Winston Churchill once noted that democracy was the worst form of government, except for all the rest.

Illustration:Nicholson

It may also be true of Chris Bowen’s Malaysian solution -assuming it can be revived somehow. It is the worst possible answer to the asylum seeker problem, except for any others anyone can think of.

I know. I know. Calling a people-swap arrangement “good’’ policy is a stretch. Very few voters would agree right now and for a government that goes backwards even when spruiking a tax cut, the task of selling something so inelegant and counter-intuitive is clearly a bridge too far.

Yet it is also a bridge which must be crossed and a few facts in this incendiary debate would go along way.

A good place to begin might be the perennial argument over push and pull factors. This turns on whether abandoning John Howard’s suite of hardline policies, in favour of Kevin Rudd’s supposedly more humane ones, amounted to a “welcome mat’’ as the Opposition loudly protested.

It is certainly an inconvenient truth for the current Government that the sudden drop-off in arrivals in 2002 followed the imposition of tough border protection laws and that what continued as a trickle for the next five years or so, only returned to significant numbers in 2007-08 when Labor came to power.

It seems an open and shut case. Tough “Pacific Solution’’ policies “stopped the boats’’ just as Labor’s however well-intentioned humane policies, started them again.

Of course, it is not that straightforward. And perhaps the most basic reality has been missed anyway - namely that the big pull factor is not this policy setting or that, but rather Australia itself. Put simply, as a liberal and tolerant democracy with enviably high living standards, people are drawn here.

Should we really be surprised? A glance at the numbers shows there have been four waves of boat arrivals since the 1970s beginning with the post Vietnam War peak late in that decade.

Each time, they have been causally associated with wars and genocide in the countries of origin rather than our policies per se: Vietnam (1976-81); Cambodia and Indo-China (1989-98); the Middle-East - mostly Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan; Turkey as well as Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka (1999-01); and finally, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka and Iraq (2009-11).

Still you have to believe you have some chance of staying here to risk the journey in the first place.

As one of relatively few countries in the world to be seriously in the refugee resettlement business, Australia has played an admirable part in absorbing those displaced by these human calamities. And on this score at least, there had long been a broad political consensus.

No longer. Flowing directly from the mostly pointless push/pull debate are a number of myths.

The prime one, and the one on which Tony Abbott is currently basing his political position is that reviving the Howard Government’s Pacific Solution would achieve the same results as it did in the previous decade.

Critics say this ignores the fact that it was the resolution of troubles in Afghanistan - namely the defeat of the Taliban - which was the biggest factor.

Whatever the truth, the Government’s immigration and border security experts are now advising that these policies will no longer work. Indeed, they say that one of the most critical deterrent factors of the post Tampa 2001 drop-off in boats was the single element of the policy that is no longer available - towing boats back to the edge of Indonesia’s territorial waters.

It worked spectacularly well then but would not work now. It was done without Indonesia’s formal authority and would certainly not receive that nod now. More importantly, asylum seekers and their people-smuggler agents woke up to it and began scuttling and sabotaging boats rather than allowing themselves to be towed. We saw the tragic results of that as recently as 2009 when the occupants of SIEV XXXVI set fire to their vessel fearing tow-back.

Similarly, Nauru had a deterrent effect because what is known now was not known then. Back in the early 2000s, the prospect of being sent to Nauru was full of uncertainty.

For asylum seekers, the questions were many: Where is it? Will I ever be let out? Where would I be sent then? Now of course it is well known that its processing centre was merely an Australian operation and those found to be refugees were eventually allowed to come to Australia. Its deterrent power now is basically zero, according to the experts. Ditto PNG’s Manus Island.

This is the essence of the message being given to Tony Abbott by experts from Immigration, Customs and Border Protection, AFP and the like. If you really want to stop the boats, the old definition of “off-shore processing’’ as per the Pacific Solution won’t cut it.

Indeed, they have told the Government that the “threat matrix’’ is already pointing to a return to more arrivals after a recent lull brought about in part by the prospect of the Malaysian deal, and in part by the Christmas Island tragedy at the close of last year.

Their advice is that the Malaysian solution, harsh as it looks, is a “virtual tow-back’’ and as such, the only policy likely to dissuade people getting on unsafe boats in the first place.

Some will always regard the end-point as cruel - especially if it involves children. But as advocates of the novel plan say, if it were allowed to work, it may save many lives.

This issue has played well for Tony Abbott so far. But the onus has shifted critically. The question now is: does he really want to stop the boats or not?

Most commented

71 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Super D says:

      06:21am | 10/09/11

      The Malaysian solution is as yet untested and is certainly not without its limitations.  Firstly the 800 person cap may be tested quicker than the government may hope.  It has obviously been reset to 0 now thought this doesn’t change the fact that half the old cap had been utilised.  There needs to be a solution for when the 800 figure is reached put in place, if for no other reason than to improve our negotiating position.  The 5-1 ratio of the first deal resulted from negotiating a position of weakness.  Next time it could be 10-1.

      The political compromise could therefore be for the Malaysian solution to stand with Nauru available for any overflow.  Furthermore the coalition should be able to extract some tribute from Labor such as an open admission that offshore processing is necessary and that weakening its removal is against the nations interests.  Indeed the coalition should also be able to get TPV’s back on the table as seeing as the Malaysian solution is going to be successful no one will ever need them anyway.

