'No future' for refugees on Nauru after funding extension
The Refugee Action Coalition says there is no future for the asylum seekers still stuck on Nauru, following the announcement that a funding deal for the Regional Processing Centre has been reached with Australia.
Nauru's President David Adeang made
the announcement last month
in parliament.
A Nauru government report states that, of the 93 transferees on Nauru, four have been granted refugee status, and 89 asylum seekers are undergoing the appeals process.
The refugee coalition's spokesperson Ian Rintoul said options are very limited for the asylum seekers.
"If there's four people have been found to be refugees, and the rest are actually going through an appeal process... it's an indication that there's some very real problem I think, with the processing on Nauru."
When asked what the long-term funding arrangement meant for those living there, he said they have no future.
"People that are on Nauru are there indefinitely," he said.
"That's one of the big problems, is that the government has talked about long-term funding for Nauru, but they've got no third country resettlement options."
Rintoul said the Australian offshore detention position is unlikely to change despite Saturday's election.
Australian governments have been sending people seeking asylum to Nauru, and also, previously, to PNG, under policy the country's boarder protection policy.
Its regional processing and resettlement stance is aimed at deterring people trying to reach the country illegally by boats.
The Australian government has maintained this position since 19 July 2013, that anyone who attempts to get into Australia illegally by boat would ever settle in the country.
Rintoul said Labor and the Liberals continue to sing from the same songsheet about refugees.
He said a new rule will allow Australia to remove not just those arriving illegally by sea, but those presently in the country.
A parliament summary said this bill - passed late last year - would allow the minister to issue written directions to a "removal pathway non-citizen" to facilitate their removal from Australia; introduce criminal penalties for refusing or failing to comply with such directions; and empower the Minister to reverse a protection finding in relation to a lawful non-citizen who is on a removal pathway.
"The new deportation legislation allows the government of the day to remove some of those people to Nauru, and the Labor government was quite happy to cooperate with the liberals, use their votes to push that legislation through," Rintoul said.
"Certainly, the refugee movement in Australia will be looking to take up the protest movement again after the election on Saturday, to push the issue of refugees, their human rights and a welcome-refugee policy that desperately needs to be implemented in Australia, and including that is to end offshore detention."
Earlier this year, the UN Human Rights Commission published its decisions on
two cases involving refugees who complained about their treatment at Nauru's regional processing facility
.
The committee stated that Australia remained responsible for the health and welfare of refugees and asylum seekers detained in Nauru.
"A state party cannot escape its human rights responsibility when outsourcing asylum processing to another state," committee member Mahjoub El Haiba said.
After the decisions were released, a spokesperson for the Australian Home Affairs Department said "
it has been the Australian Government's consistent position that Australia does not exercise effective control over regional processing centres"
.
Canberra opposed the allegations put to the committee, saying there was no prima facie substantiation that the alleged violations in Nauru had occurred within Australia's jurisdiction, but the UN committee disagreed.
Meanwhile, the governments of Australia and New Zealand
formlised a refugee settlement arrangement
in March 2022. Under the arrangement, New Zealand will settle up to 150 refugees per year until June 2025 (up to 450 in three years).
