A busy person’s guide to the Malaysian Solution

Erick says:

03:18pm | 26/05/11

There ought to be more ridicule of government policies that encourage unwanted immigration under the false guise of “asylum seeking”.

AliceC says:

04:07pm | 26/05/11

How is seeking asylum a ‘false guise’?

jf says:

05:22pm | 26/05/11

AliceC says:04:07pm | 26/05/11

“How is seeking asylum a ‘false guise’?”

When you don’t really need asylum and in fact are really seeking to move countries for economic or other reasons.

Thomas Anderson says:

12:14am | 27/05/11

“it is possible that Adelaide will act as a deterrent.”

SNAP!

Empire says:

01:58pm | 27/05/11

My sister in law told me that the immigrants she has rented her house to, receive some figure over $20 000 in the form of a grant for furniture, clothes etc… And $20 000 per family member including children.
Has anyone else heard this?
That would mean that a family of five are starting off with over $120 000 and no debt repayment, if it is true anyway.

michael j says:

08:39pm | 26/05/11

Doesn’t matter what ya want to call it there’s a few hungry pensioners in QLD that wouldn’t mind a plate-full,,,,
On 6.30, tonite George said 1/3 of Queenslanders are living in poverty
something that was not really a fu—en state secret anyway,,
I don’t see any real solution to this refugee problem but what is being tried is not working,so why are we spending over 1 billion dollars a year on this.
the money that is being spent on them could possibly be better spent in their own country,then they wouldn’t have to spend all their hard earned coming here,,
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPjzfGChGlE

Progressive policy debate says:

01:18pm | 27/05/11

Perhaps the coalition will grow some and come out with a policy abandoning the UN refugee agreement and state it’s desire to stop any intake of refugees.
The hayseeds in QLD brought this on themselves. Too much time plucking banjos and picking their tooth.

nathan says:

06:53am | 27/05/11

Never mind the fact that report which looked into welfare dependence bundled people together into households, and the 86% figures included families where one child might be collecting AUStudy or some similar payment ... Its slightly disingenuous to use that figure and claim that welfare dependence is rife among refugees. Many Australian-born and raised children access these sorts of payments while they are studying, and if asylum seekers are permanent residents why shouldn’t they receive the same?

Just Sayin' says:

03:06pm | 26/05/11

It’s an ethnic chinese dish from Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore (although the spelling ‘mee’ is particular to Malaysia and Singapore, with Indonesians preferring ‘mi’ or ‘mie’).

The Badger says:

03:16pm | 26/05/11

No sense arguing over the finer points,
In the Peninsula Indians, Indonesians, Malaysians and Chinese abound.
Charmaine Solomon the Julia Child of Asian cooking puts both Mie and Nasi Goreng firmly in Indonesia in her book The Complete Asian Cookbook which to myself and many others is the definitive guide to cooking Asian Cuisine.

Gladys says:

03:16pm | 26/05/11

Thought so.

TheRealDave says:

03:58pm | 26/05/11

I agree Rosie, how can we send these ‘Asylum Seekers’ to a third world nation like Nauru??

Plus, isn’t it supposed to be underwater by now??

Why can’t we send them to a more modern vibrant and richer country like Malaysia?

Mouse says:

10:22pm | 26/05/11

No TRD, I believe Brisbane will be underwater before anywhere else. So we don’t have to worry about Nauru until Brisbane airport becomes a sumarine base. Maybe we can think about Malaysia then…... just saying…

Joan says:

10:36pm | 26/05/11

“How can we be sure that refugees coming from South East Asia are not terrorists, paedophiles, murders etc. I would be much happier and feel safer if anyone that is allowed to settle in this country is screened here under our authorities.”

Good point, Rosie, and that screening should be extended to cover everyone in Australia. I’d be much happier and feel safer then.

TheRealDave says:

11:17pm | 26/05/11

Brisvegas underwater? Sweet, that will put me closer to the water - surely my property prices will go up then?!?!?

Ben81 says:

05:11pm | 26/05/11

It’s a sad reality that we have to be heavy handed over this but I wouldn’t call Howard’s emptying and closing down of our detention centres and stamping out people smuggling in our region while taking in just as many refugees responsibly inhumane.  Rudd coming along and reversing all of that was pretty inhumane.