      It was incredible foolish of Rudd and Gillard to play to the inner city progressives by relaxing our border controls.  All but the most jaded partisans fully understand that the current mess is all the result of the Labor Party’s folly.

    • acotrel says:

      12:54pm | 11/09/11

      We often hear our pollies espouse ‘Australian values’ when it suits their purposes. However their treatment of asylum seekers gives the lie to that concept. Locking families up behind baerbed wire is not what we Australians are about.  Perhaps our taxpayers should shout Tony Abbott, Scott Morrison, Julia Gillard, and Chris Bowen a little sojourn in Villers Brettoneux, so they can visit the museum and the Commonwealth war cemetery, and contemplate what thousands of our soldiers really died for?  All this stuff about border protection, illegals, offshore processing etc. in the cause of promoting cynical political agendas, won’t cut it when it comes to voting tiime !

    • emel says:

      11:45am | 12/09/11

      Finally we are discussing some facts about this issue instead of constantly bleating on about queue jumpers and ‘real’ refugees. Good article Mark.

      @Super D, you’re failing to absorb the facts. Nauru is not an option due to the fact that it no longer is a deterrant and it costs way too much.  - ‘inner city progressives’? Please.
      I am concerned about the plight of refugees, but Malaysia seems like it could work and as Kenny tentatively suggests, in the long run may actually save lives.

    • thatmosis says:

      07:19am | 10/09/11

      What a load of unmitigated crapola. The whole situatio was caused by Krudd and his softly softly approach to the Illegall Immigrants. We had a system that worked really well but just because it was Howards idea this Government had to squash it and look where we are now, thousands of illegalls arriving since the election and with the failure once again of a Labor Policy more ready to arrive.
        I have a few words of advice for you Mark, get a real job and stop writing crap upon crap for your ALP masters as you are becoming a standing joke on the Punch and people are starting to treat you the way that we treat the PM and not listening.

    • Amused says:

      09:58am | 10/09/11

      Add to that, it was Gillard that wrote the NEW policy for Rudd.  She has failed on so many counts, this was first and it has continued unabated ever since.

    • Soames says:

      12:40pm | 10/09/11

      Curious post, not even cursorily researched. Mark Kenny’s masters happen to be News Ltd, hardly the ALP. (that’s the Australian Labor Party). Here’s some info for you to form even a rudimentary opinion, http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/bn/sp/boatarrivals.htm  Stay sober now.

    • acotrel says:

      04:53pm | 11/09/11

      Here is something to reflect upon.  A few months back Peter Wreith tried to make a comeback into politics.  His reception from everyone else involved was much less than enthusiastic.  It will take a long time for the Australian public to forget the images of the wives and kids of the wharfies getting shoved around during the Patrick’s dispute.  Regardless of whether they might have been especially recruited for the occasion, that stuff is not what we Australians are about .  When women and kids are copping shit, the reason doesn’t matter, it has got to stop !

    • acotrel says:

      05:32pm | 11/09/11

      @Soames
      Thanks for that, and my opinion hasn’t changed about the cynicism involved !

    • emel says:

      12:38pm | 12/09/11

      @thatmosis.
      The standing joke here on The Punch is you and your LNP mates. When credible journalists start accepting advice from bigots like you, the whole system is in trouble.
      ‘Illegal immigrants’ are not out to get you. They are mostly desperate people with no options.
      Empathy and humour are indicators of intelligence.
      Sadly you display neither.
      Tottle off now back to HQ, your leaders will advise you of your next step.

    • Brian Taylor says:

      08:02am | 10/09/11

      all well and good Mark, but why are the so-called asylum seekers dumping their ID’s to get into Aust.
      I noticed you didn’t bring that fact up

    • LeftRightOut says:

      09:03am | 10/09/11

      He also left out the main part of the coalition’s policy (that worked perfectly well in the past) - Temporary Protection Visas. This, along with Nauru simply stopped the boats.

      The left struggle with this fact, and are daily, trying to rewrite history.

    • Marilyn Shepherd says:

      06:03pm | 10/09/11

      They don’t usually have any genuine ID because to carry it will get them killed or sent back.  What is wrong with you imbeciles?

      If the taliban have bombed your village and killed your family do you say “excuse me while I find the papers the nitwits in Australia think I should have”.

      Afghans are not registered at birth because there has been no actual government for over 30 years and Hazara Afghans are not even recognised as humans do genius what papers could they have.

      You make the mistake of thinking that it is about us, it is not about us and our fat selfish lives.

      It is about the victims of our wsrs.

    • marley says:

      09:57am | 11/09/11

      @Marilyn - Afghans don’t have much ID because they’ve never had much ID.  But Tamils do, and so do Iraqis.

      And all three have enough ID to get to Indonesia so the argument that carrying ID will get you killed by the Taliban or the Sri Lankan government or whatever Iraqi group you’re fleeing doesn’t really hold water outside Afghanistan or Sri Lanka or Iraq, now does it?

      .

      So, having gotten to Indonesia or Malaysia with ID, why destroy it there?