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
8 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Why travel with PMs is not for the faint of heart
Christopher Luxon was loathe to announce the replacement of the RNZAF's passenger jets until last month's budget. Photo / Getty Images New Zealander Bernard Lagan is the Australian correspondent for the Times, London It was a winter Sunday in 1983 above a seething Wellington sea when Robert Muldoon glanced up from The Economist magazine. 'Tell him to have another go,' the then prime minister told an RNZAF flight attendant as the old Andover aircraft's two propellers struggled to haul into the clouds. The pilot had abandoned a second landing attempt against a rollicking gale. Rain stung the trembling fuselage like buckshot. The ashen passengers, a mix of press and Muldoon's staff, looked queasily at each other. None dared countermand the PM. As the hapless flight attendant conveyed the prime minister's wish upfront, I imagine, the flight deck conversation went something like this: 'He wants you to have another run at it, sir.' 'God, really? Then we'll see how much the dear leader wants to keep his lunch down.' The Andover lurched around for a third attempt. With winds gusting ever higher, it see-sawed violently downward. An overhead baggage locker cracked open, spewing its contents. A fire extinguisher tore off a wall, careening onto the floor, the noise terrifying everybody. We landed crazily on one wheel and skewered down the sodden tarmac to a halt. Muldoon never looked up from his Economist. Leaders have conflicted relationships with their VIP aircraft – treating them as a personal fiefdom but fearing public opprobrium when the time comes to spend money on replacements. Like his predecessors, Christopher Luxon was loath to announce the replacement of the RNZAF's current large and embarrassingly unreliable Boeing 757 passenger jets – now well over 30 years old – until last month's Budget. After David Lange came to power in 1984, one of his first acts was to commandeer an air force Boeing 727 jet, bought second-hand from United Airlines and by then 16 years old, and storm across Africa to apologise for New Zealand's hosting in 1981 of the South African rugby team. The aircraft had a limited range, forcing a highly circuitous route to Africa to allow for refuelling. Things soon went spectacularly awry. After refuelling in Melbourne the travelling party –including your correspondent – stopped in Perth for more gas ahead of the 727's planned island hop across the Indian Ocean to Africa. In Perth, Lange learnt the US government, still seething over his anti-nuclear ships policy, had rescinded approval for his aircraft to refuel at its military base on the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia. The Africa tour was in early jeopardy until a compromise was reached – Lange's plane would be allowed to land but without journalists. The gaggle of Kiwi reporters – whisked non-stop from Perth to Zimbabwe's capital, Harare, in a new Qantas 747 – were delighted to be on hand, well lunched, for Lange's African arrival a day after their own. Their cockiness was short lived. Apparently alarmed by the burden the travelling press placed on the aircraft's alcohol supplies as Lange toured East Africa's capitals, the air force cut the booze. Other aerial dramas followed. Somewhere above Nigeria, the sight of three alarmed Nigerian air force pilots pounding the instrument cluster of the helicopter carrying the Lange party to a tea plantation preceded a rapid emergency landing. The lumbering old air freighter the Nigerians sent to retrieve us developed an inflight leak of the toilet system – sending a river of stored effluent backwards down the aisle. After arriving to work in Australia, I travelled on then prime minister Bob Hawke's equally ancient Boeing 707 – known to the rowdy travelling press as the 'zoo plane' where wine flowed while Hawke smoked cigars and played poker. Doubtless the shiny new VIP aircraft ordered by Luxon will prove far more reliable – but nowhere near the fun.
Techday NZ
a day ago
- Techday NZ
Australia's property rules may push global capital to NZ
An Australian regulatory change restricting foreign purchases of residential property is forecast to shift international investor attention to New Zealand, prompting debate over whether New Zealand is positioned to capitalise on this opportunity. Australian property ban Australia has implemented legislation that prohibits foreign buyers from acquiring established residential dwellings between 1 April 2025 and 31 March 2027. This policy aims to address concerns around housing affordability and availability. However, it may also re-route significant volumes of global capital, with high net worth purchasers now searching for alternative destinations for investment in the region. Caleb Paterson, Founder of Paterson Luxury Real Estate, believes these changes represent an important turning point for New Zealand. According to Paterson, if New Zealand does not make its own foreign buyer policies clearer and more inviting, billions in investment risk bypassing the country entirely. Missed opportunities Paterson noted that New Zealand's current uncertainty with residential property rules for overseas buyers may have already resulted in lost opportunities, as investors look toward destinations offering a more straightforward acquisition process. "We've had deals collapse because investors couldn't buy a home to settle here