Christmas Island, Curtin, Northern Immigration Detention Centre in Darwin, Maribyrnong, Perth, Phosphate Hill, Scherger and Villawood Detention Centre…

Asylum seekers at Villawood. Pic: Justin Lloyd

These are the welcoming arms of Australia for the few desperate individuals who make it into Australian waters seeking asylum. They are detention centres that could become “home” for indefinite periods of months or even years.

In the early hours of the morning Villawood Detention Centre was set alight, and protestors climbed up onto the roof of the centre.

Immigration Minister Chris Bowen says some of the protestors had had their refugee applications denied and were appealing the decisions. He cites their disappointment as the impetus for the protests. No doubt facing rejection after months of incarceration would be a bitter pill to swallow, but the unrest that has characterised Australia’s detention centres for decades seems to be deeper than the disappointment of a few individuals.

“You don’t do these things for no reason,” Ian Rintoul of the Refugee Action Coalition says. He lists indefinite detention and a lack of transparency and fairness when their applications are considered as the long-term reasons for the turbulence and instability that has long been a feature of detention centres – most famously at Woomera.

The ‘bigger question’, he suggests, is not why did the detainees protest but rather “why are we treating people who have committed no crime as if they are the worst criminals in the world?”.

Fair question. The worst criminals in the world, as Rintoul puts it (at least in democratic countries like our own) are not sent to prison before they go to trial, nor are they sentenced to an indefinite term behind bars with no indication of when they may be released. In fact, we are the only developed country who sees fit to indiscriminately and indefinitely detain asylum seekers in flagrant breach of international law.

The photos featured on smh.com.au present a frightening scene. As dramatic as the images of police and flames licking at wire fences are; I’m sure it was a whole lot more terrifying for those inside or on the roof fighting for answers.

Scott Morrison sees it differently, urging for the detainees to be punished and condemning the government for allowing a repeat by not cracking down hard enough after the Christmas Island riots. In effect, Morrison is arguing that the detainees should be punished by delaying their applications even further – the very reason the young men involved in the protest felt desperate enough to climb up on roof tops and set buildings on fire.

It’s a characteristically simplistic and predictably heartless response.

Scott Morrison feeds the fear that radio shock jocks like Chris Smith (2GB) have been running with ever since the Christmas Island protests, saying that the same people may have coordinated both protests.

Rintoul, who I suspect has had far more real-life contact with the inhabitants of Villawood than Mr Morrison, emphasised that that was not possible. The fires were located in the Stage Three compounds, whereas the only people who have been transferred from Christmas Island are being held in Stage One. Further, Rintoul says that they were moved from Christmas Island before the protests even occurred, seven or eight months ago.

In response to the close timing between the protests on Christmas Island and last night’s fires at Villawood Rintoul does not seem surprised. He likened the current situation to that during the Howard era.

“Protests are contagious. They were then, and they are now.”

Just as protests spread between Baxter, Portheadland and Woomera, we are seeing the same desperation spread from Christmas Island to Villawood.

If “the conditions create tinder for protests”, is it any wonder that Villawood was set alight?

187 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Erick says:

      05:20pm | 21/04/11

      Oh, bollocks.

      If these were genuine refugees, they’d be delighted to receive safe, comfortable housing with air conditioning, computer rooms, and more. Australia has received many genuine refugees, who have worked to build our country and fitted in without complaint.

      Their behaviour shows that they are not genuine refugees. They are bludgers and crooks who will happily use violence to get their way.

      It’s time to rescind the outdated Refugee Conventions and deport all boat people.

    • Dark Horse says:

      05:45pm | 21/04/11

      Erick ... you said what I could have said. Most of the long-term people are those who, probably not real refugees, destroyed their identification documents and keep lodging appeals against rejection. There should be no right of appeal, the Minister should have the final say. We spend millions on these parasites.

      If we didn’t have a detention system, they’d flood into the country and create havoc apart from the medical unknown. Do you think they would turn up at an agreed time to hear about the outcome of their application? Of course not.

      The UN Charter on Refugees needs to be given the flick as Erick says.

    • LeftRightOut says:

      06:35pm | 21/04/11

      bollocks alright… quote: These are the welcoming arms of Australia for the few desperate individuals who make it into Australian waters seeking asylum.

      A few? try about 10,000 since Gillard changed the relevant laws…

    • LeftRightOut says:

      06:45pm | 21/04/11

      Pretty safe to assume that poor old Sophie is pretty far to the left. Youth CLimate coalition, Arts/Law scholarship… etc etc… re-enforcing the stereotype, really grin

    • Adam says:

      08:07pm | 21/04/11

      Erick, you have said it well my friend.

      I saw some activist on the news tonight rambling about how Australia had destroyed Afghanistan and Iraq so these illegal immigrants had to come here. It was refreshing to see a member of the public interrupt him to point out that they destroyed their own countries, had come here and were now destroying ours, all because they are too gutless to fight in their own war to secure their own peaceful, free existence. Send these moral parasites home I say!

      I also agree about rescinding the outdated Refugee Conventions. They are outdated and reflective of a world that no longer exists, written by authors that could not possibly have predicted the world would evolve the way it has. At the very least, we need to change them to reflect the contemporary environment and protect Australia’s interests.

    • Robbie says:

      08:13pm | 21/04/11

      “It’s time… to deport all boat people”
      I suppose that means you want any child born here who have ‘boat people’ as parents deported?
      So by extension, you being a ‘white, male’ as you so readily identify yourself, I assume you are the descendant of someone who arrived by boat, and should therefore be deported as well. smile

    • michael j says:

      08:36pm | 21/04/11

      @Erick- you make it sound like these refugees are on some sort of bloody picnic, is this air-con reverse cycle it must be getting cold in villa wood now do they have a computer on every desk like in the ALP policy for schools and is it in a language they can under stand.
      Also has it been explained to them that in Australia we have something called the bikie laws also another law that if you do not comply we with a CMC that’s “crime and misconduct ” you can be jailed for for 6 months at a time with out been charged these thing can re-occur repeatedly without charge.
      But villa wood sounds pretty good to me I think I might like to go there and spend my last few coughs there *cough* *cough*, But with my luck I will get caught breaking in and have to spend the rest of my time with some bikies and other criminal scum.

    • Geoff - Brisbane says:

      10:40pm | 21/04/11

      @ michael j

      If Villa Wood is the hell hole you make it out to be, they can always go back to the Peaceful paradises known as Iraq and Afghanistan. I mean according to you they are better off there, right?

    • Mike says:

      03:37am | 22/04/11

      Too right mate. It’s all just another by-product of creeping totalitarian humanism. It’s time to get tough, tighten up the laws, and show these people who flagrantly break laws and damage property the door. As if there should be any question that that should happen.

    • michael j says:

      09:34am | 22/04/11

      @Geoff-Afghanistan yes you are correct ,to fight along side Australian solider’ s who are making their country a better place to live,,,
      Where did i say villa-wood was a hell hole,?i said it sounds pretty good to me,,even an anarchist doesn’t burn down their house to live in a tent,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

    • Wayne Kerr says:

      09:34am | 22/04/11

      and you can also add that these asylum seekers have by-passed many countries to get here.  You can’t tell me thay didn’t pass through other countries that are part of the UN Charter before coming to the the other end of the world.  The only difference is that those countries would probably deport them sooner if they couldn’t find validity in their claims.

    • Scot says:

      10:38am | 22/04/11

      We do not hear of the issues in Indonesia and Malaysia where these people come from and have to pay their way out of camps. If they burnt down camps in Indonesia or Malaysia they would be dealt with in the harshest terms. We in Australia are bloody fools. We have an inept Labor government that does not have the guts to deal with this mess they have caused. Villawood should be closed and bulldozed to the ground and these rejected cretins should be locked up in prisons before they are deported. The Labor government by bringing these cretins to Australian soil have given them access to the courts. They burn our money and in their own country and Asia they would not get away with it. Many have spent many years in camps in Asia even before they illegally come to Christmas Island. If these economic refugees want to use the courts they should also have to pay. Many are supported financially inside Australia for these illegal acts, so let them pay.

    • Rosie says:

      11:02am | 22/04/11

      Erick - you are correct!

      Sophie, Chris Bowen has had his chance but still hasn’t found a solution to this problem. We know that Gillard’s East Timor Solution doesn’t exist anymore even if Bowen & Gillard won’t admit it. The Gillard Govt has no policy to deal with this problem and Bowen acting tough after riots will only exacerbate the problem of detaining human beings in over crowded detention centres.

      Like Erick said these rioters are not genuine refugess, they are bludgers and crooks who will happily use violence to get their way so therefore should be isolated away from those that are genuinely seeking asylum. Saying every problem is a tough one is like saying we can’t deal with it so have to put up with it. All we are hearing is tough budget, tough difficult major reforms, tough, tough, tough made worse because of a very tough threatening opposition! lol

      Greens - Gillard Labor’s bedfellows have always had their big ideas on how to deal with this problem. The main one advocated by them is NO MANDATORY DENTION because it was inhumane. Now is their chance to enforce it but on Lateline last night Sarah Hansen Young after being asked 4 times refused to say “yes, it is something we strongly believe in and therefore will enforce it.” All talk and when given the chance to deliver have not the guts to do it!

      Sophie, don’t you think Scot Morrison should be given a chance to say how he and the Coalition would deal with the problem especially because what we are seeing is a dog’s breakfast from this Minority Govt??????

    • MJB says:

      05:20pm | 21/04/11

      We should be processing these people off shore and we should be doing more to stop them getting here in the first place.

    • Rossco says:

      05:21pm | 21/04/11

      Destroying Australian property = automatic dismissal from Australia.

    • The Galah from Hervey Bay says:

      10:11am | 22/04/11

      Right on Rossco -  Pull the same stunt where they came from and their authorities would shoot you down from the roof -  hmmmm ?

    • Justin says:

      05:24pm | 21/04/11

      Ohhhh boy, you’re gonna get it. The punchers won’t let this humanitarian stuff fly in the face of their tough asylum seeker hatred.

      Fact is, detention isn’t all that unsensible, who knows what someone who rocks up to the country has or hasn’t done, or what they are capable of doing once inside. That said, the fact it takes months or years instead of days or weeks to process the claims in the first place is a disgrace.

    • james milton says:

      06:10pm | 21/04/11

      Maybe if they hadn’t destroyed all their documents before arriving, the processing wouldn’t take so long.

      Agree or disagree?

    • LeftRightOut says:

      06:43pm | 21/04/11

      Agree, James.
      The destruction of documents is the disgrace, not how long it takes to process claims. I find it amazing that people criticise the time it takes, whilst all along, ignoring the fact that ALL boat arrivals destroy all evidence of their identity. I find it difficult to believe even one of them is genuine if they destroy their documents.

    • Robbie says:

      08:17pm | 21/04/11

      @ jamesmilton

      And what do you propose the government does even if they do have documents? Get on the phone to Afghanistan and say, “Hey do you know if this Mohammed guy is being legitametely threatened by tribal Pashtuns?”
      Cue ceaseless head scratching.

    • a nony mouse says:

      10:42pm | 21/04/11

      Imagine you are fleeing a burning building. Do you stop and grab your important documents or do you just try to reach safety? All these people are trying to do is find safety. Of course it takes time to process their claims but do we really expect their governments to roll over and say “Sure, we persecuted them because of…..” Not going to happen. Is entering our country so bad that we need to keep them locked up for moths or even years. Australia is a signatory to the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which sets forth such things as the right to life, liberty and security of person, and the right not to be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

      Australia hang your head in shame. And yes, I would quite happily have them live next door to me and send their children to school with mine. Why should the hand of friendship and support be offered only to those that some government suit. Remeber it isn’t that long ago that we had a White Australia policy where we judged people’s worth by the colour of their skin.