    • Mick S says:

      08:03am | 10/09/11

      Evil people smugglers want to illegally send asylum seekers from Malaysia to Australia.
      The current government policy, on the other hand, is to illegally send asylum seekers from Australia to Malaysia.
      The political and media response to asylum seekers is totally disproportionate to the numbers arriving, miniscule by world standards.
      Attempting to transfer our obligations to nations which are less well equipped to deal with them but will attempt to do so in exchange for Australian bribes is disgraceful.
      We are not a poor country, we have no need to be a mean one.

    • Joan says:

      09:45am | 10/09/11

      The slow drip of water will erode a rock over time, the unchecked leaking tap can turn to a gush. All Australians want the government to do is to keep our borders secure, it they can’t do that against people smugglers, what hope do they have against an army? There`s nothing noble about people smugglers, or asylum seekers who toss away their IDs or asylum seekers who load unaccompanied children on a leaky boat as an entry card to Australia. Nothing mean about wanting to secure our borders- you bet aboriginal people wished they could have secured the borders.

    • Mick S says:

      12:19pm | 10/09/11

      @Joan,
      You would appear to be eminently qualified on the subjects of slow drips and uncontrolled gushings.
      There is nothing noble in persecuting the already persecuted.
      There is nothing noble in demonising the most desperate for perceived political gain.
      There is nothing noble in allowing community release to convicted criminals while incarcerating women and children behind razor wire for undetermined but lengthy periods for the “crime” of being asylum seekers.
      As for your reference to the aboriginal people, thank you for the reminder that we are largely all boat people.
      However, I am unaware of asylum seekers hoisting flags and making proclamations regarding terra nullis - perhaps you could enlighten?

    • Richard says:

      02:17pm | 10/09/11

      But Mick S., here is the thing:~ there are no shortage of persecuted people in the world, there is no limit to the amount of desperate people who would like to start a new life in Australia in the world: there are millions upon millions.

      So the question is, is it appropriate for the Australian Government to establish sovereign control over our borders? Is it appropriate to let the Government regulate immigration to this country, or is it appropriate to let people smugglers regulate immigration to this country?

      Its the principle of the thing: everybody has sympathy for those poor people who aren’t lucky enough to live in this, the lucky country… But the majority of the community feel that it is proper and appropriate to for the borders of this country to be secure, and for immigration to be conducted through the approved, regulated channels of bureaucracy as mandated by our National Government.

      Why is this desire for our government to have control of our borders such an anathema to you?

    • Joan says:

      09:06am | 11/09/11

      MickS- burning buildings by asylum seekers is a start.  As for Aborigines they lost their right to rule their land - aboriginesforce fed-  had another culture, religion, laws rammed down their throats. Over time you can expect the muslim religion to a be a force , the sharia law to rule and women burquad. It is already happening. As one Imam said - it will happen - they can wait. As for Afagahni men -they could stand by Australian soldiers and create a free/democratic Afghanistan instead of abandoning their fellow men and country

    • acotrel says:

      05:05pm | 11/09/11

      ‘This issue has played well for Tony Abbott so far. But the onus has shifted critically. The question now is: does he really want to stop the boats or not?’

      What a bloody stupid question?  Every single person in Australia knows the statistics which prove that asylum seekers are not a real issue.  Abbott has simply created a problem in the minds of Australians, and is offering himself as a solution.  It is the same technique which was used by Goebbels to get HItler into power.  It was invented by the American Eddie Bernays, and has been spelled out in his books ‘Crystallising Public Opinion’, and ‘Propaganda’ !  There is nothing smart or original about it ! Abbott is being disingenuous as always !

    • Fiddler says:

      08:09am | 10/09/11

      Why have you not mentioned TPV’s? They were an instrumental part of cutting down the pull factor. There is not one thing that worked back then it was a host of things. We should open up Nauru, change the Migration Act to stop this ridiculous case of “Lawfare” where tax dollars are paid to take our own government to court by non-citizens and change our status on the UN convention to observer.
      Note this takes us away from the real issue, that being the un-sustainable rates of immigration that no-one in politics will address

    • Richard says:

      03:07pm | 10/09/11

      I agree with that Fiddler, except the last comment. I confess I am a believer in the “Big Australia” concept. I want Australia to be a world power with 50 Million citizens, all united and working together for the good of our nation.

      But here’s the thing, to achieve this vision, we can’t just let ‘pathetic-ness’ be the main qualification for granting an applicant entry and residency into the country. We need to be selective, we need to recruit the most useful people, not the most pathetic people. We should be inviting those migrants who are wealthy, who are educated who are skilled, who are proficient, who know our language, and refuse entry to those parasites who cannot contribute.

      We need to stop rewarding pathetic flea-bitten freeloaders who try to sneak in the back door, and rewarding greater numbers of immigrants who are deserving of Australian citizenship by their merit.

      Why are we turning away hordes of university educated young people from Asia who have paid for all their studies in Australia and now want stay in Australia and put their education to good use in increasing our GDP and paying taxes to our government? It would be win-win, they paid for their education themselves so they weren’t a drain on the tax-payer while they were at uni, but now we can still derive the benefit of their skills in our society, if only we let them stay! They want to!

