The work is indeed woth it but there remains a long way to go; there have been motions put by The YOung Liberal to sanction, for example Pietro Giorgiou, and other liberal moderates for their stand on detention seekers.
The real work is to derail those zealots before further draconian policies are cooked up by these nutters. Already leading health care workers in close contact with asylum seekers have declared many of those detainees are beyond help. Their experience of detention has left them permanently scarred.
Moves by the Commonwealth to slowly leach out detainees is primarily to assuage their conscience, paint a veneer of compassion and minimise the inevitable compensation claims thes poor bastards are entitled to make.
The polcy in practice is a mere symptom of a very sick and twisted mind set deeply rooted within the souls of the conservative movement of the day - the task ahead is to exorcise those demons from our nation.

All the males left behind have to do is say that they are female, and they will be released.

Problem solved.

When are the immigration activists going to wake up to the fact that that the strongest supporters of Howard's policy on illegal immigrants are the Labor Party's heartland? When we live in a democracy the security fears that are fuelled by terrorists, many of whom are illegal immigrants (see the figures for the arrests related to the London bombings) will ensure that both political parties will follow the people's direction and maintain a hard policy on immigration. The current situation is completely different from world war 2 and the cold war, when the number of refugees we received who had any sympathy for the regime they had just left was so small it could be ignored. With so many immigrants these days being economic migrants, sympathy for Osama et al is widespread, and we will not tolerate these people in Australia. When you look at the outlook for the next 20 years, with the inevitable world-wide collapse of living standards due to the end of the age of oil and the mushrooming world population, we should thank our lucky stars that we have a sea boundary. How many years will it be before the navy uses boats carrying illegals for target practice?

Howard, one of the most important pieces of unfinished refugee humnn rights business is the failure by the federal government so far to establish proper accountability for the loss of 353 lives when SIEV X sank in Australia's border control surveillance and interception maritime zone, where our authorities had a manifest duty of care, at the height of Operation Relex, which was being supported by intelligence from a, mostly covert, onshore Australian AFP/DIMIA people smuggling disruption program in Indonesia. We cannot shrug off this huge deathtoll as old history or as nothing to do with us. It has everything to do with us.

Yet the official cover-up and lies continue. Andrew Metcalfe, who headed the Border Control and Compliance Division in DIMIA at the time SIEV X sank, has yet to address this issue as DIMIA Secretary. The AFP has given no account of what it knew about the fatal voyage of SIEV X, and when it knew it. Lists of those people who lived and died on SIEV X remain national security secrets. The Senate has passed three motions demanding a full powers independent judicial inquiry, which the government has ignored. This is a confronting issue but we must not sweep it under the carpet now. I look to refugee and human rights organisations to continue to remember SIEV X, honour its victims, and demand justice and accountability for them. This is an Australian tragedy.

How many of the 671 detainees across Australia are so-called asylum seekers, and how many are visa overstayers and criminals? The author admits that boat-arriving asylum seekers are now not the majority, but just how many people who were seeking asylum are still in detention? As the most recent bus loads of ratbags were heading to riot and destroy public property at Baxter(in support of these 'poor' detainees), Senator Vanstone advised that the people actually in Baxter were not asylum seekers but people who had, among other things, overstayed their visitors’ visas or had committed criminal offences. So, the dirty hair brigade were doing their “good” work for people who had broken immigration laws enforced by all countries and some criminals. How noble!

Despite the “tens of thousands” of self-haters who delight in making a fuss about everything Australia does, mandatory detention of anyone entering the country illegally: asylum seekers, visa over stayers and anyone else who has no right to be here, is here to stay.

PART 1
As Author in the INSPECTOR-RIKATI® books on CD I have a considerable understanding what is constitutional appropriate in certain issues.

See also my book published 30 September 2003,

INSPECTOR-RIKATI® on CITIZENSHIP
A book on CD about Australians unduly harmed.
ISBN 0-9580569-6-X

Unless and until people are going to recognise that “citizenship” has got nothing to do with nationality (regardless what the Commonwealth of Australia purports otherwise) and the only way people can be placed in Detention and/or deported is by DUE PROCESS OF LAW by State Court order only, we will continue to have the problems ongoing.

The Delegates of the Constitution Convention Debates made clear that the Commonwealth of Australia was entitled to discriminate against any race by legislating within Section 51(xxvi) against a specific race. However, they also made clear that once a person was in the Commonwealth of Australia, and not subjected to disabilities applicable to a special race, then their rights would be the same as any other “subject of the British Crown”.

Meaning, that any denial of Medicare benefits or other kind of denial for employment is unconstitutional!

Quotation Hansard 15-4-1897 Constitution Convention Debates;

Mr. GORDON: One is that everyone born in the Commonwealth
is qualified to become an elector.

As such this is yet another indirect referral that any child born in the Commonwealth of Australia is an Australian national, regardless of its parents being aliens’!

Hansard 2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates, Barton;

If we are going to give the Federal Parliament power to
legislate as it pleases with regard to Commonwealth
citizenship, not having defined it, we may be enabling the
Parliament to pass legislation that would really defeat all
the principles inserted elsewhere in the Constitution, and,
in fact, to play ducks and drakes with it. That is not what
is meant by the term "Trust the Federal Parliament."

Would it not be nice if those people, such as Howard Glenn, did bother to consider constitutional matters appropriately and perhaps their arguments may be to the benefit of all, to finally get governments to operate within the law.