    • james milton says:

      01:38am | 22/04/11

      “Remeber it isn’t that long ago that we had a White Australia policy where we judged people’s worth by the colour of their skin. “

      We still judge people’s worth by the colour of their skin. Aboriginies get more in welfare than non-Aboriginies.

    • Richard says:

      08:43am | 22/04/11

      a nony mouse~ you are assuming that the majority of these rioting asylum seekers came to Australia in order to flee from persecution. However we know that this is simply not true for the majority of them.

      How can we know that the majority of asylum seekers are not fleeing from persecution? Because if they were genuinely fleeing from persecution, then they would be relieved and glad to have the safety and security of Australian government provided accomodation, food, medical care etc. etc.

      If they were simply fleeing from something terrible, instead of doing what they are actually doing, (which is seeking a better life in Australia), they would not be frustrated about their ‘predicament’ of being kept safe and secure and having all their needs taken care of.

      So in reality its you who should hang your head in shame a nony mouse, because your unintelligent advocacy for a disastrous policy which has lead and will lead to much suffering, is making a shambles of our official procedures and processes, and subverting the rule of our law.

    • Anne71 says:

      08:52am | 22/04/11

      I know people are worried that terrorists could be entering the country with these refugees, but somehow I think the genuine terrorists would not stoop to a long, uncomfortable trip in a barely seaworthy boat to get here. No, they would have the means to fly to Australia and enter through legitimate channels.
      Also, it’s a bit much to expect asylum seekers to have “documentation” when their homes and villages have been pretty much razed to the ground.
      Having said that, though, these detainees that have set fire to buildings and destroyed property have not helped their cause at all - in fact, all they have done is played right into the hands of the talkback radio brigade and reinforced a stereotype. Good work, guys. You’ve just made it that much harder for the rest of them.

    • Leigh says:

      09:05am | 22/04/11

      nony mouse says “And yes, I would quite happily have them live next door to me and send their children to school with mine”

      assuming that includes the ones in the riot? am sure your children would be thrilled to live next door to people who may burn down your house for disagreeing with you while throwing roof tiles at emergency services workers who were trying save you.

      I will have more respect for your position on asylum seekers when you and every other bleeding heart opens your own doors to house them in your own home more humanely, thus saving us millions of $$$ in hotel accommodation.

      Until then you are all talk

    • Tator says:

      09:23am | 22/04/11

      a nony mouse,
      so how did these irregular maritime arrivals get to their sailing point in Indonesia without documents as it is extremely difficult to transit through several countries like they do without appropriate paperwork.  Plus most of them are not claiming their governments are persecuting them, just that one sector of their population is.  Plus with Rudd reversing the onus of proof so that it is the responsibility of the Government to prove that the asylum seekers claim is false unlike under previous legislation where the asylum seeker had to substantiate their claims makes it so much easier for asylum seekers to make false allegations of persecution which are difficult to disprove unless an expensive and comprehensive investigation into every case is conducted.

    • Kate says:

      09:30am | 22/04/11

      A Nony Mouse:
      Aren’t you a beacon of morality, I bet you sleep well at night with all your morally superior thoughts. Do you dream of asylum seeker children knocking on your door asking their neighour for a bowl of sugar (would you give them the whole bag?) What about this nightmare: millions of refugees baking in squalor in refugee camps, in tents or under a tin roof,  ‘living’ side by side with aggressors,  under threat of attack from within the camp, lining up for hours for water (look it up, do some research or don’t you actually care?), surviving on basic rations, suffering from malnutrition, living with threat of cholera outbreaks (which are frequent), some living in camps for more than thirty years, all the while waiting for asylum and it never comes because you have decided that in order to obtain a smug sense of satisfaction you will condemn them to a life of suffering by instead supporting a policy that accepts people dwelling in Indonesia and Malaysia who pay upwards of $5 000 for a ticket. When you go to sleep tonight remember that since the ALP changed the policy 220 people have died at sea, more than 1000 children have been put on boats and the number of humanitarian visas given to offshore asylum seekers has halved. Hang your head in shame.

    • Charles says:

      09:31am | 22/04/11

      @A nony mouse your comment has no credibility, most (all) of these illegal immigrants fly from the Middle East to Malaysia or Indonesia before they embark on the next stage of their journey.  They have to have these documents before they are allowed to fly into a country. 

      This whole exercise of destroying their documents is so they can’t be traced, as it is most likely given they are so cashed up, that they are probably bad eggs to start with, who would not welcome close investigation of their histories.

      At the moment it looks like we are intent on letting a shambolic group of cheats, frauds, liars and ne’er do wells into the country, and it is definitely lowering the tone of the place

    • james milton says:

      08:56pm | 22/04/11

      “Also, it’s a bit much to expect asylum seekers to have “documentation” when their homes and villages have been pretty much razed to the ground.”

      WRONG. These people cannot enter Indonesia (a safe port they choose not to stay in..) without papers.

      They destroy their papers on the way to Australia, often as soon as they see a Navy vessel.

      Then they chuck their kids overboard and set the f**king boat on fire.

      And you want these people here why?

    • It sends a message says:

      05:27pm | 21/04/11

      Hopefully this sends a message to other potential ILLEGAL immigrants that there’s no easy ticket into Australia, and that they should wait in line like the rest of the refugees from war torn nations who are doing the right thing.

    • L. says:

      11:19am | 22/04/11

      Damian is right…“It sends a message” and “Erick is a legend” is a double post TROLL.

      I wonder who else you are..??

    • Erick is a legend says:

      05:40pm | 21/04/11

      Hopefully, this sends a clear message to other potential ILLEGAL immigrants that we’re not a soft target, and that they can wait in line with every other refugee from a war torn country who are decent enough to abide by the law.

    • Damian Parkhill says:

      06:54am | 22/04/11

      The above two messages should be taken as evidence that sametrolling does indeed happen at the punch

    • K. says:

      09:06pm | 22/04/11

      Yes, my God, this is unbelievable! The above two messages prove that the PUNCH is infested with trolls and most comments are probably from the same person.

    • Damian Parkhill says:

      01:47am | 23/04/11

      At least we now know who you are K raspberry

    • John Smythe says:

      05:42pm | 21/04/11

      What a shame you went ahead with posting this piece of fluff. I saw it here a moment, then it disappeared, and it’s back again.

      Pretty much what Erick says, though i wasn’t going to say it as nice.

      Ship em back the hell out, and let people who understand it takes time to process people who just suddenly show up on your doorstep.

      Australia needs to be harsh, but fair….no papers, no stay (onshore).

    • Krav says:

      05:45pm | 21/04/11

      It seems obvious that we need greater transparency and clear, reasonable guidelines for refugees. But we have no reason to reward those who protest violently and cost taxpayers money.
      We want to reward those people who do the right thing but the right thing has to be attainable first…

    • How many can we take? says:

      05:46pm | 21/04/11

      We are all sympathetic to the plight of people who escape war torn nations. However, how many can we take and how do we process them properly to ensure they aren’t infected with deadly diseases and aren’t criminals? You do so with our current immigration program.

      Unfortunately, these queue jumpers, who disregard the law, have to be dealt with appropriately in order to curb illegal people smuggling. If not, there are millions of potential illegal immigrants who are chomping at the bit to come over ASAP.

    • NicoleG says:

      05:50pm | 21/04/11

      For every action, there is a consequence. You come here illegally, you get locked up. Before they hop on a boat, they are fully aware they will go in to detention. Burning buildings down, destroying everything, rioting is disgraceful. And now they’re trying the blackmail again. You give me a visa and I’ll come down. WTF? If their behavior in detention is anything to go by, imagine what they’ll resort to if they don’t get their way when out in the mainstream of Australia.

    • Marilyn Shepherd says:

      03:18am | 22/04/11

      Nicole, how many times do you have to write the same nonsense and be told it is not true before it penetrates you mindless senses.

      they are not locked up for entering illegally because it is not illegal.

      they are not locked up for any reason than to pretend we are tough on border security.

      And for the record dear. all those who did the same things in Woomera and the other concentration camps got to stay and they are excellent citizens of this country now that they are treated fairly.

    • marley says:

      10:04am | 22/04/11

      @Marilyn - actually, quite a few of the Villawood detainees are illegal migrants, not refugees, as their claims have been rejected.  So, yes, they have entered the country illegally.

    • Anne_N says:

      10:49am | 22/04/11

      Marilyn,

      What would an ‘asylum seeker’ have to do for you to consider them with a less than rosy view?

    • Mouse says:

      12:00pm | 22/04/11

      Ooooops!  Sorry Nicole, I hang my head in shame! I have jinxed us all rflmao

    • Al says:

      12:57pm | 22/04/11

      Marilyn,

      “all those who did the same things in Woomera and the other concentration camps got to stay and they are excellent citizens of this country”

      I would love to know where you get your statistics from. I suspect you just made it up.

      Australian law mandates detention for refugees until their status can be determined. The refugees currently residing in detention are (or should be) aware of Australian laws before they leave their country on their way here. It is ridiculous that they come here as refugees and then riot because they don’t like our laws. If they don’t like it here they always have the option to go back.

    • Marilyn Shepherd says:

      06:13pm | 22/04/11

      Those trolls who say I am wrong are just dumb and dumber.  It is not illegal to enter Australia without a visa, it is not illegal to stay without a visa, there is no such thing as an illegal immigrant in Australia and it makes not a jot of difference how many times you pretend otherwise that is the truth.

      http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/FCA/2004/1267.html?query=hamdan
      “30 It is important to emphasise that the client did not escape from custody. It would have been an offence for him to have done so: see 197A of the Act. He was released from detention pursuant to a court order. Neither was he committing or proposing to commit an offence simply because he was taking steps to avoid being detained. As Gummow J indicated in Al-Kateb at [86] ff, the current Migration Act, unlike its precursors, does not make it an offence for an unlawful non-citizen to enter or to be within Australia in contravention of, or in evasion of, the Act.
      31 Further, as Hayne J observed in Al-Kateb at [207]-[208] the description of a person’s immigration status as “unlawful” serves as no more than a reference to a non-citizen not having a “valid permission to enter and remain in Australia”. The use of the term “unlawful” does not as such refer to a breach of a law.”

      Or do you want to argue the high cout asked to assess the law while you pretend I made it up.

      See, no law broken.

      What never ceases to amaze me is the hate people generate over people committing no offence in any country but are running from the most brutal human rights violators on earth.
      Why don’t you read some of the human rights reports on Aghanistan and Iraq in particular - we invaded them remember.

      And why shouldn’t asylum seekers live in the community, just because we are a nation of morons does not give us the right to violate human rights and be as bad as the talban.

    • marley says:

      08:30am | 23/04/11

      @MarilynShepherd - Marilyn, dear, - if someone is not a refugee and does not have a visa, what is he?  He’s not an asylum seeker, he’s not a visitor, he’s not a migrant, he’s not a legal resident and he’s not a citizen.  Yes, we can use the term unlawful non-national, but that covers genuine asylum seekers as well as those, like some of the Villawood crowd, awaiting deportation for a whole host of reasons. 

