Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Opinion

Expert strata, facilities & building management services

Overstary your visa – fine. Come by leaky boat – not fine.

By John Hargreaves - 29 December 2014 48

asylum-seekers-stock-291214

I’ve been in good company recently, joining others in banging on about the ill treatment of asylum seekers and trying to draw attention to the fact that the scale of the problem does not justify the degree of power and might being applied to repelling those seeking succour on our shores by coming here in leaky boats.

I have been bagged for drawing attention to the fact that perhaps the scale of the naval and customs attention (not to mention the enormous cost) to these people is disproportionate to the threat they pose to our nation.

Some time ago, I said how about having a better attempt to stop people from overstaying their visas and thus staying here illegally.

It is a fact that those who come here do not do so illegally. They are seeking asylum and until they are proven not to be genuine, they have the protection of international charters we have signed up to.

But… only recently do we now have published some thumbnail figures of those illegals who do overstay their visas. We now have a new minister dedicated to repelling at least some of them. Yeah right!

What did Labor do to stop the overstayers? Nothing. What did that sensitive new age guy, Scott Morrison do to stop the overstayers? Nothing. What will new Minister Peter Dutton do?

Well, rest easily in your beds. He’s se3nt a message to the illegal bikies! Go Pete! That’ll do the trick! Any overstaying international bikies will get short shrift!

But, hang on a minute! What about the rest of the 62,000 – yes 62,000 people overstayed their visas in 2013! How many boat bound asylum seekers were there in 213? Nowhere near 62,000, I’ll bet!

And who were these illegals? The biggest offenders were Chinese (7,600), Malaysia (6,400), the US(5,200) and the UK (3,700). And of the overstayers, visitors accounted for 44,800 of them with the rest being students.

So what have those guardians of our safety done about fixing a problem which has seen over 60,000 people come into Australia (largely by plane) and who have stayed here illegally?

Oh. Not much really. That has to be because they don’t pose a threat. Really? How can you tell? You can tell the boat people are terrorists because they come here after a perilous journey risking their lives and the lives of their children with next to nothing by way of possessions. Simple really! Visitors just make mistakes with their visas! I believe it

The illegals who come by plane are fine but the asylum seekers who come by boat are not!

I remind those who continue to bag my stance that the World Trade Centre in 2001 was attacked by passengers who took over control of aeroplanes, not leaky boats.

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
48 Responses to
Overstary your visa – fine. Come by leaky boat – not fine.
dungfungus 8:40 am 30 Dec 14

Algernon said :

dungfungus said :

I thought this was another Jon Stanhope rant for a moment.
Please note, people who arrive in Australia with a visa are not illegals. Can you understand that?

Masquara said :

The overstayers have gotten themselves jobs and are contributing to our economy.

chewy14 said :

What a silly comparison.

Most of the visa overstayers are different people each year, they do eventually go home and we know exactly who they are. They are mostly holiday makers who stay longer than allowed before going home.

They don’t receive welfare or any government assistance whilst they are here.

By my reading, Stanhope’s article was about overstayers and therefore I refer you to a document on the Department of Immigration and Border Protection website ‘Fact Sheet 86 – Overstayers and other Non-Lawful Citizens.

Dungfungus, you’re right. People who enter Australia with a visa are not illegals. People who stay in Australia once their visa has expired are. Asylum seekers are not illegal immigrants. The politicians who tell you they are, are lying to you.

Masqara, Fact Sheet 86 says: “Unlawful non-citizens are nationals from another country who do not have the right to be in Australia. The majority of unlawful non-citizens in Australia at any given time have either overstayed the visa issued to them or are people whose visas have been cancelled.”

It also says:”Overstayers and others who are working illegally are taking job opportunities away from unemployed Australian citizens and residents.”

Chewy, it would appear, through your use of the Royal ‘we’, that you work in DIBP. You say that overstayers do not receive any assistance. Why, then does Fact Sheet 86 say: “Even after the exclusion period has finished, the person cannot be granted a visa unless they repay any debt they owe to the Commonwealth, including for costs of removal, or they make satisfactory arrangements to repay their debt.”

Can you explain what debts, other than the cost of removal, an overstayer has to repay in order to be given a new visa.

Fact Sheet 86 is illuminating in understanding why DIBP is not too concerned with overstayers. It says: “These long-term overstayers become neighbours, friends, colleagues, employees and even relatives of lawful Australian residents, some of whom might not be aware of their unlawful status.”

Gee, isn’t that nice!. Asylum seekers get thrown into concentration camps.