      But noooo, we have to deport these poor graduates who have accustomed to life in Australia and fitted in well, and are primed to contribute to society, yet we’re supposed accept more useless asylum seekers whom the stats show are still bludging on welfare 5 years after their arrival! Its outrageous.

    • PTom says:

      01:53pm | 11/09/11

      TPV where in place for a year and did not work, all it did was to force women and children onto the boats.

    • acotrel says:

      06:29pm | 11/09/11

      @Fiddler
      And we should stop this freedom of speech nonsense too ?

    • acotrel says:

      06:33pm | 11/09/11

      @Richard
      ’ I want Australia to be a world power with 50 Million citizens, all united and working together for the good of our nation.
      But here’s the thing, to achieve this vision, we can’t just let ‘pathetic-ness’ be the main qualification for granting an applicant entry and residency into the country.’

      Richard, you are PATHETIC !  Perhaps we should send you back where you came from ?

    • Against the Man says:

      08:41am | 10/09/11

      Well, I’m about to go off for well deserved vacation. But before I go, I’ll like to point out something. Just looking at the last 9 months the Gillard government has had continues policy failures, record low poll numbers, policy lie/back-flip of mega porportion aka the carbon tax lie, we have perpetual talk about whether we should replave the hopeless Gillard (watching TV were its a toss up between KRudd and Stephen smith)............so you don’t have to be Einstein to see the pattern - Gillard = Failure and Hopelessness!

      And we haven’t taken into account CT…............  smile

    • nossy says:

      12:18pm | 10/09/11

      @Against the Man   have a great holiday ATM - I am sure Seano, JN and DP will miss you muchly!  hahahah

    • Against the Man says:

      06:13pm | 10/09/11

      Well those guys are their own worse enemies, I just reflect their own words, views and beliefs which unfortunately is not the majority view point.

    • John A Neve says:

      04:10pm | 11/09/11

      Atm,
      I am glad my views aren’t the views of those such as yourself. When I read your posts, I’m reminded of the Lemmings or the Pied Pipers rats.
      Enjoy your break, it will give you the chance to clear your mind.

    • The Galah from Hervey Bay says:

      08:51am | 10/09/11

      Does he really want to stop the boats or not . ?  You ask this of Tony Abbott -
      Ask the Prime Minister !  Gillard holds the reins , not Tony Abbott .
      Gillard has twisted and turned every way possible to avoid the Pacific Solution Howard fix simply to say i did it my way. 
      The answer has always been there but the prospect of eating humble pie was too much for Labor.
      Tony Abbott has offered to help the government with a bi-partisan approach to a solution to attempts to illegally enter this country.
      Gillard is about to announce another hairbrained scheme just as 73 more illegal entrants begin to belt on the back door.
      If this excuse for a government had left the border controls in place that John Howard had set up , there would be no crisis as currently exists.

    • acotrel says:

      05:19pm | 11/09/11

      @the Galah
      ‘Gillard has twisted and turned every way possible to avoid the Pacific Solution Howard fix simply to say i did it my way.’

      John Howard can never be vindicated !  Two recent decisions by the High Court prove that his actions in denying asylum seekers their rights to access our courts, and in avoiding our obligations under the UNHCR treaty were illegal under the Immigration Act and common law.  What happened on Nauru was un-Australian and cynical in the interest of promoting a political agenda.  Why would we ever go back there, and compound the felony !

    • Joan says:

      08:52am | 10/09/11

      Once again any Giilard government created problem has media looking to Abbott for solution and turrnng Gillard problem into an Abbott problem. Why not make Abbott the real PM ?- media. Gillard constantly harping about Abbott as if he were the PM. - just give him the job you already think he has.

    • Mayday says:

      08:52am | 10/09/11

      Another convoluted opinion piece reflecting on the opposition in order to cover and deflect the disaster this government has created.

    • Adam Diver says:

      08:56am | 10/09/11

      Worse article ever. Honestly, its just a massive coincidence the increase in arrivals after the laws were softened.

      And the ” Malaysian solution is the worst possible answer to the asylum seeker problem, except for any others anyone can think of”. OMG we had a solution with a proven track record. This is an untried, unfair (5 for 1) solution with a ceiling, no back up plan, and to top it off, with no legal protection for asylum seekers, your bias is amazing.

      I ponder, is the medias sudden defence of offshore processing

      a) because of the lessons learned after Rudd softened laws?
      b) in defience of the high court?
      c) a reaction to thier party getting pummeled for its complete ineptitude.

    • Steve says:

      04:29pm | 10/09/11

      d) All of the above?

    • stephen says:

      08:58am | 10/09/11

      The AFP should not be advising anyone.

      Nauru worked well previously, and no need to search then for an answer to illegal arrivals, only to have another test case brought before the Courts.
      If offshore processing is thought illegal, then let a plaintiff test it.
      They may win, but the PR will hurt the cause.

    • Mohammad says:

      10:20am | 10/09/11

      I support the Malaysian solution as it will be a big step to stop the boatpeople.

      The former PM Rudd is the No 1 person responsible for Australia’s failure to stop the boatpeople.

      FM Rudd has not changed. It is crazy of him to organize a talk fest on China with senior diplomats and academics without asking China first and getting China’s support for such a Conference. He is after all Australia’s Foreign Minister and not a professor.

      To add insults to China Rudd wants to hold a special session on the coming and ORDERLY change of Leadership in China. How would Australia feel if China’s Foreign Minister organizes a talk fest on Australia to discuss the chaos of the leadership of Rudd and Gillard?

    • steve parker says:

      10:26am | 10/09/11

      Mark - Bangladesh developed as a nation from the War of Independence in 1971 didn’t it? I know there were a couple of coups following that but with the declaration of democracy in 1991 I’m not sure why there would be a large movement of refugees from the country after that date. I’m not aware of any other factor between 1999-01 unless you are counting natural disasters.

    • Boneman says:

      10:36am | 10/09/11

      The dirrect result of “Labours well intentioned but humane policy” is the pulverising to death of 50 poor souls on the rocks of Christmas Island and another couple of hundred lost at sea.Makes children over board pale into insignificance does’nt it, all of you on the hollier than thou on Left?

    • Leigh says:

      10:48am | 10/09/11

      All commentators now seem to be saying that that nothing is going to stop illegal boats. Kenny’s comment about Nauru is right; it would no longer have any effect. But, we cannot simply allow the current situation to prevail.

      Time for a military-style defence or our borders, perhaps?

    • Al says:

      11:10am | 10/09/11

      Unfortunately the main problem with ALL the illegal immigration policies is that they tend to focus on the ‘boat people’.
      The main source of illegal immigrants in Australia is NOT ‘boat people’, it is people who have arrived in Australia legaly by a visa (student, holiday, work etc) who then deliberately overstay and/or breach the terms of their visa.
      So how do you propose we deal with this?
      Perhaps a special enforcement unit with records of where EVERY visa holder is at any time and as soon as the visa time limit is up send in the armed forces (despite the fact they may simply be waiting for an application for a new visa to go through the system, which takes ages, many times LONGER than what their original visa was for) and all this without actualy determining if they have a legitimate claim to asylumn?

    • John the Zombie says:

      01:51pm | 10/09/11

      OK Al let’s see the difference between students, holiday, work and refuges.

      Students - Pay fees for schools and these fees must be aid before they arrive in Australia. They are also required to show an x amount of money in their accounts and from accommodation. Most work while here so contribute to the economy and last but not least do not have access to Australian centre link, health care and courts.

      In this case I have a huge issue. I had a friend from Indonesia. My friend had come to Australia and studied here since yr. 10 paying international fees. His family had bought a house and car while he was here. His sister came later on and did the same studying year 10 - 12 at international fees levels. My friend then went onto university and studied a commerce degree (international fees as well) and then went on to do a Masters of Finance (international fees). He never asked or complained about not getting access to government services and also worked a job paying tax as a computer consultant. Once completing all this he waited 2 yrs. for his PR application which never was issued. He left after two years to head back to Indo. He was a hard worker and would have contributed a lot and had already done so but the govt felt that wasn’t enough. They preferred to give ppl who after 5 years are still on centre link PR and citizenship.

      Holiday - They pay a fee for the visa to come here. They spend money and are assessed by border security at the gates and must show they can justify their stay in Oz. Contribute $$ to the economy. Last but not least do not have access to Australian centre link, health care and courts.

      Workers - Required to apply for a visa to work in Oz. Must have a job ready before entering the country to work in before visa is issued. Work and contribute to the country in taxes and other expenses. Last but not least do not have access to Australian centre link, health care and courts.

      Even if these ppl over stayers they are not asking for money from the govt so to try to muddy the workers with the line ow many of xx ppl come here is crap as far as I am concerned. May I also point out that these ppl who you now are referring to as illegals actually come here with papers and when they are caught and found are sent directly home with no appeal at all. Also note it is illegal for airlines to allow someone without passport or visa to board their flight. Large fines are involved.

    • Richard says:

      02:50pm | 10/09/11

      Totally agree 100% John the Zombie. There is nothing wrong with international students, migrant workers, 407 visa holders, tourists, back packers, holiday makers, adventurers etc. Nothing wrong at all. Why you want to persecute these people Al, just to make a point?

      What rubbish, the real problem is people who think they can bypass every official channel of immigration and customs and border control and just rock up in a boat and act like their entitled to the red carpet treatment. These people are NOT WELCOME. I don’t care how unfortunate they are, we have official channels for entry into this country and if you don’t follow them you are not welcome, simple as that.

      Why oh why does this vocal minority that you represent Al find it so unfathomable that regular everyday Australians want our borders to be secure and don’t want people entering our country unless they’ve been invited?

      Its our right to feel that way Al, and if you want to live in a country with porous borders you’re welcome to move to Italy.

    • Choirboy says:

      11:46am | 10/09/11

      To all those above,( and below if you are of the same mind ) the issue is more important than to lapse into the Party rhetoric.

      A question for you.

      Hands up all of you going to Church tomorrow.
      Ok you can put it down now.

      As a respected older manager of mine ( RC) used to say, ‘You’re all heathen whores’ and he meant the ones that went as well.

