Oh cry me a river .... In 'detention' all physical needs are met, there is no danger present bar to each other (and that's such a low risk because they are all such nice honest moral upstanding folk) and if they are genuine, haven't destroyed all evidence of ID, their claims will be processed within reasonable time.

And when is a "Child" not a child? When HE (I know of not a single unaccompanied female minor in detention but do correct me if such an individual exists) is obviously in very late or post puberty and has no reliable evidence to back his claims about age.

A pox on the Labor idiots who changed the legislation and opened the door for this disgusting trade to resume.

Those waiting to come here legally are really the ones who have had their human rights robbed from them. The queue jumpers have been smart enough to see that risking the lives of their kids in most cases is worth it. On top of this paying people smugglers and destroying their own documentation are small prices to pay to get all the Australian taxpayer benefits. If you have relatives waiting to come here you might be well advised to tell them to rip up their documents and catch the Bali express.

So what do you suggest ? Separate the kids from their parents ?
No ?
Just let the parents out as well !

Which rain shower did you come down in ?

Jo, I notice that you don't make any reference to the fact that most of the asylum seekers arriving by unauthorised boats have taken a decision to destroy all of their identifying documentation.

That action means that it is very difficult for Australian authorities to establish just who these people are, where they come from, and even how old they are. That dramatically increases the cost and time required to establish those basic facts. Contrast that with those who arrive by air, who simply can't come into the country without passports and other documentation.

What do you suggest we do with these unknown queue-jumpers? Release them into the community? Really?

Its all very well having a bleeding heart towards parents that expose their kids to danger, throw away their documents, effectively committing fraud in their attempts to get into Australia. Don't the parents have some responsibility in all this?

And what about the legitimate refugees in refugee camps around the world who are unable to get into Australia because their places have been given to the queue-jumpers?

It just shows how low our educational standards have fallen if people like Jo Coghlan can slip under the radar & distribute nonsensical crap. She'd be much better off if she wrote about those who create the problems she blames us for. Why not go & join the Taliban et al & talk them out of causing this misery. Why not publish her stuff in those countries ? Why always criticise those at the end of the trail instead of those who start it ?

I know of no individual in mandatory detention for twenty years? Which the patently misleading headlines seem to suggest?
We must retain the right of all other sovereign nations, to make and enforce our own rules and regulations!
We already have examples of Pakistanis and others, claiming to be displaced Afghans and others, in order to obtain refugee status? Surely we must keep these fraudsters under lock and key, until their identities and claims are completely validated or disproved.
It wasn't Labour who created this queue; or its unavoidable duration. But rather the entirely recalcitrant opposition, which killed offshore processing by refusing to pass the only legislation on the table, that would have achieved that.
The Malaysian solution may not have been everyone's cup of tea, but at least it didn't include automatic mandatory detention!
While one can agree to shorter mandated detention, it still needs to be long enough to allow routine health and properly validated identity checks.
Even then, no automatic family migration outcomes should be able to progress until or unless citizenship is formerly acquired. Furthermore, successful applicants ought to be obligated to live and work in rural and regional Australia, rather than ethnic ghettoes inside already over populated capital cities.
I see that there is a proposal already on the table to allow intending asylum seekers to be released into the custody of paid sponsoring families or entities, who then will become entirely responsible for all health, employment and mandated compliance outcomes?
So, the author's knowledge needs some serious updating?
Moreover, we simply must return claimants, who are found to be carrying incurable transmissible diseases, like say, cerebral malaria or hugely mutated HIV, which is no longer able to be treated by any conventional means and already a problem overseas?
Sorry, but normal quarantine outcomes must still apply and or can't ever be eased or disregarded, least we import a potential population threatening epidemic!
When medical science has progressed to the point, where we can safely and routinely cure these and other similar medical problems, these outcomes could be reviewed and perhaps reversed. Rhrosty.