“Gee, isn’t that nice!. Asylum seekers get thrown into concentration camps.”
To compare Australian detention centres to “concentration camps” is totally disingenuous.
Please supply proof of what you claim.

dungfungus 8:30 am 30 Dec 14

JC said :

dungfungus said :

I thought this was another Jon Stanhope rant for a moment.
Please note, people who arrive in Australia with a visa are not illegals. Can you understand that?

Nor are those who arrive seeking assume. Can you understand that?

That said someone with a valid visa who doesn’t abide by said visa, read overstays (or works if their visa says they cannot) then become an unlawful non citizens.

The OP stated:
“The illegals who come by plane are fine but the asylum seekers who come by boat are not!”
Are you chiding me or the person who made the statement in the OP?
I am not concerned about the legal/illegal status of asylum seekers – I was merely alluding to the fact that anyone who comes into Australia with a visa is granted legal entry.
There are probably about 400,000 visa over-stayers in Australia at any one time. When they are detected and deported or decide to go home they are refused re-entry.

Mysteryman 8:18 am 30 Dec 14

JC said :

dungfungus said :

I thought this was another Jon Stanhope rant for a moment.
Please note, people who arrive in Australia with a visa are not illegals. Can you understand that?

Nor are those who arrive seeking assume. Can you understand that?

Actually nearly all of them are unlawful non citizens. Read what I posted earlier.

Weatherman 8:15 am 30 Dec 14

It’s quite simple. If someone arrives by plane, they must go through customs and they can be accounted for due to documentation. If someone arrives by boat without documentation, it is difficult to track who the asylum seeker really is and whether they are actually genuine or not. The destruction of documentation was also documented by Dutch photojournalist Joel van Houdt and American reporter Luke Mogelson when they went undercover as asylum seekers to document their journey as undercover journalists.

“Upon nearing Christmas Island a crew member used a satellite phone to call Australian authorities for help, before passengers destroyed passports and identity documents and threw mobile phones overboard.”

Asylum seekers needed documentation to arrive at Indonesian and/or Indonesia via Malaysian airports only to subsequently destroy documentation only to transit to Australia undocumented as an irregular maritime arrival.

wildturkeycanoe 8:05 am 30 Dec 14

Masquara said :

The overstayers have gotten themselves jobs and are contributing to our economy.

Overstayers no doubt keep under the radar as much as possible, meaning:
– They work in a job illegally or under false identity, so they aren’t paying tax.
– The money they earn is not going into our casinos or property market, they weasel it away and send it back to their families in the home country. Those dollars are not being spent here either.
– When raids are made on these people, they are found breaching working and safety conditions, for example, the ones who are prostituting themselves in dingy little premises owned by unscrupulous folks who rip them off by paying meager wages.
– If they can’t get these kind of jobs, I’d say they turn to crime or drug related activities which certainly don’t contribute positively to our economy or our social well being.
Overstaying a Visa costs our economy and also costs taxpayers as we have to fund the government departments who actively seek them out. If they have legitimate reason to be here, they shouldn’t have to hide from the community or our lawmakers in order to do so.

house_husband 7:41 am 30 Dec 14

So what’s your take on people smugglers John? Are they providing a legitimate service to those seeking asylum? Or are they just money hungry criminals who are happy to send families off on unseaworthy boats in the interest of turning a quick dollar?

JC 1:11 am 30 Dec 14

dungfungus said :

I thought this was another Jon Stanhope rant for a moment.
Please note, people who arrive in Australia with a visa are not illegals. Can you understand that?

Nor are those who arrive seeking assume. Can you understand that?

That said someone with a valid visa who doesn’t abide by said visa, read overstays (or works if their visa says they cannot) then become an unlawful non citizens.

Algernon 11:20 pm 29 Dec 14

dungfungus said :

I thought this was another Jon Stanhope rant for a moment.
Please note, people who arrive in Australia with a visa are not illegals. Can you understand that?

Masquara said :

The overstayers have gotten themselves jobs and are contributing to our economy.

chewy14 said :

What a silly comparison.

Most of the visa overstayers are different people each year, they do eventually go home and we know exactly who they are. They are mostly holiday makers who stay longer than allowed before going home.

They don’t receive welfare or any government assistance whilst they are here.

By my reading, Stanhope’s article was about overstayers and therefore I refer you to a document on the Department of Immigration and Border Protection website ‘Fact Sheet 86 – Overstayers and other Non-Lawful Citizens.

Dungfungus, you’re right. People who enter Australia with a visa are not illegals. People who stay in Australia once their visa has expired are. Asylum seekers are not illegal immigrants. The politicians who tell you they are, are lying to you.

Masqara, Fact Sheet 86 says: “Unlawful non-citizens are nationals from another country who do not have the right to be in Australia. The majority of unlawful non-citizens in Australia at any given time have either overstayed the visa issued to them or are people whose visas have been cancelled.”

It also says:”Overstayers and others who are working illegally are taking job opportunities away from unemployed Australian citizens and residents.”

Chewy, it would appear, through your use of the Royal ‘we’, that you work in DIBP. You say that overstayers do not receive any assistance. Why, then does Fact Sheet 86 say: “Even after the exclusion period has finished, the person cannot be granted a visa unless they repay any debt they owe to the Commonwealth, including for costs of removal, or they make satisfactory arrangements to repay their debt.”

Can you explain what debts, other than the cost of removal, an overstayer has to repay in order to be given a new visa.

Fact Sheet 86 is illuminating in understanding why DIBP is not too concerned with overstayers. It says: “These long-term overstayers become neighbours, friends, colleagues, employees and even relatives of lawful Australian residents, some of whom might not be aware of their unlawful status.”

Gee, isn’t that nice!. Asylum seekers get thrown into concentration camps.

Mysteryman 11:04 pm 29 Dec 14

It is a fact that those who come here do not do so illegally. They are seeking asylum and until they are proven not to be genuine, they have the protection of international charters we have signed up to.

That is not correct John and you need to actually read the relevant Migration Act and the UN convention. I got so tired of hearing both sides of this argument that I decided to read them myself some time ago.

Our Migration Act says that people who arrive without any of the proper paperwork, and attempt entry without going via the proper processes, are illegal. There is no confusion there. You are suggesting that being a signatory to The United Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees means that anybody who claims asylum must not be treated as an illegal arrival. That is not true. The convention says that anyone who arrives illegally (as defined by our Migration Act) will not be subject to punitive measures applied to illegal arrivals, so long as they meet the conditions. One of those conditions is that they must have come directly from the state they are seeking asylum from. If they have come via another country, like Indonesia, then they are still arriving illegally. Every boat arrival from the last few years that I’m aware of has come from a secondary or tertiary state. The boat occupants could have at any stage sought asylum from the other nations before choosing to continue to Australia. I’m more than happy to admit that I don’t know all the details of their journey, but to my mind being that picky about the destination raises some serious questions about the legitimacy of their claim for asylum.

I’m really tired of people cherry picking the facts to support their stance on asylum seekers. People need to read the documents themselves, rather than just parroting what they’ve head.

Your other point about the people overstaying their visas has some merit, but comparing it to asylum seekers is a false equivalency if for no other reason than we know who the over-stayers are, they’ve undergone security screening before being granted their visas, and they applied through the proper channels without attempting to circumvent our legal process. That’s more than can be said for people arriving by boat, without travel documents or identification, hoping to get through undetected. From a security standpoint there is no comparison.

dungfungus 7:45 pm 29 Dec 14

Masquara said :

“I remind those who continue to bag my stance that the World Trade Centre in 2001 was attacked by passengers who took over control of aeroplanes, not leaky boats.”
Huh?

The 9/11 terrorists were on domestic flights. Pre-boarding security is much more stringent on international flights into the USA and they knew that.

chewy14 5:38 pm 29 Dec 14

What a silly comparison.

Most of the visa overstayers are different people each year, they do eventually go home and we know exactly who they are. They are mostly holiday makers who stay longer than allowed before going home.

They don’t receive welfare or any government assistance whilst they are here.

How that is meant to be compared to our humanitarian refugee intake who do mostly stay permanently and do necessarily require significant government assistance I don’t know. It’s a completely false equivalence.

Masquara 3:25 pm 29 Dec 14

“I remind those who continue to bag my stance that the World Trade Centre in 2001 was attacked by passengers who took over control of aeroplanes, not leaky boats.”
Huh?

Masquara 3:24 pm 29 Dec 14

The overstayers have gotten themselves jobs and are contributing to our economy.

dungfungus 2:18 pm 29 Dec 14

I thought this was another Jon Stanhope rant for a moment.
Please note, people who arrive in Australia with a visa are not illegals. Can you understand that?

MERC600 1:55 pm 29 Dec 14

Geez John. Your off to a flying start. You suffering from a bad prawn from Xmas?

One thing that I wondered about is why a lot of the ‘boat’ people fly into Indonesia, then fork out big dough to climb into a leaky boat, destroy their documents, and hope the thing hits land before it sinks (and as we now know, for around 1200 people, ‘hoping’ didn’t cut it )

If they were able to fly into Indo, why not fly direct to Sydney, and then claim asylum? Am not up with our asylum laws, but is arriving by boat, better that arriving by plane. Is boat arrival some sort of ‘back door’ access.

1 2 3 4

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site