    • Anjuli says:

      11:57am | 10/09/11

      If the boat people can pay the amount they do to people smugglers why do they not just hop onto a plane with their visas .Answer because they would not get the benefits and free housing they get by risking their lives and that of the children by coming illegally,which is a return on the investment ,so they seem to think.After watching a 4 Corners programme some weeks ago about how they are flooding into Italy and the conditions they have there .If Italy is any thing to go by, the same could and will happen here as I don’t hear of many who stay in countries where there is no welfare system in place.

    • marley says:

      01:12pm | 10/09/11

      No, no, no. The boat people come by boat because they cannot get visas.  You can’t get on an airplane to Australia without a genuine passport and a genuine visa, and no visa officer is going to give an Iraqi or Afghan refugee in Malaysia or Indonesia a tourist visa to visit Australia.  So they take a boat.

      And the benefits available to an asylum seeker who is recognized as a refugee are the same, regardless of whether you come by plane or boat.

    • Paul Baird says:

      01:45pm | 10/09/11

      Are you sure it wasn’t a current affair you were watching? Your argument reeks of someone who gets there idea’s from either today tonight or a current affair. You would probably have a similar argument about indigenous australians getting more then everyone else. People are fleeing tyranny and extreme danger they come here to seek refuge, hence refugee’s. What sort of country do you want to live in? One that is selfish, heartless and cruel or a country that promotes compassion, humanity and care? This whole debate is a joke and all the stop the boat opinions are for what? How does this/ how has this issue affected anyone banging on about it? Are you worse off, have less money, underfed, homeless or had violence perpetrated against you by anyone who has had the temerity to make the perilous journey acroos sea to get here? You are more likely to be be harmed by a white 6th gen australian citizen and crime figures show this. This is just a good excuse for sad racist dimwits to spew forth vitriol due to unhappiness with there own station in life. You probably all carry on about the dire financial situation on the stock markets yet have no shares, whinge about a carbon tax that cannot have and will not have any effect on your precious standard of living and carry on about job loss like the idiots in hard hats and high viz jackets currently screening in scurolous deceptive tv commercials yet know of no one who has lost a job or had hours cut or lost a house, car, whatever. Do any of you clowns who jump at the chance to anonomously spread hate and negativity on blog sites actually stop, look at yourselves and ask what your point is before writing crap and blaming everyone and everything else for the your discontent. Lets do away with this anoymous internet crap and get out to public forums where you will quickly be aquainted with your own shameful comments as people will know who you are and be able to challenge your flimsily formed views. Personal accountability is dying due to these shit sites where you can say any number of negative, meaningless crap ill informed things to make yourself feel smug and safe and warm.

    • Damian says:

      12:21pm | 10/09/11

      Mark, only when we see what the departmental advice was on dismantling the “Howard’s solution” in the first place and then comparing that with the current advice will we see if the advice is worth more than a grain of salt.

    • Steve says:

      04:32pm | 10/09/11

      There is a Wikileak cable that reveals that Labor knew the polict relaxing would result in more boats but it would be worth it for Rudd to get a seat on the UN security council.

    • Carstairs says:

      12:23pm | 10/09/11

      “Very few voters would agree right now and .......

      Right now, there aren’t any voters, there will be at election time though, some time in 2012-13.

    • Wayne says:

      12:25pm | 10/09/11

      Isn’t the real problem not the boat people.. but the people smugglers?? Why are we not effectively ignoring the boat people (let them come - most of them are refugees anyway), but negotiating with Malaysia/Indonesia to have federal police (or something) on the ground there with automatic extradition to Australia to face trial.  If someone was really.. TRULY coming after them.. those cowards would disappear real quick and the problem would be solved.

    • marley says:

      02:19pm | 10/09/11

      Look, exactly how successful have we been in extraditing and trying drug kingpins from Indonesia?  Same issue.

    • Anjuli says:

      02:23pm | 10/09/11

      @ Paul Baird,No i don’t get my ideas off programmes but by living in the country that most of the boat people make for so before people can really make assumptions you have to really know the person. My brother -in law was a Polish refugee who had been in a concentration camp who saw his mother and father shot his sister sent to a labour camp never to be seen again.He with 6 others escaped from the camp and made for the French resistance organization which he was with till the end of the war not leaving the mess for others to get killed for, when he and his friends made it to England as they could not go back to his beloved Poland,as it was under Russian rule and all returning Poles were sent to Gulags where they were put to hard labour . They got no help in England other than a Nisan hut camp on arrival in England and food ,but they were all grateful ,married and all became model citizens of that country.England has become a different country to the one I left ,just go and ask the real England and they will tell you what they really think .Last of all I was raised in a very poor family had to work even from the age of 10 taking papers out in all the bad weather in the North of England   ,the paper bag was bigger than me hence later in life a bad back ,  my mother worked for every thing we had .

    • Bill of Queensland says:

      10:05am | 11/09/11

      There is no similarity between European WWI refugees and the current lot of economic opportunists!  European refugees assimilated and did not confront Australian society at every opportunity and demand special treatment! The current lot insist on imposing on Australia their failed cultures from which they were allegedly forced to flee and demand special treatment! Leaders of minority groups perpetuate social divisions.

    • marley says:

      07:04pm | 11/09/11

      @Bill of Queensland - well, whatever doubts I might have about the way we deal with asylum seekers, I honestly havent’ met or heard of an Afghan that wants to impose anything on us.

    • Anjuli says:

      02:55pm | 10/09/11

      Oh!  and by the Paul Baird at least the Aboriginals were her first.

    • engineer says:

      09:18am | 12/09/11

      Which lot ?

      Or do you imagine all the aboriginies came in one wave of migration from one place ?

      There was displacement before the white man came, been going on throughout prehistory as well as historical times. Of course the socialists and aborigional politicians (some whiter than I am) don’t like to talk about that, afterall how can you be precious and indignant if your people did exactly the same things to their predecessors.

    • Joel B1 says:

      04:21pm | 10/09/11

      Got to love the left.

      First they decry Nauru and TPVs as inhumane.

      Next they say it didn’t work anyway with 95% being accepted as genuine refugees.

      Bizarre, so it was horrible and awful but genuine refugees got the chance to become Australian citizens?

      Make your (history-rewriting) minds up!

    • jb says:

      04:31pm | 10/09/11

      To all the people that sit there and sprout on about it only being such a small number of boat people that come here, once onshore processing with no deterrents is implicated the new figure of attempts could raise ten fold or even more. I know if I knew I was getting fed, watered, housed and remunerated with a 50% chance of Australian citizenship coming from a country where I had little prospect I would be on the first boat out of there. 
      Oh and one thing you media commentators seem to forget is the figure is not 5 to one it is more like 10 to 1, not all of the boat entries would have been deemed eligible to stay…

    • mick says:

      05:28pm | 10/09/11

      Mark got it right when he stated that the reason the boats slowed to a trickle was because the probability of gaining residency was remote.  Since Labor has been in power the human rights lawyers have had one long feast and yes the boats keep coming because it has been worked out that gaining residency will be simple.  To compound the issue passports are thrown overboard (Tampa?) so that the process will drag on.
      Australians need to realise that they are being treated like mugs.  Whilst people from third world and war torn countries need sympathy and some help it is by no means a right to arrive in a leaky boat, torch taxpayer funded accommodation and throw away passports to avoid identification. 
      What we need is immediate returns for people without passports and legislation to restrain human rights lawyers who prey on our system as much as some of the new arrivals.  We need to regain a bit of control of our borders.  As much I did not like some of the policies of John Howard O do fully agree with his statement “we will decide who comes to this country” and it is about time that our elected representatives got it into their heads that Australia is not a bottomless pit, that our living standards will be badly eroded over time and that no matter how many people we cram into the world’s most desolate country we will never stop extreme poverty or indeed the replacement of those who arrive on our shores with new births in their countries of origin.
      I want a future for Australians and it is this and the population debate in general which gets precious little air time.

    • Marilyn Shepherd says:

      05:41pm | 10/09/11

      Why do so many want to find new ways to break the law and punish innocent people?

      Now for some facts about 2009.

      1.  Iran’s illegal election saw thousands of dissidents flee the republican guard or risk torture and death.
      2.  the Obama mob started their wholesale slaughter of Afghans while the Taliban in Pakistan and Afghanisan killed more and more civilians in both countries.  Hazara are killed in both countries and we know it - DIAC were wrong in 86% of the AFghan cases and cost taxpayers $500 million to keep them illegally jailed - figures in the Australian magazine today show that over 50,000 Afghans have been maimed by our war and that is just the ones treated in Afghanistan.  In late 2009 Karzai passed a law making rape legal in marriage, thousands of boys are being kidnapped as boy prostitutes, mine clearers and suicide bombers while little girls are stolen for child marriages.
      Sri Lanka started the massacre of tens of thousands of Tamil civilians and now have turned the country into a police state against Tamil civilians, rape is used to subdue women and so on.

      In other words it is not about us.

      PSSSst. JB, only 2300 people have been assessed on Christmas Island because the High court said it is not really offshore but it is Australia.

      Now Kenya has a mild problem compared to our average of 7.5 refugees per day though, they only have to cope with 1,400.

    • Push me Pull me says:

      09:36pm | 10/09/11

      “there have been four waves of boat arrivals since the 1970s beginning with the post Vietnam War peak late in that decade. [...] and finally, Afghanistan and Iraq (2009-11)”

      This is what always bemuses me when people use the “push” factor argument. What happened in Afghanistan and Iraq in 2009 that hadn’t been happening before? “on November 30, 2009 [after the major American troop withdrawal], Iraqi Interior Ministry officials reported that the civilian death toll in Iraq fell to its lowest level in November since the 2003 invasion”. You mean to tell me thousands of Iraqi’s happily stay through the 2003 invasion and only decided to leave /after/ the Americans pull out and the death toll drops? Why wasn’t there a large surge of Iraqi Asylum Seekers in 2003 when the Americans went in and the death toll started rising?

      It’s exactly the same with Afghanistan only there we don’t have a troop withdrawal, we have increases in troop numbers. Yet according to Mark, apparently people were perfectly happily to stay in Afghanistan under the Taliban, then stay under the American invasion, then only leave in 2009 because… because what?

      And why do we have Vietnamese Asylum Seekers today going on a hunger strike? What happened in Vietnam this year? A secret war the media aren’t reporting? Maybe Mark could do something useful by going over there and finding out rather than writing this speculative nonsense.

