boat people - centrelink cycle

Of course i will be labelled as "intolerant" or "racist", but in the land of a "fair go", how can the bleeding hearts condone queue jumpers who pay thousands of dollars to enter our country illegally.

This issue resonates with me because I have grave fears for the financial future of our country. Our government's spending is out of control and we struggle to retain a surplus in boom economic times. As well as believing in a "fair go", I also have a disdain for people who bludge off our system, whether they are Australian citizens or refugees.

Let's look at the "refugee - boat people" cost to our country. This is notwithstanding the billions of dollars it costs our government to have "boat people" initially arrive on our shores.

An interesting article written by Judith Sloan in "The Australian" titled, "End the Boatpeople - centrelink cycle" reports on the cost to the Australian tax payer. She reports on why humanitarian refugees choose Australia, with incentives such as free health care, free education, income support and a raft of other government benefits. She rightly states that this has become a magnet for "refugees". An interesting part of her article shows that us Australians carry the burden of cost for many years, possibly (my opinion) for the lifetime of these refugees.

She states:

"No doubt, I will be accused at this point of being heartless and ignorant. Surely refugees bring all sorts of economic benefits to Australia and these should form part of the equation when devising the size of the humanitarian quota. After all, refugees have shown determination to leave their homelands and, in the case of those who arrive by boat, to hand over money to people-smugglers to expedite their permanent entry to Australia. Does this sort of energetic resolve not correlate with subsequent economic success in Australia?

Sadly, the figures point to the exact opposite. They show that refugees have very low rates of labour force participation and extremely high rates of welfare dependence, even years after being granted permanent residence. And these figures are the official ones - admittedly released without fanfare - of the Department of Immigration and Citizenship.

The report, Settlement Outcomes of New Arrivals: Report of findings, was released last year by the department. The report's bland title is a give-away - vacuous, alliterative titles for government reports are virtually de rigueur these days. (Think: Smarter Manufacturing for a Smarter Australia.) The results on settlement outcomes are ugly.

Using the Longitudinal Survey of Immigrants to Australia, the research describes the position of the three key groups of migrants five years after settlement: skilled, family and humanitarian.

In keeping with the findings of previous research, it is absolutely clear that refugees fare very badly in terms of employment and financial self-sufficiency. And note that this study was conducted during a period of low overall unemployment.

For example, the employment rate of humanitarian migrants from Afghanistan was recorded at only 9 per cent - note this is not the unemployment rate - five years after settlement and nearly 94 per cent of households from Afghanistan received Centrelink payments.

According to the report, "Afghans have a different settlement experience compared with most other cultural groups, such as having poorer English skills and lower qualifications levels. Yet they are more likely to borrow money, obtain mortgages and experience difficulties in paying them."

Those from Iraq did little better, with 12 per cent employed and 93 per cent of households in receipt of Centrelink payments. Interestingly, those who did best in the humanitarian group were from Central and West African countries such as Sierra Leone.

Note that these refugees are the least likely to have arrived by boat.In keeping with the findings of previous research, it is absolutely clear that refugees fare very badly in terms of employment and financial self-sufficiency. And note that this study was conducted during a period of low overall unemployment.

For example, the employment rate of humanitarian migrants from Afghanistan was recorded at only 9 per cent - note this is not the unemployment rate - five years after settlement and nearly 94 per cent of households from Afghanistan received Centrelink payments.

According to the report, "Afghans have a different settlement experience compared with most other cultural groups, such as having poorer English skills and lower qualifications levels. Yet they are more likely to borrow money, obtain mortgages and experience difficulties in paying them."

Those from Iraq did little better, with 12 per cent employed and 93 per cent of households in receipt of Centrelink payments.

Interestingly, those who did best in the humanitarian group were from Central and West African countries such as Sierra Leone. Note that these refugees are the least likely to have arrived by boat.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/end-the-boatpeople-centrelink-cycle/story-fnbkvnk7-1226476061727