Coalition to Deploy Christopher Pyne as Latest Weapon in War Against Asylum Seekers
The Coalition has announced that it would spend over one billion on “unmanned aerial drones” as part of its border protection policy against asylum seekers.
Opposition Defence spokesman Senator David Johnston said that once the boats were detected by the military drones, surface craft would be sent to intercept the boats and to turn them around where it was safe to do so, and with the co-operation of the countries they had left.
”Now we would anticipate intercepting them at a much earlier stage with this platform,” he said.
‘So we’d be much closer to both Indonesia and Sri Lanka in this particular instance, such that it would give us a greater opportunity to engage authorities and say look we’ve got this boat coming, it’s not seaworthy, we’re going to bring it back.”
He also suggested officers on Customs and Navy boats in remote international waters would be given the job of deciding whether asylum seekers were “genuine,” presumably through some sort of online questionnaire or “satisfaction survey.”
The opposition says that it will spend $1.5 billion on seven drones and aim to have them patrolling Australia’s waters and international waters within four to five years.
Senator Johnston suggested that Navy and Customs officers could be responsible for determining whether people intercepted in boats were genuine refugees under a Coalition government.
‘I think ultimately the interdiction crew that our patrol boats and our Customs boats would put on board would make an adjudication,” he said.
theguttertrash.com 
The endurance and range of drones make them ideal for surveillance tasks and it makes far better use of our resources rather than relying on manned aircraft and capital ships. Now all they need to do is equip them with hell-fire missiles…… (sarcasm)
Drones should be fitted with loudspeakers emitting loud Whiney Pyne whines. A minute of such awful noise would either; turn the boats around in an attempt to escape the mind numbing insanity or; vibrate the boat to pieces thereby negating the problem of asylum seekers for ever!!
I billion on drones — we’ve got enough of them in Federal parliament!!
The endurance and range of drones make them ideal for surveillance tasks
But not at sea … ever sailed the oceans … bewdiful one day, fkn seasick the next …
Sounds like a good idea … but … I’d like to see a CBA … the tories are good at that I understand?*
*sarc alert too
I billion on drones — we’ve got enough of them in Federal parliament!!
LOL! Keep that up and you’ll get a, C&W CD, shipped out to you in orginal cellophane wrapper in no time! 😆
You do know drones fly?
No doubt Gillard will announce ‘solar powered stealth drones’ at an even greater cost (to keep our borders safe).
You do know drones fly?</i.
And you sail fkn yachts … what do you think the drones fly IN … and what happens to IT when the weather gets rough … 🙄
You do know drones fly?
How big do you think drones are?
Interesting, just whose idea was this anyway?
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-09-04/australia-moves-to-buy-spy-drones/4236544
And maritime surveillance is in its infancy … apparently …
http://defensetech.org/2013/04/04/triton-drone-prepares-for-first-flight/
“opposition says that it will spend $1.5 billion on seven drones”
yeah great *sarc*, and will they be launched from land, or are we going to shell out for an aircraft-carrier to launch them from sea like the yanks do.?
Where`s the cost benefit analysis.?
**************************************************
“I billion on drones — we’ve got enough of them in Federal parliament!!””
hear Hear Knarf, well said.
TB if you do some googling you will soon discover that drones range in size from something you can hold in your hand to aircraft about the size of a GA light aircraft and they can stay aloft for days at a time which is why they are so good for surveillance also they operate at altitudes that mean they are virtually invisible to potential targets. Bad weather at sea is simply not any more an issue than it would be for any aircraft.
Bad weather at sea is simply not any more an issue than it would be for any aircraft.