      However, I don’t mind if we just call everyone an unlawful non-national.  Conflating the genuine asylum seeker with the fake is a poor tactic on the part of advocates like yourself, but so be it.  You won’t win many friends for your cause by mixing in genuine asylum seekers with ex-residents being deported for criminal offences,  but then neither will you win many friends by calling everyone who disagrees with you a moron when you yourself have a very limited and narrow understanding of refugee issues.

    • Robert Smissen, rural SA, God's own country says:

      11:38pm | 23/04/11

      Some of these clowns came from the Old Dart & other european countries & are been held before being sent back, Marilyn are you really Sarah Bath

    • Timmo says:

      05:53pm | 21/04/11

      “The worst criminals in the world, as Rintoul puts it (at least in democratic countries like our own) are not sent to prison before they go to trial”

      Actually they are.  Once charged with a violent offence, it’s not at all uncommon for defendants to spend considerable time in custody before facing a jury.

    • St. Michael says:

      06:12pm | 21/04/11

      Most Australian criminals are permitted the right to at least ask for bail, which means they don’t spend time in custody ahead of the trial.  In fact the vast majority of accused get bail.

    • LeftRightOut says:

      06:50pm | 21/04/11

      St Michael, but we know who those people are, and they’re citizens. Asylum seekers are now, and simply do not, and should not, have the same rights as ordinary Australians.

    • SimonC says:

      07:03pm | 21/04/11

      But that’s not what Sophie said. The article says NOT sent to prison: either a gross inaccuracy, or a barefaced lie.

    • Gerard says:

      09:46pm | 21/04/11

      Timmo, the worst criminals in the world are very rarely sent to prison at all. You’ll find that they usually get whatever they demand when they demand it, receive all the media attention they crave and generally get presidential treatment. This is not particularly surprising really, when you consider the fact that most of them ARE the presidents of their countries.

    • Timmo says:

      05:54pm | 21/04/11

      “The worst criminals in the world, as Rintoul puts it (at least in democratic countries like our own) are not sent to prison before they go to trial”

      Actually they are.  Once charged with a violent offence, it’s not at all uncommon for defendants to spend considerable time in custody before facing a jury.

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      05:54pm | 21/04/11

      So if we don’t like the judges decision we sent fire to things? I would argue that it is the refugee advocate industry that is at fault for dragging out the appeals process. Also the fact that many asylum seekers have no papers complicating vetting and verification processes while in detention. Want to stop riots in detention centers? Mandate a one week determination process with no appeals and swift outcomes.

    • Timothy B. says:

      05:55pm | 21/04/11

      It’s the refugee advocates/green-left that take the position of which the asylum seekers are destroying property and protesting due to their desperation. When it can also be the case that the rejected applicants are merely throwing tantrums for not getting their own way.

      Despite the processing of asylum claims taking so long, the claimants are not subjected to the persecution or threats which they claim to be subjected to in their home countries, therefore, the tantrums seem to be evoked by the same opportunism that prompted the failed claimants to take advantage of pull factors to arrive, considering that the detention centres have very good facilities and that welfare is also available. It’s the same opportunism that compels illegal immigrants to cross the USA border from Mexico, despite the risks.

    • Bruce says:

      05:55pm | 21/04/11

      Just send these economic refugees back. No questions asked, no more generosity. Goodbye !!

    • MarK says:

      06:01pm | 21/04/11

      I am disgusted by the artilcle.

      Repulsed.

      That the inference vomited here can even be given credence shows a pathetic lack reasoning by the author and despairing paucity of intelligence by others willing to believe this crap.

      “It’s a characteristically simplistic and predictably heartless response. “

      You wrote this about Morrison.

      Sophie I think your response is a simplistic and predictably saccharine response to a failed policy and a failed government.

      The facts are these.

      With the Pacific solution that “dog” Howard, the heartless murderer, the scum had a handful people in detention by the 2007 election.

      Now there are 6,800 plus.

      And a pile of dead floating off Christmas Island. And many more in the ocean between. Gillard, Rudd, Swan, Bowen, Tanner and the rest of the rabble have blood on their hands.

      The contrast could not be more stark. Gillard lied at the last election again.

      Remember this story?

      http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/campaign-countdown-she-will-decide-who-comes-here/

      Yeh

      And the result

      http://www.immi.gov.au/managing-australias-borders/detention/_pdf/immigration-detention-statistics-20110311.pdf

      Look at the graph. look at the morality of Labor.

      It is clear.

      Labor has lost control. Gillard is ineffective and a liar.

      The progressives such as this author have no clue, no idea and no solution.

      The Pacific solution and a no tolerance policy needs to be invoked now.

      All irregular maritime arrivals are to be sent back to a refugee camp. All of our intake of a humanitarian nature should be from refugee camps off shore. All “treaties” with the pointless UN on asylumn seekers should be torn up.

      End this pathetic spectacle now.

      Hold people like this author to account now. We are sick of the progressive feel good crap. The time for talk is over. The time for immature and pathetic responses is over.

      Gillard and Bowen have lost control.

      It is time for the adults to be back in charge and set it right again.

    • Harry Melton says:

      06:50pm | 21/04/11

      Things would be no different under a Liberal government. All the crystal ball gazing will not make it otherwise.
      You are just a one eye’d political monkey.

    • Erick says:

      06:54pm | 21/04/11

      Well said, MarK.

      Gillard lied about everything. She is no better than Rudd, who caused this problem in the first place, by overturning Howard’s effective policies.

      It’s well past time to get rid of the idiots in government, and install a fresh crew.

    • Ben81 says:

      07:12pm | 21/04/11

      Harry Melton - things *were* different under the last Liberal government and can be the same under this government if they decide to finally take the the same responsible actions.  You don’t need a crystal ball to see history and learn from it.
      When Rudd took over we had about 300 or so in immigration detention and detention centres were being closed down while we still took in just as many refugees, now we have over 6500 and climbing and have detention centres opening again.  People smuggling in our region was almost completely dead, now it’s thriving.
      If you can’t see what’s right in front of your face you’re more than just one eyed, you’re blind.

    • JT says:

      07:19pm | 21/04/11

      Your village called Harry, they want you back. It is not only correct but very easy to say things would be different under a Liberal government…because it was!. No amount of bs, lies or denials by ideologues like you can change that fact.

    • MarK says:

      07:28pm | 21/04/11

      Look at the graph in my link harry abd stop being myopic.

      Look at it.

      tell me what year it started to go up.

      it was different and will be different under a coalition government.

      They are the adults of the country that come in and clean up the economic and social mess that the left leaves behind on its pathetic attempts to run anything more complicated than branch stacking some new member for the last one accused of child porn charges.

      Labor has failed in this policy area as in many others.

      Tell me one policy success of Gillard.

      One.

      Explain to me the compassion shown by Labor.

      Sick of the lies the spin the failure. We deserve more. This woman has failed.

    • Marilyn Shepherd says:

      03:23am | 22/04/11

      When the conservative Robert Menzies wrote the convention with the US, Britain and other countries after sending jews home to die he was not considered to be a bleeding heart leftist.

      It’s people like you who don’t have a clue, have never had a clue and can’t be bothered to find out the law because of your hate and bile.

      IWe blew Afghanistan and Iraq to bits and yet we think we have the right to lock up those who escape

      And what do you suppose happens to people escaping genocide and torture if all the 147 nations who ratified it tear up the refugee convention because we are so racist and stupid we jail innocent people for no reason and pay a British company to be the jailors.

      That same company scoops dog poo in British parks you know.

    • Adam says:

      11:05am | 22/04/11

      @ Marilyn - “We blew Afghanistan and Iraq to bits and yet we think we have the right to lock up those who escape”

      Wrong. We fought a war on behalf of their populations to give their people freedom. We removed oppressors like the Taliban and Saddam Hussein. It cost us and our allies thousands of lives and billions of dollars. The people who are showing up on our borders are those too gutless to fight alongside our brave troops to earn the peace, freedom and security they so readily crave. Those too lazy to work alongside our reconstruction task forces to build their country into something they can be proud of. Those so cowardly they often leave their wives and children behind. Those so shamefully dishonest and greedy they transit through multiple safe haven countries just to get to rich old Australia, before destroying their documents on the final boat ride from Indonesia. And they come here and perpetrate criminal destruction against our publicly owned and paid for facilities. They drain the Australian public of millions through their wanton destruction of our public assets and sponge off the public purse via welfare for decades.

      So yeah, we do have the right to detain these pieces of scum in a five star resort while their fraudulent applications for asylum are reviewed after we liberated their countries from oppressors.

    • Harry Melton says:

      11:52am | 22/04/11

      Interesting MarK
      You look back at historical data and extrapolate out that things would be different now if we had taken a conservative fork in the road.
      Yet, you cannot apply the same logic to AGW.
      Your thought process is flawed or you have shown yourself to be the myopic one - take your pick.

      pwned

    • MarK says:

      12:02pm | 22/04/11

      Protip Marilyn - who cares what they do in England.

      I don’t want them employed here to lock people up. I don’t want them to have the chance to do anything because I don’t want it necessary.

      I want the boat people trade stopped dead. I want nobody that comes by boat or other irregular means to be eligible for asylum.

      I want all of humanitarian intake taken from refugee camps after we process them in the camp with extensive scrutiny.

      I want any UN treaty, protocol, useless piece of shit bit of paper torn up, rescinded and spat on that takes away our sovereign right to do as we please with our borders and dictates policy to us.

      I want sacrosanct and solid borders.

      I want the right to choose who comes here and they way in which they do.

      I also DO NOT WANT a return to a white Australia policy that was advocated so strongly by the Trade Union movement and Labor.

      Your point about Menzies was what again dear? It seems to be moot and without validity.

      Leave the room Marilyn.

      It is time for the adults to sort out the pathetic and bloody mess Labor has saddled us with. It is obvious it has gone all out of control.

      The minister is now ringing the people on the roof to ask them to come down. Seriously? Send in the riot squad and bring them down however they have to. How the hell did these idiots get mobile phones anyway. Progressives like the author here no doubt. What a joke.

      What ridiculous and humiliating situation we find ourselves in where illegal aliens protest and burn our property and are provided phones by members of the left so the government…the Minister…can talk to them? It is laughable. It is impotent. It is sad.

      It is sycophants like you and the author that perpetuate this mess. And hundreds have died at sea. The blood is on lefts hands.

      You are disgusting.

    • Tim says:

      12:38pm | 22/04/11

      Well articulated Mark, we now have criminal activity in suburban Sydney by some of these queue jumpers, destroying Federal Government property.  Are these really the sort of people that Rintoul and his lot think will make for a better Australia. 
      I haven’t paid taxes all my working life of 28 years to see it handed over to people that clearly do not have any respect for our democracy.  Likewise I don’t want my tax paying dollars funding jail costs

      Round up the trouble makers and DEPORT them NOW

      and start turning the boats back!!!

    • John A Neve says:

      12:54pm | 22/04/11

      Adam,
      Says ” we fought on behalf of their populations”!
      Adam, if you really believe that there is no hope for you. The population of both countries is worse of now than before our intervention.

      Sadly things will not improve until the so called Coalition of the Willing is out of both countries. Australia has made more enemies in the last ten years than the rest of it’s existence.

      Kill some one mother, father, sister or brother and they will never forget.
      Bad policy, made by bad governments, I can only hope I’m not here when it’s their turn, but it’s coming.

    • L. says:

      02:03pm | 22/04/11

      “The population of both countries is worse of now than before our intervention.”