As for Malaysia, we’ll see, it could work for a while but I won’t be surprised if we end up taking in the 4000 from there and don’t actually end up sending anyone back to them.  Nothing particularly wrong with taking those people in though.

Ben81 says:

06:57pm | 26/05/11

Sure it was expensive, and yes most of the relative few people who were intercepted on boats at the time ended up here anyway.  Good on them, they were probably genuine refugees.  There’s millions of them.

It wasn’t nearly as expensive, inhumane and irresponsible though as turning over part of our asylum seeker intake to people smugglers and opening up our detention centres for thousands of people for years until we sort things out again.

It was simply about making people smugglers businesses unviable for the safety of asylum seekers, our security, and for a more effective and responsible use of our resources and that’s exactly what was achieved, I sure don’t remember the aim of it being to take in less refugees.

TimB says:

07:07pm | 26/05/11

So what, these hidden boat people came in on non-existent boats?

Did they get here via lifesaver ring?

Big Ted says:

10:41pm | 26/05/11

Sorry Im lost- exactly how did Howard make it ‘unviable’ for people smugglers by processing refugees on one island instead of another?

But now your lack of objectivity is a little clearer. Labor lets in queue jumping Boat People, but Liberals let in refugess that are “probably genuine”? Got it.

Ben81 says:

12:02am | 27/05/11

“Sorry Im lost- exactly how did Howard make it ‘unviable’ for people smugglers by processing refugees on one island instead of another?”

Because that offshore processing along with TPV’s made it impossible for them to guarantee they could get people into Australia in the first place and end up with permanent residency if they got here.  Their whole business model was shot. We sent out a strong message that they wouldn’t get away with it anymore, and their activities stopped until those measures were reversed and we sent out the message that they could go back into business.

NicoleG says:

09:29pm | 26/05/11

Normally I’d wish your keyboard broken. But now I wish it was your fingers!

Mouse says:

10:13pm | 26/05/11

Cool Nic, I’ll help you, let’s go!

Be cool says:

04:23pm | 31/05/11

Trust the right wing nutters to start ‘wishing injury’ on the net. Nicole you are a sicko, cheap shot. I’ll see ya in the real world for it

Kurisu Sonsaku says:

08:09pm | 26/05/11

Face it princess they didn’t or have no intention of entering in a legal fashion.

This is just your usual bluster, waffle & bullshit from a self flagellating apologist. come reverse racist.

Damian Parkhill says:

09:29pm | 26/05/11

And yet for all those flaws Kurisu….......

She didn’t need to resort to personal attacks, which is more than can be said for you!

Shane From Melbourne says:

10:10pm | 26/05/11

Treaties can be withdrawn from…..

Marilyn Shepherd says:

01:53am | 27/05/11

Actually that bluster is the law set by parliament and deemed to be valid by our own high court.

How can you have so little respect for our own law and so little respect for human beings that the only thing you can do is abuse me for publishing the truth?

The Murdoch media have been publishing hate filled rants and demands of push backs for 4 years now for reasons that escape me because they know they are breaking the law and don’t seem to care.

And Kurisu, of course they have every intention of entering legally, it is perfectly legal under Australia’s migration act to enter anyway they can so long as they present to the authorities, which of course they do before we chuck them in the slammer.

What is actually happening here is evil, pure evil.

1.  It was illegal to halt applications for Afghans and Sri Lankans, it caused enormous stress, cost lives, drove people to attempt suicides on a daily basis, cost vast amounts of cash and for what?  In the end all of the Afghans will stay because we are still “at war” with the Taliban.
2.  Locking children up was illegal, but we do it anyway.
3.  Locking up accepted refugees is illegal but we do it anyway.
4.  We broke our own law by locking up refugees on Christmas Island to keep them away from the law, but instead of letting them out when the High court said they should, we locked them up twice as long.
5.  There is no requirement for ASIO to check on refugee claims, in fact they don’t check them for those who fly here, but we jail people for up to 18 months by pretending they are having ASIO checks.
6.  So what happens after all this law breaking by the government?

They decide to cover up their law breaking and illegally push refugees off to a country they will not be accepted and where refugees are not even recognised.

So essentially they are claiming one small group of innocent people will be trebly punished because we kept breaking the law over another group of innocent human beings.

And no-one tells that moron Bowen ‘YOU DO NOT OWN THOSE PEOPLE”

Peter says:

11:28pm | 27/05/11

Any ‘convention’ that allows people to pass through numerous safe countries before deciding to claim refugee status in the country of their choice, which coincidentally allows them to live the rest of their lives on welfare needs to be withdrawn from immediately. I suggest a simple change of the convention stating that no refugee will ever be settled in the country in which they lodge their claim would see an immediate end to people smuggling.

Be cool says:

04:26pm | 31/05/11

Tim this is pretty sick and has nothing to do with policy. I can’t believe that the punch published this sexist comment.

Just Sayin' says:

11:25pm | 26/05/11

I’m pretty that refugee convention was signed by the aforementioned elected government. Which begs the question, what’s your point?

Marilyn Shepherd says:

01:56am | 27/05/11

That lie has been tested over and over again.  Everyone in our territory has the legal right to access to our courts.

And the High court have found that the installation of the refugee convention into the migration act is valid law.

So do not come the aliens bullshit with me,

Just Sayin' says:

11:29pm | 26/05/11

You’re either a troll or a moron. No conservative Liberal would think swapping a small number of refugees for a big number of refugees is a good idea, and no liberal Liberal voter would like the Malaysian solution. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and suggest you return to your bridge.

Marilyn Shepherd says:

02:00am | 27/05/11

You nitwit, there are no people smugglers.  It is not people smuggling to give refugees a ride, it is the free choice of the refugees to pay for transport.

For christ’s sake are you a savage?  And how do you think that will make it any safer when the refugees will have to get to Australia before we kidnap and transport them.

The twisted minds in this country truly astound me.

All over the world refugees are fleeing their homes with as little as they can carry to get to safety yet we are the only ones who jail the refugees and the ferry men, except the ferry men get charges, lawyers, trials and sentences imposed by courts for not people smuggling.

The refugees get minimum legal rights.
We have no right to stop any person leaving any place to seek protection, if every country did that we would be pre-convention days where we could deny entry to jews to protect the white Australia policy.

It is a fact conceded by the DIAC dimwits that the “smugglers” don’t sell anything more than transport.

Douglas says:

09:20am | 27/05/11

@Justsayin

4,000 people over 4 years is a miniscule number. As we Liberal voters have been saying all along, the issues are safety, and gving the smugglers nothing to sell. It is a very good agreement on both counts.

Racist, bigot, redneck, Xenophobe, anti muslim, an says:

12:45pm | 27/05/11

marilyn could you answer me a few questions please, i would like the literal/legal definitions not your version of the definitions please.

Define smugglin for me:

Define seeking asylum for me:

Q. Is it illegal to leave indonesia without a passport or paying any departure taxes or filling out the appropriate declarations for customs etc?

Q. Is it illegal to enter Australia without a passport or visa ?

Q. Is it legal to enter Australia without filling out our customs forms and declarations.

Do our elected representatives need to view several pieces of legislation at the same time? ie immigration act, refugee agreement, quarantine laws, human rights laws, Australian constitution.

Must be easy only having to rely on four or five articles of one agreement to run the country.

Can you board a flight from any country in the world to another country without a passport?

Interested Observer says:

01:29pm | 27/05/11

Perhaps I can be of some assistance to you

Define smugglin for me:
Smugglin – an encompassing doona like device that bogans lie around in watching plasma burn.

Define seeking asylum for me:
Easy – The domicile you reside in.

Q. Is it illegal to leave Indonesia without a passport or paying any departure taxes or filling out the appropriate declarations for customs etc?
Yes

Q. Is it illegal to enter Australia without a passport or visa ?
Yes, unless you arrive and claim to be seeking Asylum.

Q. Is it legal to enter Australia without filling out our customs forms and declarations.
Yes

Do our elected representatives need to view several pieces of legislation at the same time? ie immigration act, refugee agreement, quarantine laws, human rights laws, Australian constitution.
It is difficult to view several pieces of paper at the same time, because our eyes tend to focus on one object at a time.

Can you board a flight from any country in the world to another country without a passport?
Not that I am aware of.

Hope that helps.

Racist, redneck, xenophobe, and the rest of the is says:

04:44pm | 27/05/11

yes very helpful, thank you observer apart from my own typo contribution which was not helpful.
So an asylum seeker may enter Australia without a visa but it doesn’t say thay can enter without a passport, and infact they may be detained if they have no passport.

As they may have left indonesia illegally with a captain who is also breaking several laws they are infact illegal visitorsor at the very least complicit in the crimes of the said captain, some may then ask for asylum and they wont need a visa but will have needed to comply with the laws of the countries they passed through to get to Australia, hence illegal.

Asylum is ( when used for seekers) safe haven or protection from racial, political and other forms of discrimination.

I can’t find the paragraph about travelling through (illegally) as many countries as you like till you find the one you prefer to seek asylum in, anyone got that link

Interested Observer says:

05:28pm | 27/05/11

So an asylum seeker may enter Australia without a visa but it doesn’t say thay can enter without a passport, and in fact they may be detained if they have no passport.
    Yes, Asylum seekers are always detained until their claims for refugee status are investigated. If they are found to be genuine asylum seekers they become refugees and are allowed entry. If they are found not to be refugees, they are deemed to be illegal immigrants and are returned to their country of origin.

As they may have left indonesia illegally with a captain who is also breaking several laws they are infact illegal visitors or at the very least complicit in the crimes of the said captain, some may then ask for asylum and they won’t need a visa but will have needed to comply with the laws of the countries they passed through to get to Australia, hence illegal.
    No, Turning up in Australia to seek Asylum is not illegal. If the captain has entered Australia and is not seeking Asylum, he has entered Australia illegally and appropriate action will be taken under Australian law. Australia is interested in verifying the claims of Asylum seekers and does not prosecute asylum seekers for what they may have done to get to Australia to lodge their claim.
Asylum is ( when used for seekers) safe haven or protection from racial, political and other forms of discrimination.
I can’t find the paragraph about travelling through (illegally) as many countries as you like till you find the one you prefer to seek asylum in, anyone got that link.
    As I stated earlier Australia does not enforce another countries laws. You seem to be assuming that asylum seekers cross borders illegally, without passports and visas. This may not be the case. Their documentation to arrive at a departure point to Australia may have been entirely legal.
    There are a variety of reasons why they may have arrived in Australia without documentation. They may prior to their last departure point had their documentation stolen, they may have destroyed it, or may have forfeited it to the “captain” as a condition of boarding.

Ranting racist rah rah rah! says:

07:00pm | 27/05/11

So Observer, as my original line of questions was to marilyn on the point that Australias detention of asylum seekers is illegal, it is not

That asylum seeking is legal which it is, you didn’t elaborate or point out where a person can go through many countries without seeking asylum until they reach a preferred destination. Along the way if the laws of other countries have been broken ( yes we don’t enforce other countries’ laws) but we can deem them unsuitable for asylum as the definitions get a bit questionable there…i feel.

If the captain has their papers, they are not lost and should be provided upon demand by Australian authorities, customs, navy etc.

Smuggling is defined as to transport something in a clandestine fashion or to circumvent the laws of the place you left and the place you wish to enter or take the smuggled item to, the item,person or animal you are smuggling having given you their permission or even paying the fare doesn’t make it NOT smuggling as Marilyn asserted earlier.

So in summary,

You may seek asylum in Aus’ you don’t need a visa but you will be detained…legally!

You cannot leave another country without their permission and correct paperwork. If you have it’s illegal regardless of where, and the rest of your voyage is done from an illegal starting point.

The intent still seems to be about getting around our laws, which is illegal.

Interested Observer says:

10:31pm | 27/05/11

Dear ranting racist
It appears your are concerned about Asylum seekers, but your mostly concerned about the definitions regarding what is legal, what is illegal and what are conventions and treaties that Australia is signatory to.
There are approximately 12 million refugees in the world. Australia takes in 13,500 of these each year.
Start here, as this is probably the most important part of the puzzle.
http://untreaty.un.org/cod/avl/ha/prsr/prsr.html
Consider whether you think Australia should take in refugees and if you think we shouldn’t, contact you elected member and advise them that you believe Australia should withdraw as a signatory to The 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees.
We deal with refugees in accordance with this treaty.
Have a nice life, you are fortunate to live in this country.

yadda yadda yadda says:

08:56am | 28/05/11

Actually Observer < i question that name as you failed to observe my point was addressing Marilyn’s assertion that detaining asylum seekers is evil and illegal. It is not!

The assertion that “they are not being smuggled” which by definition, they are being smuggled.

I am using the Australian human rights commision as my reference point, as i am subject to Australian law.

I have no concern over the number of asylum seekers we take in or detain, i am concerned with certain members of Australian society want to LIE and try and shame Australians into being submissive to the vocal minority.

Apart from assisting me, what is your point?

Interested Observer says:

11:05am | 28/05/11

I do Apologise yadda, yadda

I just saw your questions and that there was no reply.
Marilyn is well known on this site as a fringe dweller of the extreme left.

I hadn’t even read the previous comments, just saw your questions.
I do apologise for interfering in your conversation with Marilyn.
PS you wouldn’t have gotten a rational answer to your questions.

Eagle Eyes says:

11:45pm | 26/05/11

Don’t be such a pussy, try weaning yourself off mungbeans, channel your inner warrior, swap your sacred animal for a scorpion or something…

John the Zombie says:

12:23am | 27/05/11

Wolfie so living under the Taliban is good, what did you recon wolfie? How about under Suddam Husain, sounds even better, I guess not?

It seems when information that will support the journo and left wing view is required then these organisations apply for the freedom of Information details but when it doesn’t they rather work of rhetoric. I ask any journo or left wing to go and ask for the number of boats that arrived before and after Howard put into full swing the Pacific solution. Remember this solution came forward after another asylum seeker boat was lost at sea and the death of those on board. You will find that over time till the during the last part of Howard govt the number actually went down to one yes one boat for the whole year and why because the smugglers could not sell the product.

You do realise that there are refugees living in awful conditions that can’t afford a ticket to Australia or to pay the smugglers one cent. Also let me ask you wolfie, why are ppl who will suffer even more still sticking it out in Afghanistan. You do realise that there is a Sikh population there who is threatened with death still living there. Their children can’t even go to school as students try to force them to convert to Islam. Why are these ppl able to continue to live there and the ones who are coming here who are Muslims say they fear for their lives.

jf says:

11:36am | 27/05/11

So Wolfie, which countries did we make uninhabitable?

Don’t say Iran as, for all it’s problems, it wasn’t such a great place to be (unless you were part of the ruling elite) beforehand.

Don’t say Afghanistan as, unless you were Taliban (or at least male and fundamentalist), it was worse.

War is a horrible thing. Sadly sometimes it is unavoidable.

As to why we are shipping them around, I’m with you wolfie. There has to be (and has been) a better way than this. I guess, if nothing else, it will act as a deterrent. Previous ways have been harsh but this way seems unecessarily cruel and punative.

Marilyn Shepherd says:

01:00pm | 27/05/11

He was not backing the Pacific solution, he merely said it would be better than Malaysia.

Grow up you frigging lazy dingbats.

Under Article 32 of the refugee convention it is illegal no matter what crap we try.

racist...blah blah whatever says:

04:48pm | 27/05/11

come answer my questions marilyn…the ones up there ^^^

Dr B S Goh says:

08:07am | 27/05/11

@ Lisa. To get a plane into Australia you need to get a Visitor’s Visa to Australia issued by Australia. It is not easy to do so to get into Australia from some countries. An Airline would not let you board a plane otherwise it is liable to take you back for free when immigration stops you at the gate.

What is happening is that our Asian neighbours have let us down by letting these boat people enter their countries legally and get onto a boat and throw away their documents. But do not forget many of the these boatpeople are Muslims and with the bleeding hearts in Australia we are made the stupid and laughing stock in Asia.

I would have thought the people vetting the boatpeople should ask these people how they get into our neighbouring countries if they do not have any document. If they lie on this issue they should be automatically disqualified on grounds of fraud.

One Asian leader used to call us the White Trash of Australia. I wonder what they think of us in the boatpeople game. I like to ask the bleeding hearts of Australia if they think we are the No 1 racists in this boatpeople game or WHO IS??

Gregg says:

08:27am | 27/05/11

The Visa Lisa,
They are not so easy to get for people have to answer a lot of questions and be considered as having reason to make a return trip.

Anne_N says:

08:37am | 27/05/11

Emotional blackmail?

The mental image of poor bedraggled desperate flotsam fleeing the evil regimes of the world is meant to illicite certain emotional responses (just ask Marilyn) where planeloads of disembarking passengers doesn’t have the same effect.