    • Slouch Hat says:

      09:10am | 11/09/11

      The only way to stop the uninvited is to revoke the UNHCR Resolution of 1951 and the even worse 1967 Protocols which prevent Australia from having much say in who comes here.  This is the 21st Century and times have changed since people came from war torn Europe. They fiitted into our society but most of the new arrivals cannot or will not assimilate. because of Middle Eastern culture and belief systems.  It is time to take back or boarders and the only way is to withdra from theUN’s conventions and have our own.

    • Marilyn Shepherd says:

      04:05pm | 11/09/11

      Do you know how ridiculous you are?  You are whining about pretending you have a say who comes here, you don’t even have a say who moves into the house next door you jackass.

      And the refugees who came from 1995-2001 have all now fitted in rather nicely, it’s us white morons who still don’t get that everyone has the same rights as we do.

      Do you have a say in the 4 million plus other people who come here every year or do you just feel the need to whine about the 7.5 refugees a day on frigging boats.

    • stephen says:

      07:16pm | 11/09/11

      Maybe the ‘rather nicely’ Marilyn is why he’s talking in the first place, but I do agree with you that who moves in next door is not the same as who lands on our shore.
      You often invoke the big issue in your letters, as if the concept of weary travellers who come on boats, ( and has there ever been a Romantic image of a wanderer who has not gone anywhere on a boat ?) should not have a resting place where the locals don’t want them.
      You, Marilyn, are a secretive Romantic yourself, except for this reason : the locals do want them, but only at a degree of respectability.
      You and they, gotta have respect.
      Respect is the best example of another’s feeling for culture, and neither do you have it for us, nor do they.

    • Concerned says:

      02:45pm | 11/09/11

      Do some reading on the impact “asylum seekers” in Sweden. Swdes can no longer comment publicly due to new laws which can send them to jail for what was once known as free speech. Also check out Norway, Holland, France, Italy and the UK. in Europe it is now referred to the multi-cultural nightmare. Non integration,welfare dependancy and rape of European women being their main objections.  Coming soon to Australia.

    • Concerned says:

      04:45pm | 11/09/11

      Coming soon to Australia…on reflection the concerns are here already. The lack of integration, welfare, the calls for sharia law and requests for a Muslim banking system at zero interest, an Imam in Australia referring to uncovered Woman as meat ...  the rape of a Woman by young Muslim men in Sydney. The 60 year prison sentences handed down by the enlightened judge in Sydney a few years back should send a clear message….but is it enough?

    • engineer says:

      09:10am | 12/09/11

      “Put simply, as a liberal and tolerant democracy with enviably high living standards, people are drawn here.” Wrong, dead wrong. In case you haven’t noticed we have a near identical western democracy next door, called New Zealand.

      The reason these people are comming is we are a soft target. Because we have the yoke of the refugee convention around our necks we HAVE to process anyone arriving on our shores claiming to be a refugee, and if found to be so to give them asylumn. THAT is why we have this problem.

      The real trick to Howards solution was the temporary protection visa. If you can be expelled in future once your place of origion is deemed safe, with all the other restrictions that come with that, it makes the place a LOT less attractive.

      But of course government policy isn’t driven by outcomes let alone (god forbid) reason. It’s all about appeasing the factions and the media.

    • Ian Marshal says:

      11:12am | 12/09/11

      So we are asked to accept that malasia has processed 4000 people and we are going to swap 800 for processing etc.etc. Now who has done the processing on the 4000 and who will do the processing on the 800 plus due to be sent to Malasia. Now in Asian countries things don’t work like in Australia corruption reigns surpreme so 4000 processed Bull. It’s Australia’s problem so we must do the processing. The refugee problem runs deep and has it’s roots in corrupt governments in many countries.

    • michael gardiner says:

      03:12pm | 14/09/11

      you last sentence says it all Mark ” does he (Tony Abbott ) really want to stop the the boats”. at this stage he is clearly playing politics because he can’t claim anymore that his Narua solution will work.
      Most everyone involved in this issue state they want to stop the boats coming because they don’t want people risking their lives, I believe this is a humanity issue, many people supporting on shore processing ignore this, because the people processed 10 years ago ( in Malaysia and Pakistan ) and certified as genuine asylum seekers by the UN are at, the head of the , queue yes, queue, turning a blind eye to this tragic humanitarian issue means that the, on shore processing supporters have to ask themselves this question, why don’t the people at the head of the queue in Malaysia and Pakistan come by boat? its so obvious people, people with money come by boat, you are supporting the haves over the have nots, shame on you . know matter how much bleating they express the supporters of the haves, they cannot ignore the elephant in the room.

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Daniel Piotrowski

RT @ToryShepherd: Onya, @KRuddMP“@newscomauHQ: BREAKING: Kevin Rudd has come out in support of same sex marriage: http://t.co/CFaHrxyV5G

Daniel Piotrowski

RT @newscomauHQ: BREAKING: Kevin Rudd has come out in support of same sex marriage: http://t.co/2KEO6yEx5F

Daniel Piotrowski

True Rudd style. Bazillion word folksy statement

Daniel Piotrowski

RT @Rob_Stott: Like a lot of Republicans in the US, it's much easier to support gay marriage when you're no longer in a position to do anyt…

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter