lucky country indeed.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

When Australian tax payers, citizens and leagal immigrants are waiting in long lines to get their medical needs seen to that seems fair, considering some of these people (cue jumpers) paid as much as $10K to people smugglers bypassing numerous other (muslim-islamic) countries in an attempt to take advantage of the system that has taken over 200 years to develop. @goldorak Your limited knowlage of global and regional affairs is obvious from your quotes "getting away with murder" No EU etc countries" Geographics and logisticaly Australia demonstrates its generosity well above its weight of 25M population. Check your facts on thoes (colonial) contries you have quoted and you will see how wrong you are.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

There's nothing wrong with applying very strict criteria to asylum seekers once they arrive and mercilessly deporting them if their claims have failed, but the Australian model of handing out cash to people smugglers in exchange for turning back boats (with potential genuine refugees onboard? who knows?) and holding people in terrible conditions until they 'voluntarily' withdraw their claims is not something Europe should ever follow.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Good, send them BACK, to wherever they CAME from, when they ILLEGALLY entered the country.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

It's great to see so many fellow "Daily Mail" readers here. If they really have cancer, let the country that complains take them in, simple.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

It is obvious that having cancer has nothing to do with a claim for asylum, which is dependent on whether or not you were persecuted by the government in your home country. This constant stream of sentimental claptrap is tedious beyond belief.

Every country has a primary duty to its own citizens and since money is limited every penny spent on foreigners is less money available for your own. It would therefore be a betrayal of your own people to allow foreigners to enter who are coming simply because they want to use your services.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

and holding people in terrible conditions until they 'voluntarily' withdraw their claims is not something Europe should ever follow. yes well see how accommodating the EU is in about 2-3yrs and a couple million more asylum seekers later, some of these EU countries taking the moral high ground over Australias policies are now screaming that others arnt taking there fair share, like or hate Australias tough stance on asylum seekers the fact remains it works, alomost no boats have come and nobody has lost there lives taking the dangerous journey. We all know the people that have died and keep on dying trying to cross the Mediterranean.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

M3M3M3: ... but the Australian model of handing out cash to people smugglers in exchange for turning back boats (with potential genuine refugees onboard? who knows?)

If Australia pays up front, why shouldn't the smugglers drop the refugees in the ocean, as soon as Coast Guard is out of sight? Otherwise the refugees will whine and complain all the way back.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Australians are a heartless lot but I was surprised to learn that they are taking 25,000 refugees through the UN this year.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

@turbotsat

If Australia pays up front, why shouldn't the smugglers drop the refugees in the ocean, as soon as Coast Guard is out of sight?

I guess because nobody would ever pay for their services again if word spread that they were killing their customers.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

@wildwest, what are you on about mate, why the aggro?

If you don't think Oz is getting away with things and flying under the radar (not saying its bad, as I said its one of the perks of being relatively small and isolated) compare to EU nations or the USA then you don't understand what's happening around you. When Obama, Merkel, Hollande or Cameron (or Abe, Putin etc) sneeze hordes of journos ask "what did you say?". Who outside Oz knows Malcolm Turnbull? How many non aussies on here knew that oz asylum seekers were sent to Nauru or PNG? not that many I would say. That's right, countries in Oceania can fly under the radar in a way EU and the usa can only dream about. That's why we are more pragmatic and can put in place bolder (sometimes wrong lets face it) policies without having to worry about what other politically correct EU members will say.

Re the policy itself, although I didn't like nor vote for Abbott I have to say his 'stop the boats' policy was imo the best of his tenure and as wtfjapan said, it worked. Having said that yes there was/is a price to pay: some asylum seekers were abused in and around the facilities. No one can be pleased with that.

Sure they come here illegally but as a civilised nation I don't think we should turn a blind eye on what happens in the countries we are paying to basically handle our sh.te. Plus PNG having one the worst crime rate in the world am not sure that's the best place to handle refugees anyway. just my 2 cents on that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Australians are a heartless lot but I was surprised to learn that they are taking 25,000 refugees through the UN this year. compared to Japans quota Australians are saints

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites