The Claim
“Offered money to Manus Island detainees if they voluntarily returned to the war crimes, genocide, torture and persecution that they originally fled from. When in opposition the government opposed these same payments.”
Original Sources Provided
✅ FACTUAL VERIFICATION
Core facts verified: The Abbott Coalition government significantly increased financial incentives for asylum seekers on Manus Island and Nauru to voluntarily return to their countries of origin in 2014 [1][2].
Payment amounts increased: The Coalition offered between $3,300 and $10,000 depending on nationality - Lebanese asylum seekers were offered $10,000, Iranians and Sudanese $7,000, Afghans $4,000, and Pakistani, Nepalese and Burmese $3,300 [1][2]. This represented a dramatic increase from the previous Labor government's offering of $1,500-$2,000 [2].
Administration: The payments were administered by the International Organization for Migration (IOM), a UN-related agency, not directly by the Australian government [1][3]. IOM has been implementing Assisted Voluntary Return and Reintegration (AVRR) programmes worldwide since 1979 as a "humane and dignified approach to return" [4].
Government opposition confirmed: Labor opposition immigration spokesman Richard Marles stated in June 2014: "when Scott Morrison was in opposition he opposed Labor's own re-integration packages and now he is offering sums that are triple the amount" [2].
Missing Context
Historical precedent: The claim omits that voluntary return payments were not a Coalition invention. Immigration Minister Scott Morrison stated: "It has been the standard practice for more than a decade for settlement packages to be offered to those who voluntarily return home" [2]. The Labor government under Julia Gillard had already been offering $1,500-$2,000 payments [2].
Safety assessments: The claim's emotive framing about returning to "war crimes, genocide, torture and persecution" is not fully accurate. The government maintained that returns only occurred to countries deemed safe for return. Liberal MP Kelly O'Dwyer stated: "These are people who are voluntarily returning home and...it is safe for them to return home" [2]. IOM's policy states they "do not facilitate involuntary returns" [1].
Voluntary nature: The claim omits that these were described as voluntary returns, and asylum seekers who accepted the payments reportedly spent their own money before receiving reimbursement upon return [5]. By June 2014, 283 people had voluntarily returned since September 2013 [1].
International practice: Assisted Voluntary Return programs are standard practice internationally, implemented by numerous countries including the UK, European nations, and others, often administered by IOM [4][6].
PNG Supreme Court context: The timing coincided with increasing legal pressure on offshore detention, including the PNG Supreme Court's 2016 ruling that detention on Manus was unconstitutional [7].
Source Credibility Assessment
SBS News: One of the original sources (SBS) is a mainstream, reputable Australian broadcaster. The SBS article provides balanced coverage including both government justification and opposition criticism [2].
The New Parliament: The other original source (thenewparliament.com) appears to be an advocacy/political blog. Its credibility is questionable compared to mainstream news sources.
Primary sources: The most credible sources include direct quotes from government ministers (Morrison, O'Dwyer) and opposition spokesperson (Marles), as well as reporting from established outlets like Sydney Morning Herald [1][2].
Labor Comparison
Did Labor do something similar?
Search conducted: "Labor government asylum seeker voluntary return payments 2010-2013"
Finding: Yes. The Labor government under Julia Gillard offered $1,500-$2,000 payments to asylum seekers for voluntary return [2]. Additionally, Labor reinstated offshore processing to Nauru and Manus Island in August 2012 after closing the Howard-era facilities in 2007 [8][9].
Key comparison points:
- Labor offered similar payments, but at significantly lower amounts ($1,500-$2,000 vs Coalition's $3,300-$10,000)
- Labor reinstated the Nauru and Manus Island detention centres in 2012
- Both parties maintained offshore detention as policy
- Both parties used IOM to administer voluntary return programs
Scott Morrison's hypocrisy confirmed: The claim correctly identifies that Morrison opposed Labor's payments when in opposition. Richard Marles (Labor) confirmed: "when Scott Morrison was in opposition he opposed Labor's own re-integration packages and now he is offering sums that are triple the amount" [2]. Marles also noted: "In opposition, Scott Morrison opposed the PNG arrangement, now it forms the heart of his own strategy" [2].
Balanced Perspective
Government position: The Coalition defended the increased payments as necessary for successful reintegration. Kelly O'Dwyer stated: "We want to make sure that when people return home that they are set up for success" [2]. The government maintained these were voluntary returns to safe destinations, administered by the UN-related IOM organization.
Opposition and human rights criticism: Labor criticized the government for offering "blank cheques" rather than processing claims [2]. Human rights advocates expressed concern about the ethics of paying people to return to countries they fled. Human Rights Watch's Elaine Pearson stated: "By making the conditions in Manus and Nauru so awful that people are encouraged to go back to active conflict zones, you are putting them in danger" [1].
Comparative context: This was not a uniquely Coalition policy - both major Australian parties have used voluntary return incentives, and the practice is common internationally. The key difference was the scale of payments. The Coalition dramatically increased amounts that Labor had already established.
Complexity: The policy existed within the broader context of Australia's controversial offshore detention system, which has been criticized by the UN Human Rights Committee, UNHCR, and human rights organizations [7][9]. In January 2025, the UN Human Rights Committee ruled that Australia breached human rights treaties through its Nauru detention arrangement [9].
Is this unique to the Coalition? No. Both parties have maintained offshore detention and voluntary return programs. The Coalition increased payment amounts significantly, but the fundamental policy framework existed under Labor.
PARTIALLY TRUE
6.0
out of 10
The claim is factually accurate in its core assertions: the Coalition government did offer increased financial payments to Manus Island detainees for voluntary return [1][2], and Scott Morrison did oppose similar (though smaller) payments when in opposition [2].
However, the claim contains significant misleading elements:
- The emotive description of returning to "war crimes, genocide, torture and persecution" overstates the situation - the government maintained returns were only to countries assessed as safe [2]
- The claim omits that Labor also offered voluntary return payments, just at lower amounts [2]
- The claim omits the international context - Assisted Voluntary Return programs are standard practice administered by IOM worldwide [4]
- The voluntary nature of the program and IOM's role is downplayed
The claim presents the policy as uniquely Coalition and uniquely cynical, when it was actually an expansion of existing Labor policy that both parties had used.
Final Score
6.0
OUT OF 10
PARTIALLY TRUE
The claim is factually accurate in its core assertions: the Coalition government did offer increased financial payments to Manus Island detainees for voluntary return [1][2], and Scott Morrison did oppose similar (though smaller) payments when in opposition [2].
However, the claim contains significant misleading elements:
- The emotive description of returning to "war crimes, genocide, torture and persecution" overstates the situation - the government maintained returns were only to countries assessed as safe [2]
- The claim omits that Labor also offered voluntary return payments, just at lower amounts [2]
- The claim omits the international context - Assisted Voluntary Return programs are standard practice administered by IOM worldwide [4]
- The voluntary nature of the program and IOM's role is downplayed
The claim presents the policy as uniquely Coalition and uniquely cynical, when it was actually an expansion of existing Labor policy that both parties had used.
📚 SOURCES & CITATIONS (9)
-
1
smh.com.au
The Abbott government is offering asylum seekers up to $10,000 - a five-fold increase - to leave detention centres on Manus Island and Nauru and return to their countries of origin.
The Sydney Morning Herald -
2
sbs.com.au
Labor has attacked the government for increasing payments to asylum seekers to return home. as an asylum-seeker reportedly set himself alight.
SBS News -
3
iomaustralia.org
Iomaustralia
-
4PDF
a framework for avrr en
Publications Iom • PDF Document -
5
smh.com.au
Asylum seekers who are offered substantial amounts of money by the government to leave the detention centres on Manus Island and Nauru must spend their own cash before receiving the payment.
The Sydney Morning Herald -
6
gov.uk
An annual breakdown of the number of Assisted Voluntary Return (AVR) applications under the 3 programmes (VARP, VARRP and AVRIM) and the outcomes from 2003 to 2013.
GOV.UK -
7
huffpost.com
'All of them were under pressure and threatened by immigration for a long time.'
HuffPost -
8
asyluminsight.com
Asylum Insight
-
9
ohchr.org
Ohchr
Rating Scale Methodology
1-3: FALSE
Factually incorrect or malicious fabrication.
4-6: PARTIAL
Some truth but context is missing or skewed.
7-9: MOSTLY TRUE
Minor technicalities or phrasing issues.
10: ACCURATE
Perfectly verified and contextually fair.
Methodology: Ratings are determined through cross-referencing official government records, independent fact-checking organizations, and primary source documents.