What you need to know about the Australian Government’s immigration reforms

I don’t know much about Australia’s immigration policy, but I know this: It’s been a long time coming.

Since the election of former prime minister Kevin Rudd, the country has seen its share of asylum seekers, mostly from Asia.

It’s been almost a decade since then, and Australia’s current immigration policy has become one of the world’s most contentious.

In the lead-up to the May federal election, the Coalition had promised to increase Australia’s refugee intake from 10,000 to 25,000, but it has since scaled back those promises, saying the increase will not be as big as its previous promises.

As of March 1, the government has admitted 1,636 new refugees, up from 636 in the first quarter of 2016.

While Australia has taken in fewer than 200 refugees per day, it has also made it easier for those arriving in the country to become permanent residents, by extending the period during which they can live in the UK.

This has given rise to fears about the country’s future in terms of its immigration policies.

Many refugees are now being told that if they don’t come to Australia, they will be returned to their home countries, which has sparked debate in the Australian Parliament.

Opposition MPs have called for an end to the policy of temporary protection visas, which allow people to settle in the United Kingdom for a period of up to two years before being allowed to return home to apply for permanent residency.

One of the leading voices in the debate is MP and member of the Senate Migration Legislation Committee Chris Bowen, who has been the most outspoken against the policy.

“The policy of the Rudd government is that they will not allow any of these people to stay, and we will end it,” Bowen said.

“[I]f they want to come back, they’ll have to come to the UK, so they can apply for an Australian visa, and they will have to apply to the Australian embassy in the British Isles.

We have seen a massive increase in the number of people coming here from Asia, and people who are arriving from those countries have not been able to settle here.

They will have no right to stay here, they are not going to be able to apply here.”

The Government’s new immigration policy also came under fire from some in the community, with former Labor Senator David Leyonhjelm telling the ABC that it was a “shame” that refugees were being sent back to their countries.

Senator Leyonham says Australia should ‘move on’ and ‘stop blaming refugees’ He said the policy should be stopped and that Australia should “move on” and “stop blaming people for their lives”.

Senator David Leynhjellm, a former Labor member of parliament who is now a Liberal senator, told the ABC he believed Australia should be “tougher” on asylum seekers.

He said the current asylum seeker policy was a waste of taxpayers’ money and a “bad thing” for Australia.

“I think we have a problem of the refugees being brought in, we have the problem of our border with Australia being porous, we’re having an increase in asylum seekers coming into our country,” he said.

“We’re spending an awful lot of money on these people coming in, and that’s a shame, because I think that’s the cost of doing business.”

But he also noted that Australia’s border had been breached by hundreds of thousands of people, many of whom were not refugees.

Australia’s government says the policy will not change.

The Immigration Department said it has increased the number in the queue to around 1,200 each day, which it said was in line with the number the government believes are arriving each day.

And Immigration Minister Scott Morrison said there was a clear and present danger that people would attempt to enter Australia illegally and could face prosecution.

There are a number of reasons why the government is confident that the plan will be successful, Immigration Minister Morrison told ABC Radio in Canberra.

“The government has said that in the event of a breach of the Australian Border Force, the number that the government would consider to be a credible threat to Australian national security would be considered to be in the hundreds of hundreds,” he explained.

But the Coalition has repeatedly accused the government of making the country “more dangerous”, saying that if the policy is not halted, Australia could be facing a humanitarian crisis.

ABC political editor James Ashby said the debate around the policy had been one of “very public, public squabbles”.

“There’s been an absolute amount of public anger about it, there’s been very little debate about it,” he told the BBC.

If you have a serious issue with the policy, I would say don’t send it to the ABC, but don’t let them be your news, he said, adding that the issue was