first. That's an avoidable failure of policy. Meanwhile, in places like Dubai, capital is being welcomed and economies are booming because of it." He argues New Zealand's offering of political stability, attractive natural environment, and high-quality lifestyle remains a drawcard, but these are not translating into investment without a streamlined and reliable path for international purchases. "New Zealand has a unique combination of political stability, natural beauty and a lifestyle that's incredibly appealing to global investors. They're not just looking to park capital, they want a safe, long-term base for their families and their businesses. What's missing is a clear pathway for them to invest and if we don't act they'll go elsewhere. We are talking about an investment in the billions right when the economy needs it most. "I'm dealing with ultra-high-net-worth clients from China, Canada, the US and the UK who are currently sitting on the fence. They want to invest here not just in homes, but in businesses, developments, the tech sector and other industries but they're not going to do that while the rules remain unclear." Paterson warns that uncertainty could see investment redirected to more accessible markets, highlighting the UAE as a major competitor. He attributes recent policy ambiguities to a situation where "hundreds of millions in immediate capital" is held back, awaiting regulatory clarity. "We're talking about people with serious capital including a $4 billion syndicate from Taiwan, developers with $70 million commercial projects sitting ready and expats and migrants waiting to buy homes, set up companies and inject money into our economy," he says. "I recently had someone trying to bring in a major international coffee roasting brand, but they couldn't get a foothold here because they couldn't buy a family home first to get settled," he says. Changing investor sentiment According to Paterson, Canada's proposed wealth tax and ongoing political shifts in the United States have increased the number of international investors considering New Zealand, but competing jurisdictions like Dubai are attracting attention due to the clarity of their investment rules. "I've got clients telling me they'll take their money to Dubai where they know what the rules are. There's no shortage of appealing alternatives," he says. Paterson reports that uncertainty in New Zealand has also affected local real estate activity, with as much as 40% of luxury listings withdrawn over the past year as sellers waited for the possibility of rule changes. He says the result is a stagnant high-end market, impacting not only buyers and sellers but also broader economic sectors tied to property transactions. "Everyone's being impacted, even high-net-worth individuals who are less agile right now. This winter will be our coldest yet, metaphorically. People can't keep borrowing to stay afloat and we're going to see more financial strain. "This isn't about pitying someone in a $15 million home. It's about what happens when they can't sell, builders aren't contracted and tradespeople sit idle. The wealth isn't circulating and the economy suffers. "I'm probably one of the few people in the country who speaks to around 20 high-net-worth individuals a day. These people are worth $4 to $5 million or more on paper but right now every single one of them is feeling pressure. It's not just one or two outliers; across the board, I'm hearing stories of business strain, stalled investments and uncertainty. "Unless you're a billionaire, people are navigating real challenges. We need a solution that gets capital flowing again, not just for their sake, but for the broader economy that depends on that investment." Regional implications Paterson also highlights the impact on regions beyond New Zealand's main urban centres, suggesting that allowing limited high-value international buyers could stimulate development and economic activity in outlying areas. "Outside of Auckland and Queenstown, opening the door to high-value international buyers would also unlock stalled developments in regions like Northland, the Bay of Plenty, and Central Otago. These are areas where investment could mean hundreds of new homes, jobs for local tradies, and real economic momentum outside the main centres." Market effects and policy recommendations Paterson contends that if the New Zealand Budget were to introduce a clear threshold for overseas residential investment, significant pent-up demand could be released, resulting in rapid market movement. "Even if international buyers were allowed back into the market tomorrow, we wouldn't see a spike in prices straight away. There's a significant backlog of unsold high-end stock, it could take 12 to 18 months just to clear that. What we'd see first is volume returning, not price pressure. And that's exactly what the market needs right now - movement. "I could quadruple my sales volume in a month. We have listings ready to go, marketing prepared, and global agents waiting. "The economic impact would be almost immediate with millions of dollars in real estate value unlocked we just need the green light," he says. Paterson warns that the absence of action could mean New Zealand risks losing both the immediate benefit of investment capital and the long-term advantage as an attractive destination for international investors. "We've got the lifestyle and the stability investors want. Now we just need to show them that we're open for business before they go elsewhere."
