The new limit will apply to privately sponsored refugees.
It isn’t the limitation that got me interested, it is their private sponsor program that began in 2013. Private groups can pay in a big chunk of cash to care for a refugee or a refugee family for a year. Every one of those privately sponsored means one less refugee the government will sponsor. Very interesting!
Here is the news from The Guardian yesterday, story titled:
South Sudan, Somalia and Iran excluded from one of Australia’s refugee programs
Humanitarian migrants from eight countries will be prioritised under one of Australia’s refugee resettlement programs, with other nationalities told their applications are highly unlikely to be accepted.
The Guardian understands the priority countries are: the Democratic Republic of Congo, Afghanistan, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Myanmar, Bhutan, Syria and Iraq. Nationals of several other specific countries that were previously considered for resettlement, such as South Sudan, Somalia and Iran, are now excluded and will not be able to access the program. The move has been condemned by some community leaders as “clear discrimination”. [Keep reading because the restriction is only for a tiny portion of their refugee flow—-ed]
The resettlement scheme, known as the Community Support Program, is one element of Australia’s broader humanitarian program, which, this year, offers up to 1,000 places, taken from within the broader program of 16,250 places. [1,000 places are up for grabs, but how many are actually sponsored this way when you see the price tag below!—-ed]
It allows community groups, businesses, families or individuals to sponsor and support a refugee to come to Australia. But each privately sponsored place reduces by one the government’s resettlement commitment.
The program was previously the Community Proposal Pilot, started in 2013.
The Community Support Program is based loosely on Canada’s private sponsorship program.
Since the late 1970s, more than 280,000 have been resettled in Canada by private sponsors, who commit the equivalent of one year of social security – about $30,000 – in cash or by in-kind commitment of housing, clothing, furniture and food, to assist a refugee family of five to settle into the country. [This in-kind stuff can be a sham as they get a bunch of junky furniture and claim it has a higher value.—ed]
Now get this! With one-year support expected to cost $100,000 for a family of five, the government is basically telegraphing the cost of just one third-world family. Yikes! And, frankly what is the incentive for a private group to do this?
Australia’s scheme is much more expensive – to sponsor an individual refugee costs about $48,000, a family of five about $100,000 – and, for every humanitarian migrant privately sponsored, the government resettles one fewer under its program.
Of course the Open Borders Lefties in Australia are complaining because they obviously want the Australian tax payer to bear the burden!
This “offset” has led to criticism of the scheme as the government abrogating its commitment to resettle refugees, instead outsourcing resettlement to private individuals or community groups.
The Cato Institute was pushing such a program at one point, but frankly it was just to add more refugees to your towns and cities (for globalist labor needs), not to reduce the government-sponsored flow.
Asylum seekers held in offshore detention have mental health issues.
I sure hope none of those the Trump State Department is admitting are among those mentally impaired (like the Youtube shooter).
From UN News:
Australia-bound asylum seekers left mentally scarred by years of detention on Pacific islands, warns UN refugee official
Under a deal agreed between Australia and the United States, some 1,000 detainees from Nauru will be repatriated to the US. Around 180 have already left the island.
Read it all here.
I wonder what is holding up the arrival of more refugees under the Obama/Trump “dumb” refugee swap deal. See Australia deal archive here.