Yeah, I’m willing to concede some of that, based on what I’ve read too, IH, but marine ops are still in infancy … I must admit it seems a better way to deploy naval resources …
Wonder if the ROI or CBA proves that? 🙂
I have had to listen to this mantra about “people fleeing” for fear of their life for years now on this topic and as such have been saying how it was just part of a different story that had nothing to do with “asylum” and everything to do with ECONOMICS! Anybody really surprised or care to say now there is no country shopping, pull factors or abuse here? I find it refreshing it is at least making the print media for a change…Its what ever body already knows anyway…
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/tamils-flee-for-cash-not-from-harm/story-fn59niix-1226619501732
Drones…Give me a break..it is all about policies/enforcing law and taking away incentives..The rest is just a smoke screen to appear as if something is being done while not really doing anything…Your government is a carbon copy of ours…Labor wants votes and the Libs want cheap labor…All a sham….UN Charter has no place in the modern world of the “economic migrants”….
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/immigration/asylum-boat-arrives-in-geraldton-2000km-south-of-christmas-island/story-fn9hm1gu-1226616052358
Plenty of Australian suckers, keep on coming! Don’t worry about the remittance gravy train being stopped, nobody wants to be labeled a racist, mean or not compassionate…LOL
This epidemic is almost laughable now as is the excuses still being made…Much like our own cluster here in the States…You guys live on a damn island and can’t seem to control your borders; what is up!
If they were really fleeing persecution in Sri Lanka why don’t they go to India?? Are they in danger in India??
Neil,
There is no danger! That is the point…And has been mentioned by many to include myself genuine refugees don’t skip closer safe havens if their reasoning is really desperation…To skip other countries is very telling they are after more…The whole thing is a sham on many levels.
If that is the case why don’t we get boat people from India??
But i think you are right. Most alleged refugees are economic immigrants rather than fleeing persecution. Must be a bummer for refugees in some camp who have lost a place in Australia because they have no money to pay a smuggler.
The Eastern Europeans are on the move as well. What beats me is that countries like Russia who have so much natural resources cannot develop a society where people like to live. If a Russian can get out of Russia they will.
Neil,
Very true…
Hi Sparta
Yeah, too bad about the genuine refugees doing it hard in camps to the north of us, although we are told an orderly process is still in place and the usual numbers are coming from those camps.
Christmas island is full to the brim with economic refugees…… OrdOrdOrd……
Might go off to the Boter and give him a tip.
“and the usual numbers are coming from those camps.”
As far as i know that is not true. We have a quota system. Each person who comes on a boat means one less person from a camp. At the moment we are getting all our humanitarian intake from boat people.
You maybe correct Nils, I haven’t looked into it.
I might remind you all that most “illegals” turn up by AEROPLANE … more and more from the states … must be escaping the poverty and decay … 🙄
I agree most illegals come by plane.
It ought to be illegal to call asylum seekers illegal.
I agree, sreb, not the same as “illegal” immigrants … usually visas hoppers …
Asylum seekers are just that and Australia has responsibility … but there is a reasonable argument for why they skip other countries and head for Oz, don’t you think?
I know my parents came here for a better life (and to get away from my old man’s “nocturnal past” …but we did follow the process – tedious though it was – oh, and fkn cheap!
“You maybe correct Nils, I haven’t looked into it.”
I have posted this before but it is a difficult issue
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/boatpeople-keep-other-asylum-seekers-at-bay/story-e6frg6z6-1225961715172
“SALVATION Army senior soldier Simon Hartley struggles with the consequences of asylum policy every day in Altona, in Melbourne’s southwest, in the heart of Prime Minister Julie Gillard’s electorate.
He does not deal with asylum-seekers who arrive on boats. He helps the families of refugees suffering overseas who have been crowded out, denied a place in Australia because it has been taken by someone who originally came illegally.
“The families we are assisting have put their applications through the correct channels, have not sought out people-smugglers and now are being told that they do not have a real chance of obtaining a visa,” Hartley says. “This is grossly unfair and will drive more to people-smugglers………………………………..An Australian-based worker with the oppressed Karen minority from Burma, who declined to be named, echoes Hartley’s comments: “While the suffering of many people seeking to enter Australia by boat via people-smugglers is heartbreaking, it would be a tragedy if the granting of visas to these people were at the expense of offshore asylum-seekers such as the Karen who, in good faith, apply for humanitarian visas through the appropriate channels.”
We are talking about economic refugees (sic) who have the money for flight and not a rickity fishing boat. Another one just sank.
I’ve told the story of an illegal family I sheltered, our children played together, then they were discovered and sent back.
A year later they turned up again on dodgy passports and I still said nothing, they all looked emaciated. A month passed by and they asked if I could pick up some of their friends at the airport, which I did. That’s how they found the money for new identities, the four characters I picked up were gangsters.
I still said nothing for the sake of the children.
Thanx nils.
I still said nothing for the sake of the children.
What about MY children? 🙄
Evil exists where good men AND women do nothing …
“illegals” is an emotionally loaded term that has more to do with Australians’ sense of entitlement and resentment towards anyone who might be different.
If you’re talking about people who arrive by plane and simply don’t leave when they’re mean to why not just call overstayers?
That’s what they used to be called before we became so hysterical about the situation.
… why not just call overstayers?
‘Cause I think they are breaking the law … that’s illegal … asylum seekers aren’t – by international/UN law …
If you overstay your visa (and particularly deliberately!) that’s illegal … and not uniquely Aussie BTW …
True “boat people” are really determined and would make really good Aussies … the VN community shows that … but the SVN were true asylum seekers … even though they arrived with gold leaf all over their bodies … they would have been persecuted for being successful …
And it IS a vexing question …
But the tories’ll fix ’em just let ’em into the Lodge … 🙄
TB
did you see this piece in the courier mail today?
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/technology/baes-superdrone-taranis-to-be-tested-at-woomera/story-fn5kftjr-1226619892302
Yes I did, thanks, IH
“very secret” but we can read about it???? 😉
‘Depending on the specific context, therefore, terms such as “illegal immigrants” or “illegals” may constitute a breach of the Council’s Standards of Practice on these grounds. The risk of breach can usually be avoided by using a term such as “asylum seekers” although in some cases, of course, the context may require reference to their unlawful or unauthorised entry or their status as unlawful non-citizens pending determination of their claims (if they do not have bridging visas).’
Press Council
It is false to say that somebody who is “claiming” asylum and clearly not entitled to such protections should be deemed to be anything other than illegal when they and everybody else knows they were never entitled to do so. Emotionally loaded word you say Reb? Well it should be! As has been pointed out such people that abuse the system are law breakers. We deal with about a million a year here; count yourselves lucky you have an ocean between you. We here in the states do not have such a luxury…
The problem we have now is there are a large number of “morons” pushing the idea that the movement of people is a “human right” which is of course absurd in the modern sense. It is one thing to deny basic human rights based on the “color” of one’s skin and quite another to insist “place of birth” is equivalent. I am sorry, but words have meaning and this asinine idea that we should not use them because they “offend” somebody has to stop. Political correctness is helping to kill the “WEST” and undermine one of our greatest tenants, freedom of speech. We can no longer have honest dialogue about anything in the WEST because the topic (whatever that may be) is always side-lined with the need for one to defend themselves from accusations meant to stifle and win the argument because the individual or cause making the accusation cannot with the debate on the merits.
The modern asylum seeker aka “ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT here” knows the system; fostered by bleeding heart lawyers/politicians in the West, relatives and friends already through the system and demonetization of anybody who brings this issue to light. To do so is to be deemed “xenophobic” with is ridiculous. God forbid you want the rule of law not the rule of emotion to be the standard.
As I have said to the boredom of many here; it is moronic to keep thinking we can fix the problems of the 3rd world by importing it. We have simply run out of places for people to FLEE and the sooner we stop giving the 3rd world a place to “run away too” the sooner they will start trying to figure out how to make things work for them at home. There are BILLIONS clamoring to get here and most legitimate asylum seekers will never be able to come up with the 14,000.00 dollars US to circumvent the legitimate system!
I agree with Sparta, political correctness has gone too far, although its not entirely true to say ‘we have simply run out of places for people to FLEE…’
Australia is a large island and we can accommodate $100 million economic refugees if they set up camp down the road from the Alice.
el gordo,
Yes, perhaps you can but why? To what end? A desire to replicate China or India?
It’s a ‘feel good’ moment in history … we can save the world, which is about to slip into a mini ice age.
If we don’t populate willingly, then we may perish as a nation state…. democracy, justice and economic free enterprise supplanted by dictatorship.
The caveat is that all new comers deemed to be economic asylum seekers (sic) should be put into a large holding station in a isolated desert location, where they will learn English and have religious tomfoolery knocked out of them.
Their stay there is determined by how quickly they can adapt to Australian culture.
… where they will learn English and have religious tomfoolery knocked out of them …
Will that include, Irish, Catlicks?
Yep, shouldn’t be too hard.
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/04/16/the-economics-of-immigration/more-immigration-is-not-always-better
Now some might ask, “why this article here?”….I think you could say your government is following the same economic model…MORE, MORE, MORE…..People Ponzi folks…
Have a look at this Sparta… not sure if its accurate.
http://pickeringpost.com/article/up-to-80-of-illegal-immigrants-are-afghani-army-deserters/1015
el gordo,
Yeah, I am not sure how accurate those numbers are but suffice to say a strong case can be made that a very large number of asylum seekers are “economic” in nature; to try and argue otherwise is just moronic. It is just mass migration to places of means dressed in a “humanitarian” shroud. Why any of the Western Countries are still using a post WWII charter in 2013 is just baffling. One has to assume it is filling the needs of the power’s that be; domestic and foreign.
I’m not against economic refugees (sic) or legal migrants flooding into our country, simply because we need the people.
The situation in the US is different and I have no answers to your plight.
When I heard the abuse Howard got about the way he treated asylum seekers my first instinct was to think these people were just playing politics with the lives of asylum seekers to demonise Howard.
Where have the protesters all gone??
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/refugees-end-hunger-strike-20130418-2i1mp.html
“The 27 refugees branded a threat by ASIO have abandoned their hunger strike after immigration authorities agreed to examine the option of doing odd jobs around the detention centre.
But their main complaint – being incarcerated for up to four years on secret assessments without any right of appeal – remains unresolved.”
If Labor does this it is O.K.
It should also be mentioned that Howard had only 4 asylum seekers locked up when he lost office in 2007. We now have 6,000.
BREAKING NEWS!
http://www.news.com.au/national-news/tony-abbott-staffer-well-cut-your-throat/story-fncynjr2-1226624063491
If Labor does this it is O.K.
No, its not, Kneel, and many ALP (and ex) supporters condemn this … many ALP supporters want on-shore processing as we’re mandated to do by the UN …
In fact, it is misleading and ill informed comments like yours that inflame and politicise a sad and very serious situation …
My understanding is that, Peter Van Onselen, has some very strong ties with the Liberal Party … especially after writing John Winston Howard’s biography … that makes this accusation very serious …
WTF is going on? They haven’t even got into power and the vendettas have started. Usually you keep your hitlist secret, not tell journos about it. I expect there will be an apology, a sacking and some very serious questions for Abbott to answer.
There were semi-permanent demonstrations about asylum seekers by welfare recipients and a few others during the Howard era.
Neil is correct to point out that the protests have disappeared.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That’s interesting about one of Abbott’s staffers. A resignation is on its way.
“In fact, it is misleading and ill informed comments like yours that inflame and politicise a sad and very serious situation …”
It is the truth. Why don’t the Greens/ALP demonstrate like they used when when Howard was in power. Remember the memorial for SIEVX?? Well we have had at least 1,000 drown since Labor changed Howards Pacific Solution. My link says some have been locked up for 4 years.
It was Labor and their supporters that inflamed the debate. Using asylum seekers for political purposes. I don’t think Sarah Hansen Young gives a stuff about them.
Don’t worry as soon as Abbott is elected Pm Labor will hand him 6,000 asylum seekers in detention and out they will all come saying how mean and nasty Abbott is for locking up refugees.
It was out of character, he was tired and emotional. Was it Flannery receiving the threat?