Scoop
2 days ago
- Scoop
Seabed Mine Fears Ignite Coast Towns On Ocean Day
Article – Craig Ashworth – Local Democracy Reporting A match lit six weeks ago in punak has ignited fires the length of the North Island with seabed mining opponents taking to the coast on World Ocean Day. A match lit six weeks ago in the coastal Taranaki town of Ōpunakē has ignited fires the length of the North Island – and far across the Pacific – with seabed mining opponents taking to the coast on World Ocean Day. South Taranaki's 15-year fight against an Australian mining bid was picked up by more than 200 surfers, stand-up paddleboarders, body boarders, waka ama crew and kayakers at eight spots along the coast between Wellington to Auckland on Sunday. As they paddled-out from Island Bay, Whanganui, Pātea, Pungarehu, New Plymouth, Raglan, Port Waikato and Muriwai hundreds more rallied on shore, with organisers saying strong turnouts in New Plymouth and Raglan took total numbers over 1200. Four-thousand kilometres away supporters in Tāhiti also hit the waves, they said. Fiona Young of Protect Our Moana Taranaki said coastal communities jumped on board after the first paddle-out at Ōpunakē in April. 'It's important being connected together for this, because if given the greenlight here it would set a very dangerous precedent for all the rest of our coast and the Pacific.' 'It's a new experimental extractive industry that doesn't belong in our oceans.' Trans-Tasman Resources (TTR) has approval to vacuum up 50 million tonnes of sand annually from the South Taranaki seabed for 35 years to extract iron, vanadium and titanium. But the company still needs consent to discharge 45 million tonnes of unwanted sediment a year back into the shallow waters – 160,000 tonnes daily of a recognised pollutant. After a decade failing to win discharge consent right through to the Supreme Court, Trans-Tasman last year quit the latest environment hearing to seek consent via the new Fast-track Approvals Act. Many locals fear sediment would smother reefs and stunt marine photosynthesis by filtering sunlight. TTR's executive chairman Alan Eggers said the discharge wouldn't bother the marine ecology. 'De-ored sands will be returned immediately to the seafloor in a controlled process to minimise the generation of suspended sediment … the plume generated is localised,' said Eggers, who's also executive director of TTR's new owners, Australia miner Manuka Resources. The mining ship would work as close as 22 kilometres off Pātea. Saturday's cold snap cloaked Taranaki Maunga with winter's first heavy snowfall but, after dawn karakia, 20 surfers shrugged off the chill at Pātea Beach and formed Sunday's first circle on the water. Among them was Te Pāti Māori co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer. As a Ngāti Ruanui leader she fought the miners for a decade before entering Parliament. Ngarewa-Packer said World Ocean Day helped highlight that the proposed mine was an untested precedent, here and internationally. 'Seabed mining leaves behind the sludge, or the mud. Imagine 45 million tons of sludge … a lot of our magic reef life and our marine life will be absolutely annihilated.' Sand extraction is common but doesn't involve dumping most of what's taken back into the environment, opponents say. Among the 100 supporters on Pātea's beach and dunes was onshore oil driller Hayden Fowler. Despite working in an extractive industry, Fowler brought his teenage daughter Amelia to Pātea to oppose the marine mine. 'I just don't think it's the right thing to be doing.' 'A lot of people don't actually understand what will take place if it happens … so it's probably a little bit misunderstood as to how bad it could be.' Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Ruanui kaiwhakahaere Rachel Arnott said TTR kept losing in court because judges found environmental safety evidence unconvincing 'TTR had nothing and in the Fast-track application we still haven't seen any sign that they've adapted to the courts' demands for proof – nothing fresh in terms of evidence.' On Sunday afternoon 500 gathered at New Plymouth's Autere, or East End Beach, to cheer more than 130 taking to the waves. Surfer Fiona Gordon said she was there to celebrate the ocean. 'The beautiful things that it brings to our lives and the risks that are posed when we start interfering with that, in ways we don't fully understand.' Many travelled from Pātea to join the Ngāmotu event including Bruce Boyd, head of community underwater science researchers Project Reef. 'I dive off Pātea, that's my playground, and I don't want to see what's there changed in any way, shape, or form. Especially not covered by that sludge.' TTR expects to earn US$312 million a year before tax, giving shareholders a near 40 percent rate of return on investment of US$602 million. The company promises an economic boost in Taranaki and Whanganui, creating over 1350 New Zealand jobs and becoming one of the country's top exporters. Opponents believe the financial benefits will land with mostly-foreign shareholders.