      Except the women.. who are now allowed to learn and run for government.

    • MarK says:

      02:25pm | 22/04/11

      ”  Harry Melton says:

        11:52am | 22/04/11

        Interesting MarK
        You look back at historical data and extrapolate out that things would be different now if we had taken a conservative fork in the road.
        Yet, you cannot apply the same logic to AGW.
        Your thought process is flawed or you have shown yourself to be the myopic one - take your pick.

        pwned

      BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA

      No. Not pwned. Not even close kid. You can go into the corner with pers and stamp your little feet and yell I win all you want.

      Lets follow your little analogy through just for kicks.

      You idiots on the AGW side extrapolated a hockey stick graph that has been demonstrably shown to be false and full of dodgy faulty science. Oh it was peered reviewed and all that crap.

      Still doesn’t change the fact it was all bullshit and the peer reviewers were wrong as well. All computer modelling with bad numbers and a lack of credibility, morals or science.

      I have a hockey stick graph that I can prove by counting the number of people that should be returned to a refugee camp off shore, denied access to the country and forcibly removed from the roof of the detention facility I helped to build and maintain by doing the lawful, normal and correct day to day stuff like working and paying taxes.

      Happy to compare hockey stick graphs. Go ask Mann for a hand if you like. You will find his number in the F section of the phone book between Fail and Fraud.

      Meanwhile I will continue my call for a removal of this failed government, its pseudo leader and the illegals on our soil.

    • Harry Melton says:

      03:21pm | 22/04/11

      Stamp your feet all you want MarK
      You’ve been pwned
      wriggle wriggle little worm
      .

    • MarK says:

      06:31pm | 22/04/11

      Awwww Harry.

      You really really really want to play with the big kids don’t ya.

      Keep trying son raspberry

    • Likes Joining Dots says:

      07:22pm | 22/04/11

      Internet etiquette is so difficult to master these days.

      For instance, are you allowed to declare ‘pwned’ based purely on your own comments or does it require other posters to reinforce and declare the ‘pwn’ for it to become official?

    • MarK says:

      08:12pm | 22/04/11

      Awww LJD let him have his fantasies.

      It is all good

    • james milton says:

      06:08pm | 21/04/11

      “We are not criminals, we are humans”

      Aren’t all criminals humans?

    • Peter says:

      10:19pm | 21/04/11

      Last time I checked arson and assaulting emergency service personal were crimes. That makes them criminals.

    • Sam says:

      06:12pm | 21/04/11

      ‘The photos featured on smh.com.au present a frightening scene. As dramatic as the images of police and flames licking at wire fences are; I’m sure it was a whole lot more terrifying for those inside or on the roof fighting for answers. ‘

      You mean they were terrifed of the the fires they set themselves. How horrific for them.

    • G says:

      06:17pm | 21/04/11

      A great article Sophie!

      I wonder how much these people who have commented before me actually know about the treatment of refugees and that it isn’t just air conditioning and computer rooms. It is infact an indefinite future in prison like buildings with no certainty of what lies around the corner.

      If I was in there shoes I would have done the exact same thing! Can’t blame them really. We are letting them down with our disgusting treatment and things really need to change.
      Continue to speak for those who are silenced.

    • John A Neve says:

      06:47pm | 21/04/11

      G,

      You are a worry.
      Question; in your view are these people better or worse off now, compared to where they came from?

      If they are better off, they should shut up and wait their turn. However, if they are worse off, all they have to do is ask and I am sure we will send the home.

    • JT says:

      06:47pm | 21/04/11

      ‘‘If I was in there shoes I would have done the exact same thing!’‘

      So you admit you would knowingly and purposefully committ a crime? One must wonder if you have not already? Have you? Do you wish to confess to anything here? I’d be more than happy to report you to the police and see you locked away.

    • LeftRightOut says:

      06:55pm | 21/04/11

      I can blame them, and so can probably 90% of Australians.
      This feel-good rubbish lefty types spout is down right destructive. You cannot seriously hold these people blameless… what needs to change are the relevant laws, bring back the Pacific solution and TPVs, problem solved (again).

    • DWGW says:

      08:20pm | 21/04/11

      Yeah and you’d end up in gaol but I bet they wont.

    • MO says:

      08:30pm | 21/04/11

      I came to Australia four years ago as an Independent immigrant. To do that I had to get skilled, learn language and prove that I am not a criminal. I also had to pay several thousands for the paperwork to be accepted. When I arrived, I was not entitled for any Govt assistance for two years. Now I work two jobs, raise son, pay taxes and like a lot of people who live here struggle with bills, etc sometimes. I am happy here, but life is no red carpet. Now, tell me this: if I get unhappy, climb the roof and burn something down, will the Govt give me a pat on the back? Maybe a free house?.. I doubt that.

    • Phil says:

      09:40pm | 21/04/11

      G
      I imagine you are a green voter with an attitude like that.
      Even one of the Tasmanian mayors is now up in arms, but like hello, Tasmania is full of greens who want refugees. I say lets take in 20000 and send them for a life in Tasmania, in the suburb next to the labor senators, maybe just maybe then they may change their minds.
      I think they should make the Greens and Labor parties personally pay for the damage caused to Villawood, Christmas Island etc, as it is their failed policies causing loss of life, damage, and immediately deport whoever is responsible.
      My main questions however is HTF do they get on the roof of a detention centre. Do we supply ladders? are they assisted? water canon or rubber bullets would do the trick to get them down.
      I would not fix the premises but make they remain in the burnt remains of the buildings staying till they are deported, that or a army plane and parachute back to where they say they are from.

    • Peter says:

      10:24pm | 21/04/11

      G,
      The arsonists are not refugees. Their claims and appeals have been rejected by our bleeding heart courts even with our very liberal laws that define a large volume of the country shoppers who arrive in Australia from the safety of Indonesia as being genuine refugees.
      The only reason they are still in detention is because they refuse to accept the umpires decision.

    • Mouse says:

      06:19pm | 21/04/11

      It is not illegal to seek asylum but in Australia if you arrive without a visa detention is, by law, mandatory.  Besides not having a visa, the asylum seekers also do not possess ID, so these people are in detention until it is verified that they are who they say they are. Our Immigration laws do not discriminate between race, religion or sex, they do not care which country people come from. If you enter Australia and violate our laws in doing so, you will be detained. This is not a new concept.
      “why are we treating people who have committed no crime as if they are the worst criminals in the world?”.  How do we know who they are or what they are not? That’s why they are in detention, so we can answer these questions. If security checks are done and applications for permanency are denied, do we not have the right to send them home? Do we not have the right to decide who we allow to stay in our country? These are the questions that have to be answered. All this talk of transparency and fairness applies to both sides.  If there is not honesty in the beginning, the process becomes long. This is the way it has to be so we can, to the best of our ability,  keep our country and people safe.

    • NicoleG says:

      07:01pm | 21/04/11

      Agreed Mouse. Oh and BTW, you uttered that persons name in the open thread. You’ve jinxed us all. Wait for it….......

    • Mouse says:

      08:52pm | 21/04/11

      MarK’s not the only fisherman here Nicole and he won’t be p!ssed at me for pinching his troll! lol

    • Marilyn Shepherd says:

      03:12am | 22/04/11

      Asylum seekers do not need visas, that is and always has been lie.

      They don’t need papers, they simply have to arrive here anyway they can and ask for protection.

      Why do you write such arrant nonsense?

      No asylum seekers are breaking any law and if you think they have I dare you to find that law because this is what the high court had to say about that.

      This is the case of Akram Al Masri, a Palestinian sent home to be gunned down likea dog in Gaza.

      http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/FCA/2004/1267.html?query=hamdan
      “30 It is important to emphasise that the client did not escape from custody. It would have been an offence for him to have done so: see 197A of the Act. He was released from detention pursuant to a court order. Neither was he committing or proposing to commit an offence simply because he was taking steps to avoid being detained. As Gummow J indicated in Al-Kateb at [86] ff, the current Migration Act, unlike its precursors, does not make it an offence for an unlawful non-citizen to enter or to be within Australia in contravention of, or in evasion of, the Act.
      31 Further, as Hayne J observed in Al-Kateb at [207]-[208] the description of a person’s immigration status as “unlawful” serves as no more than a reference to a non-citizen not having a “valid permission to enter and remain in Australia”. The use of the term “unlawful” does not as such refer to a breach of a law.”


      Do you see where it says there is no breach of the law?

      Why is it that people think it is ok to mistreat the innocent because they don’t have a piece of paper they don’t even need?

      WE have been told for 20 years we are in breach of the law but we keep on doing it anyway.

      We would not arbitrarily jail anyone else ever without charge because that is a breach of the rule of law so why do we think we have the right to lock up people Gillard said this about -

      We should also understand that what drives the peaks and troughs in the
      numbers of boats trying to get to Australia has less to do with what we do
      here and more to do with the conditions people are escaping - conditions like
      war, genocide, imprisonment without trial, torture, harassment by authorities,
      the disappearance of family and friends, and children growing up in refugee
      camps with no prospect of ever again seeing their home.
      And when conditions deteriorate in countries with sea routes to Australia

    • MarK says:

      08:23am | 22/04/11

      I am nothing if not a sharing soul.

      Feel free to have fun with my troll.

    • Adam says:

      12:13pm | 22/04/11

      @ Marilyn - Tell me this; where would these asylum seekers go if everyone else in the world was equally as gutless as them and refused to fight to protect their freedom, security and peace?

      The case you cited is from 2004 and no longer relevant. The legislation has changed since that time (in 2005 and 2009). The detention of an unlawful non-citizen or someone who has bypassed immigration is entirely legal. You might want to check out the Migration Act and associated legislation before you make yourself look silly again.

    • Mouse says:

      01:11pm | 22/04/11

      Ahh, had my hot cross buns so now I am ready to reply. @Marilyn, that link you give, have you read and understood the case?  It is more about privileged disclosure and child custody than immigration. The law they are talking about here is civil law, not immigration law. And it’s an old case too. Duh!!! 
      Please read on and I shall try to explain how wrong you are.
      Asylum seekers, if they do not have visas, face mandatory detention. as pursuant to Australia’s Immigration laws. Here’s the link http://www.immi.gov.au/managing-australias-borders/detention/about/background.htm.  If you don’t know how to get into a link, I will copy what the initial bits for you to read.
      “Why is it necessary?
      Australia’s Migration Act 1958 requires people who are not Australian citizens and who are unlawfully in Australia to be detained. Unless they are given legal permission to remain in Australia by being granted a visa unlawful non-citizens must be removed from Australia as soon as reasonably practicable.
      This requirement reflects Australia’s right to determine who is permitted to enter and remain in Australia and the conditions under which those who cannot remain may be detained and removed.
      Immigration detention is not used to punish people. It is an administrative function whereby people who do not have a valid visa are detained while their claims to stay are considered or their removal is facilitated.
      Who is ‘unlawful’?
      People who are not Australian citizens are ‘unlawful’ if they do not have a valid visa giving them permission to be in Australia. Usually, ‘unlawful non-citizens’ are people who have:
      •arrived in Australia without a visa
      •overstayed their visa
      •had their visa cancelled. “
      This is our laws in regards to unlawful entry by anyone, regardless of race, colour, sex, age or origin. These are the facts, like it or not. You carry on about genocide, torture, etc, etc, and, while that is a terrible thing, the vast majority of unlawful entries are not running from this, they are economic asylum seekers, who pay thousands of $ per person to get here, knowing full well they will be sent to detention on arrival. But hey, let’s not let the facts get in the way of a good hysterical rant!
      ps MarK, many thanks, I love a man that shares! Happy Easter to all

    • Gratuitous Adviser says:

      06:26pm | 21/04/11

      The illegal immigration issue in Australia (the bigger issue and crime, Mr. Ian Rintoul), except for the phantom students and tourist overstayers, appears on the front page of our newspapers every time a boat appears in the vicinity of the West Australian coast or there is a detention centre incident.  Other than the vested and do-gooder interests, we all get exited and upset by the inaction of our government to control the situation however our problems are miniscule compared to the United States or Europe.

