Australian Asylum Seekers: A Conundrum

What should our policy be?

The news of late has had much commentary and opinion concerning Australia's "Asylum Seekers" Policy, particularly with the issue of where Refugees should be housed whilst their applications are being processed.

There are two distinct issues to this argument,

1. What is our attitude to Asylum Seekers/refugees generally? and
2.  How and where should they be processed as to their eligibility to being allowed to reside permanently into Australia

No-one, I believe, is against the sovereign right of Australia to choose who it allows into this country as permanent residents.

The Australian government and the Australian opposition party, the Australian Liberals, are both in accord that Asylum seekers should be intercepted and  located in offshore sites where their applications would be duly processed. That Australia will decide who it allows into this country and on what grounds.

In opposition to this is the minority Greens Party, humanitarian organisations and various religious leaders. 

They argue that Asylum seekers should be housed in Australia under the day to day supervision of Australia whilst  their Asylum applications are processed. That, as a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention, we have certain obligations that we are abrogating by offshore processing. And, further, that it is a human rights violation and morally wrong to offshore the process.

Now the Australian public I feel are mostly for the interception and processing of Asylum seekers offshore. 

Australians have a very high regard for human rights, and rightly so, we have a lot to be thankful for, and we genuinely feel for those less well off. But deep down the average "Joe Blow" does not want anyone but bona fide Asylum seekers getting residency in Australia. 

There is much thought that the majority of these boat people are not true refugees escaping torture death and other serious human rights abuses. They in fact believe many are "economic refugees", people who want to come here for a better standard of living but who would not have been accepted through normal channels and procedures. Given the many incidences of identification destruction as well as the violent and costly disturbances, some have been involved with, this is not a hard proposition to believe.

The Australian government, the opposition party and the people of Australia feel that by enforcing offshore processing we will deter non genuine "Asylum seekers" from even trying to get here. And, probably more to the point, if they are processed offshore it is very much out of sight out of mind. Due process of law can take place without our collective soft hearts being affected and therefore our objectivity..

This is a valid point to consider. Australians just don't like hurting people, we are not collectively hard enough to allow these people to appeal to our very open humanity. Those opposing offshore processing know this thus the bringing into play spectres of "corporal punishment" in Malaysia or sub standard conditions in Nauru or "unaccompanied' children roaming around in a foreign country alone and afraid. They know the only way to win this argument is to blatantly appeal to our softer side.

We Australians have the right to choose who comes to our country and how they come. We have the right to deter people from attempting to do so illegally.


The government's policy of interception and offshore housing of asylum seekers is the way for Australia to proceed.


But, in saying that, we also have the obligation to ensure that these people, for whatever reason they attempt to come here illegally, are treated humanely, promptly and according to law, be it domestic or otherwise.


I think the Australian government, the people of Australia, with the oversight of the country's news media and humanitarian and religious organisations, want this outcome and are more than capable of achieving it.