      Pressures from constituents in all liberal western countries are growing significantly for those in power to say “enough is enough”.  The current North African revolution/refugee crisis is the catalyst for European countries starting to clamp down on free travel between EU countries with passport control beginning to be reintroduced.  European governments are also starting to blame each other for not doing their bit and/or reminding each other of a historical event that in some way gave them illegal immigrant credits.  In the US, Donald Trump is gaining support by putting on the political agenda the manning of the Mexican/US border with troops.  Laugh you may, but this is a huge political issue in the southern Border States of the USA, especially Arizona.

      Whilst not completely relevant to the illegal immigrant discussion, during the 2010 British election one of Gordon Brown’s “faux pas” was the complete disregard of Gillian Duffy’s concerns about Polish immigration (undercutting and taking jobs from Brits), and then calling her a bigot.  This was not the death blow for the Labour Government but it was an issue not forgotten at the ballot box.

      Last year the French expelled hundreds of Roma, it says, settled in the country illegally in what was said to be a political manoeuvre by Sarkozy to raise his popularity, and it did.  His government is currently stopping trains from Italy carrying Tunisian immigrants fleeing political unrest.

      Back home, the illegal immigration issue is a time bomb for both parties.  The Labor government is in the sights at the moment, but when the next Liberal government gain power they better have a good result with “Stopping the Boats” or they will be dealt with as any government will be that can not control its borders.

      The reason for the opposition to illegal immigration is human nature.  No one wants or will allow their home to be invaded by uninvited guests that have broken the law to enter their home.  The current Villawood incident only hardens the opposition.  This is a fact and all the howls from the various pro-illegal immigration groups and vested interests, in the end, will have no consequence because whichever government can not control this issue will not be in government for long.

    • pj says:

      06:31pm | 21/04/11

      goverment has only invited further destruction upon our country by allowing illegal immigrants to take charge? What are they thinking? If any “AUSTRALIAN” destroyed goverment property we would be jailed forthwith.What happens with illegals..nothing,just put them amongst the general population..how pathetic!

    • jag says:

      06:38pm | 21/04/11

      I don’t like the ALP. Can I go and burn their headquarters down?

    • fairsfair says:

      06:39pm | 21/04/11

      I have the same thoughts on this matter as the last homosexual article posted. I am sick of hearing the same thing and seeing no change in the comments that follow or the responses made by the authorities. How long do we have to witness unashamed waste of public money without seeing any change in process or outcome?

      You can’t polish a turd, but you can roll it in glitter. I think we are out of glitter.

    • Enough is Enough says:

      06:39pm | 21/04/11

      Enough is enough. Send the army in to sought it out. 29.8 million already going to be spent on Villawood now even more yet the govt says we have to tighten our purse and families will suffer

    • Peter Simmons says:

      06:39pm | 21/04/11

      It was the ALP/Greens who set up the mechanism that allows Appeals to continue ad nauseum that take years and cost Billions.
      Why are the pro Illegal Arrivals not so active in protecting the LEGAL applicants that are continually pushed back in their legitimate claims.
      Why not set up a new version of Villawood at Ainslie in the ACT.

    • John says:

      11:22pm | 21/04/11

      Even though I hate the ALP and Greens its not fully thier fault. Remeber the case recently taken up by some nice expensive lawyers on the behalf of a group of Sri Lankan refugees that rules they had a right of appeal all the way to the high court at tax payers expence.

      But the greatest thing ws the abolishment of the pacific solution, a solution that did work and stopped boat arrivals to basically 1, yes sophia and all you left wing idiots 1. So as labour got in and the policy was abolished the numbers rose again.

      Just to let you know Sophie under the Howard govt immigration to Asutralia and the number of refugees give visas grew.

    • JT says:

      06:39pm | 21/04/11

      Personally I say we just shoot them right now, along with useful idiots like
      Sophie Trevitt and as she says none of us will be locked up as apparently ‘‘The worst criminals in the world are not sent to prison before they go to trial” so really we have nothing to lose. Problem solved.

      Of course back in the real world, feel free to join us one day Sophie, criminals are locked up before going to trial, arriving here without papers is illegal, and burning buildings down because you are in detention while your claim is being processed is not an act of desperation but one of criminality. They should be arrested immediately and deported as soon as possible, no ifs or buts.

    • Robbie says:

      08:55pm | 21/04/11

      Death threats?
      Good to see violence among Australian conservatives and right-wingers is alive and kicking.

    • Marilyn Shepherd says:

      03:28am | 22/04/11

      Where does it say that it is illegal to arrive without papers?  I dare you to find the relevant law, tell us how many have been jailed under it, or what fines they were charged.

      come on, if you are so certain people are committing a crime, find it.

    • mervyn ford says:

      06:43pm | 21/04/11

      Stick to climate Sophie, although you probably have weird views on that subject too.
      What has happened at Villawood is a disgrace and more evidence of another labor failed policy.
      They don’t like the decision so they riot..AND LABEL THE JUDGE “RACIST”...do we really want this type of person let loose in our country…the answer is NO.

    • John C says:

      06:47pm | 21/04/11

      In the history of migration to Australia, many migrants - sponsored and refugee - have stayed in accommodation like Villawood, at places like Herne Bay and Fairy Meadow and I suspect that conditions there in earlier years were nowhere near as good as currently exist - no air conditioning, no tv etc.
      Yet those people did not burn down their accommodation and were grateful for Australia taking them in.

      This current lot are just trying blackmail - give us entry or we will do bad things - and are trying to reverse the Howard slogan and empower themselves into deciding who comes to Australia and the conditions under which they come.

      People who put at risk the lives of others and who destroy property should never be allowed entry into this country - permanent or temporary.

    • Ben81 says:

      07:03pm | 21/04/11

      How much longer does this have to go on before certain people realise their so called more ‘compassionate’ approach has failed?
      Too proud to admit they were proven wrong when John Howard’s policies and actions worked and proven wrong again when they were undone?  Come on, it’s right there in black and white.

      Where are the busloads of protesters tearing down the gates who only seemed to care when the Liberals were in charge, even though we ended up with a few hundred people in immigration detention instead of over 6500?  Why isn’t Labor (and the Greens) being demonised by the people and groups making all the noise back then for causing a situation far worse, much much worse, than at any time under the watch of Howard?
      More importantly, why the hell is the Gillard still stalling on this?

    • But seriously says:

      10:32am | 23/04/11

      Things would be no different under a Liberal government.
      You’re not fooling anyone but your self.

    • TimB says:

      12:11pm | 23/04/11

      Yes they would be different. You know why? Because they WERE different.

      Ignore history at your peril. The only one fooling themselves is you.

    • Dave C says:

      07:12pm | 21/04/11

      There is a solution to this mess however no government has the will to do it.

      1) Withdraw our signature to any UN declaration on refugees, (and others by the way but lets keep on topic) that way we as a democratic nation state can decide our own policy in this area
      2) Round up everyone in all the detention centers, and boat them (using force if need be) to the nearest UNHCR center. No processing to occur in Australia at all
      3) Every time a boat carrying asylum seekers comes near Australia is it to be directed (at gun point if need be) to the nearest UNHCR center. Because of point 1 we have no obligations towards the UN, it can be there problem.
      4) Give a few hundred million of our taxpayers dollars to the UNHCR so they have more time and resources to process the asylum seekers so at least we are doing our bit out of kindness and not out of obligation (see point 1)
      5) Keep the worse center open in the middle of the desert for a mandatory 2 month stay before deportation for anyone who wants to overstay their visa when they fly, here this shows we keep the same rules for all people who come hear illegally regardless of how then came
      6) Increase our immigration levels of genuine refugees from UN refugee camps, ensuring we only take genuine refugees and we take the ones who have waited there the most and not made any trouble whilst at the camp.

      The end result of the above 6 points is that we as a nation will still take genuine refugees from around the world, we may even be able to take more than we do now. But we will take them on OUR TERMS and we will not have our immigration policy dictated to us the UN or refugee activists in this country.

      Now whats wrong with that?

    • Peter says:

      10:30pm | 21/04/11

      Another simple solution to stopping the people smugglers is to pass a law stating that no person found to be a refugee will ever be settled in the country in which they lodge their claim.

    • Marilyn Shepherd says:

      03:33am | 22/04/11

      Everything is wrong with that.

      1.  Refugees have usually already fled at the point of a gun or bomb, or invading hordes like us.
      2.  We helped to write the refugee convention because we already did the things you claim we should do now and millions were slaughtered.
      3.  The UNHCR in general terms do not assess refugee claims except in non-signatory nations.  Only 9% were assessed by the UNHCR 2009/10.
      4.  There is no treaty or law on earth that puts resettlement before protection.  The reality is that only a small proportion of asylum seekers are registered with the UNHCR:
      UNHCR offices registered some 73 400 applications out of the total of 861 400 claims in 2008. This number has decreased compared to 2007 (79 800 claims). The office’s share in the global number of applications registered stood at 9 per cent in 2008 compared to 15 per cent in 2006 and 12 per cent in 2007. As the overall number of applications has continued to rise, states are increasingly taking responsibility for refugee status determination.19
      Once registered with the UNHCR, many refugees seek resettlement to a country such as Australia. Refugees do not have a right to be resettled, and states are not obliged under the 1951 Refugee Convention or any other instrument to accept refugees for resettlement. It is a voluntary scheme co-ordinated by the UNHCR which, amongst other things facilitates burden-sharing amongst signatory states. Resettlement therefore complements and is not a substitute for the provision of protection to people who apply for asylum under the Convention.

      Now try not to be a savage.

    • marley says:

      09:59am | 22/04/11

      The only problem with your plan is - what on earth makes you think that the country in which the UNHCR camp is located, is going to accept planeloads full of refugees.  Those countries - Indonesia, Malaysia, Pakistan, etc - are under no obligation whatsoever to admit people to their territory who are not their citizens.

    • Dave C says:

      10:40am | 22/04/11

      Ahhh Marilyn how did I know your pro refugee rantings and abuse would resonate once I wrote my piece. You just dont get it do you, and I guess you never will.

      As I said, Australia is a sovereign nation, a nation state if you will. It can choose who to let in and it as a nation state can certainly choose which UN declarations to sign and ratify. So we signed a declaration in 1951, at that time the white Australia policy still reigned.  Times have changed and we as a nation should decide whether we should withdraw our signature. Maybe the issue should go to a vote and guess what Marilyn…. your side would lose and therefore everything you say does doesn’t hold water, a bit like a refugee boat sinking after those on board refuse to go back to Indonesia.

      Once that is done then every single argument you make on this issue gets blown out of the water faster than a roof tile can be thrown at a firefighter at Villawood.

      You can argue about what states can do what and when under the convention and how much the UNHCR does and what it doesnt and what members states do and dont do and what numbers go where and therfore hence and so forth ......... and bot do you argue it well.

      BUT for any of that to hold water Australia must still support the 1951 convention. I say the SILENT MAJORITY of Australians dont support it and we should withdraw from it. Once that happens we are not under any obligation to do anything. Every other one of my points at least means at least we do take genuine refugees, just on our terms and not theirs or yours.

      Oh and I am a savage am I.. at least you didnt call me a fool or a fuckwit or any other form of intelligent articulate argument (re abuse) that you are famous for on blog sites….... I feel privileged Happy Easter Marilyn.

    • Bikinis on Top says:

      07:21pm | 21/04/11

      The Right Wing Of The Labor Party and the Liberal National Party have destroyed Australia,Australian morals, Australian values and the Australian way of life.
      They imprison everyone and everything due to zero tolerance.
      Animals get kept in zoos. Kids get held in schools. Old People get held in retirement villages and nursing homes/. welfare recipients get held in poverty.Migrants get held in prisons.
      Right Wing ALP And Liberal National People hold themselves in pubs,clubs, workplaces and churches.
      Let all illegal and legal immigrants into Australia now.
      Move the Right Wing ALP And the Liberal National Party offshore as soon as possible.Place their supporters in UK or USA

      only criminals should be held in prisons.
      migrants are not criminals

    • JT says:

      08:00pm | 21/04/11

      The fact you are posting here proves everything you say is a lie, after all, the aslyum didn’t hold you when it clearly should have.

    • Peter Simmons says:

      08:07pm | 21/04/11

      What a load of Left wing Garbage.

    • LeftRightOut says:

      08:13pm | 21/04/11

      Is that the “Right Wing Labor Party” - or the “right wing OF the Labor party”?

      Either way, you’re a goose wink

    • MarK says:

      08:26am | 22/04/11

      Sarah…Sarah,,,is that you?

      Or is this reg. I can’t decide tbh. Possibly Badger although he mangles the basics more than you.

      Hmmm

    • PolyWatcher says:

      07:28pm | 21/04/11

      Let us ask ourselves. Are these the type of people that we need to welcome to our country? We have already enough problems with their type in Sydney which unfortunately we are unable to send back from where they come, because in fact, they were born in this Country. We do not want, nor should we, welcome this type of person to our country it could only get worse. After all they arrived illegally.

    • Cuppa says:

      07:33pm | 21/04/11

      So while we have Queensland children sleeping in tents & pensuiners struggling day to day, these illegal grubs have the nerve to destroy taxpayer funded buildings because they didnt get their way.Their actions are typical of the tribal, troublemaking muslim mentality that we are starting to see more of in Australia thanks to our woefull immigration & refugee systems.We owe these ugrateful freeloaders NOTHING & our taxes should be spent on AUSTRALIANS in need.Enough is enough & the Australian people are sick of it.

    • Richard says:

      07:40pm | 21/04/11

      The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

      I’m sure Kevin Rudd had good intentions when he dismantled the Pacific Solution, but the actual results of his “compassionate” policy was, as we can now see; hundreds of drowned corpses in the ocean, thousands of incarcerated individuals in detention, the detention system itself stretched beyond its limit and in apparent meltdown, and an out-of-control population of wild and dangerous detainees with nothing to lose and a penchant for violence and arson.

      So now here writes Sophie Trevitt, with the best of intentions I’m sure, that in order to deal with all the problems have now become manifest (problems which were solved by the previous government, but are now back again), we should be even more “compassionate” and abandon even more aspects of the previous policy (which worked).

      But Sophie, good intentions don’t count. The only thing that counts are real-world results. ‘Progressive’ advocates need to spell out exactly what real-world result they want to achieve regarding the asylum seeker issue. Do they want Australia to become like Europe? Where the refugee/asylum seeker problem continues to spiral further and further out of control? What is their measure of success?

      All human behavior is governed by incentive. If our government doesn’t take the incentive off the table for asylum seekers to chase after, then asylum seekers will continue to come here in greater and greater numbers, causing even more problems, that are yet unforeseen. How is getting rid of mandatory detention going to reduce the incentive for asylum seekers to attempt to come here?

      Without addressing the real cause of the problem, i.e. the incentives that make Australia such an attractive place to seek asylum, can you not see that this problem will continue to get worse and worse and worse?

    • Kurisu Sonsaku says:

      07:41pm | 21/04/11

      Another boat, another policy failure.  Does that phrase ring a bell with you???????

      Grow up Sophie it has been reported this evening that the majority of those rioting have had their applications refused. Spare me your infantile BS, these people are little more than yahoo’s who have assaulted Australian citizens doing their job and comitted criminal damage.

      If it makes you happy i’ll fly to Sydney and help them pack to go home.

    • bikinis on top says:

      08:00pm | 21/04/11

      if jesus had a last supper ,how could he was so lean on the cross next day?

    • Kurisu Sonsaku says:

      08:39pm | 21/04/11

      Apart from your mangling of the english language…............................... maybe he had a toastie and a cup of tea

    • Gratuitous Adviser says:

      09:01pm | 21/04/11

      What does this mean???  I need an interpreter.  Sheeeez

    • Debbie says:

      08:13pm | 21/04/11

      People smuggling is a crime under Australian law. So to me it follows that those who knowingly involve themselves in people smuggling, even as the cargo are also guilty. And furthermore those who advise any of these people in advance as to how to gain admission to Australia are accessories before the fact, and all the so called refugee advocates etc who give assistance after arrival are also accessories to this crime.

    • the whisperer says:

      10:08pm | 21/04/11

      Well Debbie, you sure have got all of the right legal terminology. You read as if you are a law student or maybe even a qualified legal practitioner. I sincerely hope not, but hey, even the odd one sneaks through the cracks. If you were a legally trained person you would know that no-one, I repeat, no-one should be imprisoned without having first appeared in court. Forget about the idiots on here who say, “Plenty of people, denied bail, remain in gaol despite being unconvicted” They are ignorable. Those accused have had their day in court. The men, women, and shamefully, children being held in prison, (yes it is), are not there because of any court order, Read this….. They have not been to court!  Now Debbie, do you understand?
      How can any person, (and I despise people smugglers), be convicted of a crime that has not been proven?  Your “accessories” are those to whom I refer. Next week, you and people like you will be saying that people who are defrauded by conmen should be charged for taking part in the crime.  And there are no “so-called” refugee advocates. They are, indisputably, refugee advocates. No secrets there Debbie, just good people acting in the Australian way of trying to help the helpless.
      How much effort do you, Debbie, and those others who follow the theory of “tread down on the downtrodden”, make in detecting those real illegal immigrants who have come here to take bread out of Aussie family’s mouths, overstayed their legal entitlement, and carry on unthreatened. And by the way, they come from Sweden, France, Denmark, Holland, Germany, Japan, China, and all of those, (many more), countries without any repressive governments which make “refugee” have meaning.
      I suppose, Debbie, that you will now go on a crusade to ensure that all of those farmers, orchardists, grapegrowers, and others who advantage themselves of the ‘cheap’ labour of those who overstay their legal time will be also prosecuted? Of course you will. Won’t you.
      And in closing, for all of you racist, bigoted, uncaring - for- children supremists, think on this. If it was your wife, your children, fleeing from any danger, physical, medical, or for any other valid reason, would you say, “Send them Back”? Anyone?  Debbie?

    • Marilyn Shepherd says:

      03:36am | 22/04/11

      Debbie, that is simply untrue.

      There has never been a single person sent to prison for people smuggling, no-one is being smuggled. 

      You dingbats drive me crazy with the nonsense you write.

      this is what all the judges say about the cases:

      As has been observed in relation to other cases of this kind, the prisoners were not involved in a ‘people-smuggling’ exercise. There was nothing covert about either operation. They were transporting the non-citizens to Australia for presentation to Australian authorities. There was no attempt to hide from the authorities or to disguise what they had done. “

      We do not get to abuse people because you want to spout tripe.

    • Karen from Qld says:

      08:32pm | 21/04/11

      If they want to stay on the roof - that’s fine. Just leave them there - don’t give them media attention and if they want food or water then only supply that if they come down to get it. Once they come down supply them with a tent to sleep in. They obviously don’t want to sleep in a bed with a roof over their heads and don’t require internet access or other creature comforts. Let them experience first hand the consequences of their actions. As soon as it is possible put them on a plane and send them back

    • Gerard says:

      10:13pm | 21/04/11

      Send them ‘back’ where? The problem is that the overwhelming majority came from Indonesia and Indonesia won’t take them back. Sure, we could send them to the landlocked nation of Afghanistan that many of them claim to have travelled from by boat. But once they start realising that this particular story is a bad idea and stop using it, then what?

    • Peter says:

      09:47am | 22/04/11

      Gerard, I’m pretty sure that legally we are allowed to return the country shoppers to Indonesia or whatever nearby country they came from. If Indonesia doesn’t like it we can hold back the $1billion a year in aid we give them.

    • marley says:

      12:07pm | 23/04/11

      @Peter - sorry, but we are not legally allowed to return people to Indonesia (unless they’re Indonesian citizens).  Countries are obligated to admit their citizens but not people who aren’t citizens and were there illegally.  The only countries obligated in international law to take back the Villawood detainees are the ones they actually came from originally.

    • ;o) says:

      08:33pm | 21/04/11

      Look its simple….. if these so called illegals, did the same action in there country or another’s they would be SHOT on sight, thats a fact. The country I call my home (Australia) does not need this lot or the bullshit they bring with them. They are abusing the Australian way of life with these actions as well as destroying our tax payer assets. We don’t need detention centres we need DEPORTATION centres.

    • Ben in Canberra says:

      08:34pm | 21/04/11

      Sophie, nice try. Unfortunately your time spent as the NSW Director of the AYCC seems to have addled your brain to such a degree that you swallow unreservedly the rubbish that is disseminated by Ian Rintoul and the RAC as well as the Federal Govt.

      Firstly, do you know the detainees involved? Personally? Know the reasons they were denied immigration status in Australia?

      Did you know that one detainee featured heavily on the news coverage today (bald head, beard) is a NZ citizen being returned to NZ following a sentence of imprisonment?

      Did you know that each state and territory in the country have a Bail Act o variant thereof? Did you know this Act gives a Magistrate or Judge the right to refuse bail to a person if certain caveats are satisfied such as risk of absconding, previous offending history, other pending charges, danger to the community?

      Did you know that the only people moved from Christmas Island recently were moved to a facility on Darwin, not Villawood? Did Chris Bowen not outline that clearly enough for you when he announced it following the recent riots?

      Well after reading your article, it appears that no, you didn’t know. If you’re going to add to the debate, why not follow some basic tenets of good essay writing:

      1. Check your facts.
      2. Outline your argument.
      3. Check your facts.

    • Gratuitous Adviser says:

      08:34pm | 21/04/11

      Watching Chris Bowen on 7:30, he is understandably upset with his situation however he and the government have brought this on themselves and are continuing the farce. 

      How naive does he or his advisers think the great unwashed are when his “fix” is fundamentally to tack this incident onto the previous Christmas Island incident (of course, eminent public servants will be in charge) and wait for the “Report” and presumably hope that it goes away.  His, and the governments, dream of the East Timor solution is obviously spin and can someone also advise me:
      1.  Why are the people involved in this incident not down in the Villawood Police Station being interviewed?
      2.  If the “ringleaders” had been refused entry (after going through the processes), why were they at Villawood and not on the plane?
      3.  Who is going to pay for the time and resources of the NSW Police and Fire Brigade.  State of Federal budget?  The Federal taxpayer is obviously going to pay for the rest.
      4.  Who is in charge (really in charge)?

    • Dave of Brisbane says:

      08:47pm | 21/04/11

      Chris Bowen on the television-what a class act…of course they will riot. They chuck a tantrum and get fast tracked. Anyone remember Pacific Viking…helllooooo….
      We know and they know it.
      He still believes East Timor is viable-nine months since Gillard first raised it..and if it doesn’t go ahead, we’ll just keep on talking about it ‘cause there is no Plan B.
      The Gov’t we have is ruining this country…they are the one’s that should be deported…along with their brain dead zombie supporters like John A. Neve, acotrel,nossy, persephone and chongy..

    • Marilyn Shepherd says:

      03:04am | 22/04/11

      http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/FCA/2002/1009.html?query=al masri
      “60 In any event, while it is literally correct to describe the applicant as an “unlawful” entrant and an “unlawful non-citizen” that is not a complete description of his position. The nomenclature adopted under the Act provides for the description of persons as “unlawful non-citizens” because they arrived in Australia without a visa. This does not fully explain their status in Australian law as such persons are on-shore applicants for protection visas on the basis that they are refugees under the Refugees Convention.
      61 The Refugees Convention is a part of conventional international law that has been given legislative effect in Australia: see ss 36 and 65 of the Act. It has always been fundamental to the operation of the Refugees Convention that many applicants for refugee status will, of necessity, have left their countries of nationality unlawfully and therefore, of necessity, will have entered the country in which they seek asylum unlawfully. Jews seeking refuge from war-torn Europe, Tutsis seeking refuge from Rwanda, Kurds seeking refuge from Iraq, Hazaras seeking refuge from the Taliban in Afghanistan and many others, may also be called “unlawful non-citizens” in the countries in which they seek asylum. Such a description, however, conceals, rather than reveals, their lawful entitlement under conventional international law since the early 1950’s (which has been enacted into Australian law) to claim refugee status as persons who are “unlawfully” in the country in which the asylum application is made.
      62 The Refugees Convention implicitly requires that, generally, the signatory countries process applications for refugee status of on-shore applicants irrespective of the legality of their arrival, or continued presence, in that country: see Art 31. That right is not only conferred upon them under international law but is also recognised by the Act (see s 36) and the Migration Regulations 1994 (Cth) which do not require lawful arrival or presence as a criterion for a protection visa. If the position were otherwise many of the protection obligations undertaken by signatories to the Refugees Convention, including Australia, would be undermined and ultimately rendered nugatory.
      63 Notwithstanding that the applicant is an “unlawful non-citizen” under the Act who entered Australia unlawfully and has had his application for a protection visa refused, in making that application he was exercising a “right” conferred upon him under Australian law.”
      Now those four paragraphs make the law pretty clear and that was upheld by three more judges in the Full Court of the Federal court in April 2003 after Akram had been deported.

      So far so good on the “unlawful” = “illegal” story.

      So let’s wander off to the High Court appeal which became Behrooz, Al Kateb and Al Khafaji and have a look at the meaning of “unlawful”.

      http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/other/HCATrans/2003/456.html?query=behrooz
      GUMMOW J: What is the baggage of the word “unlawful”?
      MR BENNETT: Your Honour, none. It is a word used in a definition provision, it is simply a defined phrase. It is not a phrase which necessarily involves the commission of a criminal offence.
      http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/other/HCATrans/2003/458.html?query=behrooz
      “GUMMOW J: What is the force of the word “unlawful”?
      MR BENNETT: It is merely a word which is used in a definition section, your Honour.
      GLEESON CJ: Does it mean without lawful permission?
      MR BENNETT: Yes, that is perhaps the best way of paraphrasing - - -
      GUMMOW J: But in the Austinian sense that is meaningless, is it not?
      MR BENNETT: Yes, your Honour. The draftsperson of the Act is not necessarily taken to be familiar with the - - -
      GUMMOW J: Well, perhaps they ought to be.”
      Wow, so the word unlawful is legally meaningless.

    • Bris Jack says:

      02:03pm | 22/04/11

      Such a class act it has been removed from the 7.30 segment on Villawood.

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      10:36pm | 21/04/11

      Australia has an asylum seeker problem, but it is not as big as the legal migration problem posed by 457 visas, NZ transfers, visa overstayers etc. In pure numbers the asylum seeker problem is insignificant. Having said that it is a question of sovereignty that Australia and Australia alone should determine who comes to Australia and in what numbers, which is why Australia should withdraw from the United Nations convention on refugees.

    • mervyn ford says:

      10:36am | 22/04/11

      at least we know who the legal overstayers are as they use their legal documents to arrive…who knows who is coming in illegally as they have destroyed they documents…you have to ask yourself why.

    • jim peters says:

      08:16am | 23/04/11

      mervyn is right, comparing visa over-stayers to asylum seekers has got to stop. They are not the same. Visa over-stayers entered this country legally. We know who they are. They entered with all the right documentation and pose no threat. The vast-majority of them intend to leave the country, they do not try to get welfare or residency or anything else. In most cases they are simply travellers who are extending their stay.

    • Adam says:

      10:58pm | 21/04/11

      Anyone else notice how much the picture of Sophie Trevitt looks like the one from Sarah Bath’s facebook page? The similarities are scary!

    • Enrico says:

      11:29pm | 21/04/11

      Yet another “F” for fail for this utterly incompetent, lying, thieving and embarrassing Rudd/Gillard Government.  It is easily the worst Federal Government in Australia’s History.

    • DJ says:

      03:13am | 22/04/11

      All illegal entrants to this country should be informed the moment they are transferred from their leaky boats to Australian territory that you will be treated well and housed in a detention facility until your claims for assylum are investigated. Since you have arrived without a visa and without any documentation which could help your cause, this could take some time, possibly years. However, in the meantime, you are required to behave in a responsible manner with patience and gratitude just like the thousands before you. If you cannot do that, your application for assylum will be automatically rejected.

      Simple.

    • Marilyn Shepherd says:

      03:42am | 22/04/11

      Philip Ruddock and John Howard has riots, fires, suicide attempts, deaths and the whole catastrophe for 12 years.

      Gillard could have and should have stopped locking the people up.  Instead she panders to the racist shit heads who spew out their ignorance year in and year out without a hint of bothering with the truth - and the media generally behave like the audience cheering gladiators in the ring.

      The reality is the law is simple.  Everyone has the right to seek asylum.

      After all, all they are doing is filling in a visa form.

    • marley says:

      10:10am | 22/04/11

      True.  And when their visa application/asylum claim is rejected, they should bloody well accept that they lost, and get on the first flight out, instead of torching their accommodation.

    • PolyWAtcher says:

      10:51am | 22/04/11

      Such a great command of the English language Marilyn.  Perhaps you should spend a few months teaching these illegal people some of your special brand of English.

    • mervyn ford says:

      02:59pm | 22/04/11

      A very selective if not biased view of history, ask yourself how many people have died just from the boat crashing on rocks at christmas island and the boat that was blown up by smugglers a few mths earlier.
      And those illegal immigrants that caused the trouble on christmas island….why are they still here.The govt is all spin and no substance.
      It must really irritate you that howard is still not around to blame for everything.
      Fact. He stopped the boats and by stopping boats stopped deaths.
      this labor govt has failed on this and every other policy since krudd was elected.
      it is the worst govt this country has ever had to endure.

    • Get Bent says:

      03:07pm | 22/04/11

      Good one Marilyn…then it should be people like you that should pay for all the damage they did.
      Also close Villawood down and move it to Pymble.

    • Dingo says:

      05:10pm | 22/04/11

      There were riots, fires, suicide attempts and deaths under Ruddock and Howard, so they implemented policies that stopped the boats and the problem was solved.

      Then people like Marilyn agitated for change. That change by Rudd/Gillard lead desperate people to believe if you get to Australia by boat you’re in. As a result there have been 300 deaths at sea, 50 people smashed to death on Christmas Island, 6 people who’ve died in custody and over 1,000 children in detention. The Government and the “Marilyns” should accept responsibility for the consequences of what they pushed for and the changes they made.

    • Brian Taylor says:

      05:30am | 22/04/11

      these so called asylum seekers wouldn’t ven be in detention if they came to aust the right way true???
      I paid my way here and am allowed to live here, I didn’t try to sneak in by boat.
      they have no rights just because they came here by boat none
      if they want to destory and burn things dow piss them back to where they come from

    • Dr B S Goh says:

      05:35am | 22/04/11

      @ Shane From Melbourne.

      I support your comment that Australia should withdraw from the UN Convention on Refugees. Most of our Asian neighbours are not members of this UN Convention, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_Relating_to_the_Status_of_Refugees. A few of our Asian neighbours have laws with mandatory caning of boat people.

      We should also deny the boat people Legal Aid so that they do not use more of our tax money against Australia by invoking the UN Convention.
      If they wish to the ALP and Greens Govt can continue their stupid policies on boat people without the burden of the UN Convention on Refugees.

    • Craig says:

      06:05am | 22/04/11

      Australia has an obligation to take in a certain number of refugees each year. Every time a person arrives on a boat they take the place of another who has applied through the correct channels. These people arriving on boats are economic refugees. They fly to Indonesia and then pay people smugglers large amounts of money to come to Australia. The Rudd govt changed the laws in early 2008 which effectively dangled a carrot for the people smugglers and illegal immigrants. The boats are arriving at the rate of one per week and this latest fiasco at Villawood is just another example of a system in chaos and a federal govt ideologically opposed to do anything about it.

    • Sony B Goode says:

      07:16am | 22/04/11

      What we need is mandatory repatriation. People should not be jumping migration queues.

    • thatmosis says:

      07:17am | 22/04/11

      All this waffle means nothing, the simple point is that these people have broken Australian Law and as such are no longer eligble to enter this country, simple as that. All this catawalling and bleeding heart mentality doesnt change the facts that these people are no longer acceptable in Australia. The Government set a precedent last week with the kicking out of the English person who was an undisirable so lets send them all back now and thats that.

    • Karen from Qld says:

      08:58am | 22/04/11

      Gerard - those whose claims have been rejected have had a country of origin identified

    • Very Southern Cross says:

      09:12am | 22/04/11

      Erick is right.  It is time to revoke the UNHCR 1951 Convention and the even worse 1967 Protocol which takes away the rights of Australia to even chose who it can accept.  These Resolutions are not binding as the Israelies know by continueing to build in the Occupied Territories.  There is no reason why Australia should not stand up to Resoutions which wre made in another Century, another time with different problems.

    • POW says:

      09:15am | 22/04/11

      The Refugee Industry is alive and well, hand wringing and whinging about arsonists who torch their free bed and lodgings and now will complain theyi don’t have a recreation area.  What would Weary Dunlop have do;ne in the same circumstances?

    • Si Kiatrist says:

      09:24am | 22/04/11

      Erick and Mark, I don’t think Julie lied, she just sat on;the fence too long and now has a split personality.

    • Major Tom says:

      09:27am | 22/04/11

      Why aren’t the young male Afgahns in the understaffed army and fighting for their country’s freedom instead of running away like frightened dogs.  If the ANZACS had done that, we may not be living in a free Australia.

    • marley says:

      10:01am | 22/04/11

      Because Afghanistan isn’t a functional country.  The young males might be prepared to fight for their tribe, but hardly for a government which oppresses their tribe.

    • Adam says:

      12:39pm | 22/04/11

      @ Marley - “Because Afghanistan isn’t a functional country”. If we all thought like that we’d still be in the stone age. There is nothing stopping these people fighting to make their country better.

    • Ground Control says:

      10:29am | 23/04/11

      These young male Afghans didn’t ask the coalition to go into their country and create the mother of all shit fights.
      This is not their war, it is ours. What part of that are you having problems understanding?
      Moron.

    • marley says:

      11:55am | 23/04/11

      @Adam - I agree - but the reality is, Afghanistan has never achieved any kind of functional, egalitarian government in its history.  When left to their own devices, the government inevitably disintegrates into tribally based rivalry, even warfare.  So most Afghans don’t have any loyalty to Afghanistan as such, just to their particular tribe.  And it’s now wonder, after 30 years of pointless tribal struggles, young Afghans are unlikely to feel that their government represents them or is worth fighting for.  At the same time, they don’t want to fight for the Taliban.  So, they flee. It’s a pretty human reaction, I think.

      @Ground Control - not sure who you’re calling a moron, but chew on this:  isn’t it odd that the number of Afghan refugees dropped radically after the allied intervention, as millions of Afghans went back home.  The number of Afghan refugees worldwide is still well below the level it reached in the last year of the Taliban regime.  So it would seem, quite a few Afghans were in fact quite pleased to see the allies arrive and force the Taliban out.  .

    • Southern Very Cross says:

      09:31am | 22/04/11

      The original UN Convention let Australia accept people from war torn Europe after WWII and theyi were from a western society.  The new refugees come from an entirely different cultural background and have belief systems which do not or cannot assimilate into the Australian culture, for better for worse.  The UN Protocol of 1967 prevents the Government from chosing suitable refugees to settle here and this is the Resolution from which we must withdraw unless we want to have the same problems of UK, France and other countries.

    • Blame Rudd & Ju-Liar says:

      10:09am | 22/04/11

      This is purely the fault of the GLI (Greens/Labor/Independent) party. They wrecked Howard’s effective ‘boat people’ policy and now we have to pay for it.

    • pj says:

      10:14am | 22/04/11

      to the goverment of today and any such alike in the future..only this have i to say.“How long must I have to suffer thee,are you still yet without understanding.”

    • ZMAC says:

      12:31pm | 22/04/11

      Our Aussie soldiers are over in the Middle East living in far worse conditions than these detainees, the tax payers of Australia must certainly remain angry when they see these people come into the country illegally have food and lodgings and medical care air condition comfort which I may add a lot of Aussies do not even have, then to see them destroy buildings along with computers etc, just who do they think they are,  they are vandals and criminals and should not be allowed in our peace loving country, put them in shackles end send them back, and any relatives who start trouble, send them back too, we don’t need that type here.

    • Brenda says:

      12:45pm | 22/04/11

      They are not fleeing persecution. They are very safe in Indonesia, just as they were in the countries they travelled through to get that far.  Australia is not “first country of asylum” because they are not being harmed in Indonesia.
      If an Australian broke into someone’s home, trashed and burned it because his/her patience with a situation had run out, would that Australian and accomplices be jailed for arson, or would people make boo hoo excuses?
      They are paying their way into Australia for Centrelink benefits such as pensions, cheap taxpayer funded housing, free legal assistance, health care, unemployment benefit, dental services, counselling services, baby bonuses, language services, etc. while we fools are being prepared for Gillard’s budget “pain”.  She swans around the world in luxury while we pay for the illegals and their demands.  They are economic refugees.The 400 young men to be housed in Tasmania’s $15 million complex are a symbol of Julia Gillard’s lies and unconscionable dissembling. Her nonsensical pre-election promise to force East Timorese to solve her incompetent government’s self-made illegal border buster racket is only one of her litany of policy failures. But Gillard won’t do anything, because she is so far mired into irreversible policy failures she’s just serving out her time and showing off until the knife that got Rudd gets her.

    • Al says:

      01:38pm | 22/04/11

      Where are the women and children?

    • BLA says:

      09:42pm | 22/04/11

      Still in the ‘deadly dangerous’ place they ‘fled’ from - waiting to also jump a queue via the very special ‘refugee family reunion visa’, again ahead of everyone else. And to land straight into the Centrelink paradise where they will live happily ever after on welfare benefits, paid by our tax dollars… and will attempt very quickly to seek ‘their rights’ and transform this country into the place they left. These people take us Australians for what we are… the biggest fools on planet Earth.

    • AnthonyG says:

      03:59pm | 22/04/11

      We should be making these places smoke free and removing all lighters and matches. The next thing they will try will be suing us for passive smoking
      Then the can live in the burnt out buildings before being sent back.
        If they weren’t criminals before they are now

    • Jack Sparrow says:

      08:22pm | 22/04/11

      Not sorry to say - back on the boat with ye.
      Farewell from Oz. Go to one of the countries that allow illegal immigrants to mingle with society. Good luck to them all.
      Australians should not be held responsible for these people’s clear and deliberate disregard for our laws. I do not care about the fees they’ve paid to people smugglers. I do not care that they were told it was easy to get into Oz. I certainly very much doubt the majority are “political refugees” in the true sense of the word.
      There has to be a line. There has to be a way of controlling the numbers. There has to be a way to discourage the violence carried out by these people. And it is very, very simple.
      Back on the boat me hearties!

    • Jim Peters says:

      07:57am | 23/04/11

      This is a country that wants to throw citizenship at anyone and everyone. They must really have had a good reason to deny it to these people. And their actions have proven how right that decision was.  Ship them back immediately.

    • Lunatic Les says:

      01:16pm | 23/04/11

      Some people really do not get it. What right do a few people who come here have to destroy anything that is not theirs, because they are upset? No right whatsoever. They are criminals and if they supposedly weren’t in their own country, they are now and we don’t want them here.
      They have only made I harder for others who doing the right thing so they should be very proud of themselves. Now they are spending time in a jail where they will really learn what it is like to be locked up.
      We don’t want them here if this is the way they respond when thigsg don’t go their way.
      No sympathy.

    • Steve says:

      03:34pm | 23/04/11

      I’ve travelled most of the world including the places most assylum seekers come from. It can be difficult to be objective towards your own homeland but I believe Australia is a far better place to live than most of the rest of the world. Of course people want to come to Australia. You don’t come half way around the world to seek refuge. You make that trip for a better life. Most of the rest of the world would come here given half a chance. If we have policies that encourage assylum seeking then that is what we will get - people pretending to be assylum seekers in order to live in Australia. Meanwhile these “few” are causing Australian to question the whole immigration program. Actual immigrants will feel the backlash because of the few boat people.

    • Alan says:

      05:12pm | 23/04/11

      They lost me the minute they started with “We demand” - sorry but as arsonists your rights consist of serving a prison term followed by deportation. Meanwhile our fearless leader takes a trip to Japan, the mid boggles.

    • Audra Blue says:

      07:10pm | 23/04/11

      The government of my country has disgusted me with their behaviour.  These poor people spend years in detention here, waiting for visas, in spite of having close family members already here.  Their applications are dragged out for years and when they finally crack because they feel they aren’t being heard, the government treats them like criminals and rub their hands in glee at having a “legitimate” excuse to deport them back to where they came from.

      I really hate the term “un-Australian” but that’s what we’ve become.  We boast about how generous we are to the world but when it comes to actually being generous to those who need it, we act like the thugs and bullies the asylum seekers no doubt ran away to escape.

      By the government’s own admission most of these people have no documentation because of the upheaval in their own countries.  And yet they won’t grant them asylum here.

      Makes me sick to my stomach.

    • marley says:

      09:13am | 24/04/11

      Audra - these people aren’t, for the most part, recent arrivals waiting for their asylum claims to be processed.  Some of these people ARE criminals and are being deported after finishing prison sentences.  Others are visa overstayers, also awaiting deportation.  And some are people whose asylum claims have been rejected. 

      And sorry, but simply being from Sri Lanka or Afghanistan doesn’t make you a refugee.  You have to meet the criteria of the UN Convention, which involves a well-founded fear of persecution.  Fleeing chaotic conditions isn’t enough.  And neither does having family here give you an entitlement to live here - if you’re not a refugee, you’re not a refugee, no matter how many relatives you’ve got in Australia. 

      I have no issue with any asylum seeker having access to a rapid and fair determination of his refugee claim.  I also have no issue with deporting those who cannot meet the definition, or who are war criminals, or who have committed serious criminal offences.  The convention doesn’t cover any of these situations and nor should it.

    • Dazeddazza says:

      08:59pm | 23/04/11

      Sophie, what do you not understand?  The majority of Australians do not want these people arriving here by boat, expecting to receive preference to others waiting legally in a queue.  You and your bleeding heart can assist by heading off to their respective countries and telling them not to come as we are a bunch of racists here in Australia.

    • Matt says:

      10:05pm | 25/04/11

      I agree Dazeddazza. I think all the refugee advocates like Sophie, who are concerned about people being held in detention in Australia should travel to these source countries and explain to would be boat people that they will be locked up in detention for an indeterminate period of time with no prospect of permanent residency.

      Pity our current Government is too pathetic to follow through with the tough policy this requires.

    • fed up with queue-jumping vandals says:

      10:32am | 26/04/11

      Actually, we DO put people in prison before conviction. It’s called arrest, and remand in custody. Perfectly acceptable for those who (like illegal immigrants) are a flight risk.

    • TracyH says:

      12:23pm | 26/04/11

      Sophie Trevit, Marilyn Shepherd et al…OK, I hear you about the legal/illegal argument. Can you please spell out what exactly it is that we should do with asylum seekers while we check them out? What if they have transmittable diseases etc/ What if they are war criminals (taliban or whatever) ...should they be released in to the community? I really just want to see some clearly articulated responses to what we should do, if we cease to have detention. Also, would you have the same point of view if we had 500 thousand arrive? If we have no detention at all, and house the asylum seekers in the community, wouldn’t that pretty quickly result in at least 500 thousand and more arriving? Please educate me on your preferred solution, including projected outcomes for any such proposal. Thanks.

    • TracyH says:

      12:23pm | 26/04/11

      Sophie Trevit, Marilyn Shepherd et al…OK, I hear you about the legal/illegal argument. Can you please spell out what exactly it is that we should do with asylum seekers while we check them out? What if they have transmittable diseases etc/ What if they are war criminals (taliban or whatever) ...should they be released in to the community? I really just want to see some clearly articulated responses to what we should do, if we cease to have detention. Also, would you have the same point of view if we had 500 thousand arrive? If we have no detention at all, and house the asylum seekers in the community, wouldn’t that pretty quickly result in at least 500 thousand and more arriving? Please educate me on your preferred solution, including projected outcomes for any such proposal. Thanks.

    • Danice says:

      09:30am | 17/10/11

      That addresses several of my concerns atculaly.

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Anthony Sharwood

Dementor doing a good job for sweden #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

Ukraine song pinches chord progression from The Verve's Bittersweet Symphony. Fo real #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

RT @GerardDaffy: @antsharwood all the talk over there is the grannies will win.they entered to get a church built,feelgood story

Anthony Sharwood

These peole insult my grandmothjer, who was born in minsk, belarus #sbseurovision

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

An email was sent to almost every politician in Australia this week saying that someone should cut off…

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

We admire them, but we’re not entirely sure why. We allow them to operate in the shadows; we rarely…

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

Like a fat full-stop, it lay in my hand. A small orange – not exactly fresh, but purchased anyway…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter