fester it is unfortunate that people smugglers are one of very few options available to people seeking asylum. But where should these protective enclaves be? We keep expecting other countries to shoulder the burden of refugees. Most will never be resettled. If you could get out I am sure you would. Obviously a boat trip is a life risk but for people without choices it is the best of the worst. Why do we expect people to sit in a camp in danger while we argue about super profits on mining taxes?

It wouldn't lead to more reliable processing and the problem is not processing it is resettlement places, there are nowhere near enough. Many in Indonesia now have been processed by UNHCR, it is no more reliable that our more elaborate processing systems. This research gives some insight into why staying in Indonesia is not a good option http://allafrica.com/stories/201006040762.html
I have to take issue with the idea that asylum seekers on boats are wealthy... Deals with sumgglers to work off the money on arrival are common now, or part payment now and rest later, and all the other complex scenarios. every case is different. we only have a little number of refugees coming here, people need to look outside and look at solving some of the problems that cause people to come.

and on the subject of lying and criminals. Memories are short. White australia is founded on a convict colony. Lots of anglo Australians now enjoy boasting about their convict ancestry. and we simply took up residence here on the basis that is was uninhabited, so our whole exisitence here is based on a lies. Natural I suppose to fear others acting like us.

mellom

Where should the enclaves be? Nearer the source, and I would suggest that this does lead to more reliable processing. Citing processing in Indonesia emphasises my point, as Indonesia is not the source of asylum seekers. I suggest that processing asylum seekers nearer the source is also a more efficient use of scant funds.

No-one is denying that most asylum seekers will not be resettled, but why should someone who has engaged the services of people smugglers be more deserving of resettlement than other asylum seekers? This valid perception is a major driver of the people smuggling business. The problem of resettlement is an international problem, not just an Australian problem. If people had no reason to believe that their safety and chance of resettlement were the same if they were processed locally, why would they want to engage the services of people smugglers?

"I have to take issue with the idea that asylum seekers on boats are wealthy... "

If I had no money in Melbourne and faced some sort of persecution there, what do you think might be easier for me: Seeking asylum in Melbourne or seeking asylum in Cairns? And if I weren't fit for earning an income as an illegal worker (e.g. building, hospitality, prostitution), do you think that a smuggler would be as willing to accept an iou?

My view is that the involvement of criminals in the trafficking of people has nothing to justify its support with poor policy choices.

but Fester we are not operating in a world where refugees are safe in those camps in neighbouring countries. By all means advocate for better resources to be given to the UN but at the moment its not happening and they do not process people more thoroughly than a receiving country. UN is just a replacement when countries aren't signed to the convention like Indonesia who wont do it themselves. The world doesn't really care about refugees and it becomes every man for himself.
The article about Indonesia gives a few examples of people there, about 15% are in nasty detention centres.
If you faced persectution in Melbourne you would keep going until you found safety and a future. If there was a camp in NSW that you would probably spend the rest of your life in and you would be in danger, have to pay bribes to survive, your family may be raped, wouldn't you try to get them to Cairns?
Noone on the refugee support side supports people smugglers or encourages boats but punishing people is not ok. So treating people with decency and trying to stamp out smuggling in the region is the only option, and trying to solve problems in source countries. When the world starts giving a damn people will not have to live like this. I hope you have met some of the people who come on boats and really understand just some of the predicaments they have faced.

harimen,
you presume a lot, most of which is incorrect.

Just a couple of things. Abbott is not my leader. I do not have any affiliation with any political party, nor do I support either of the major parties or the Greens. I am independant.

I do not have mates here on OLO. I put my views on various matters as I see them. Sometimes others agree with me and sometimes not, and vicky versa.

For years those supportive of the illegals have tried to paint a picture of these people being poor, persecuted and destitute. My research leads me to believe this is not the case. They are nothing more than economic opportunists, with money, who are willing to break laws, lie, cheat and buy their way to Aus. If they were truely were persecuted they would stop at the first safe haven or go to another closer country that has signed the Refugee convention.

These are the corrupt, cheating and lieing people you say we should let into our country. Not me. There are thousands of others who do not sell their soul to get economic advantage, that we can allow here.

It may well be the culture in some countries to be corrupt, but that does not mean we have to follow suit. We have bodies here, such as ICAC, to weed out and prevent bribery and corruption and most people with morals do support that. As we have seen with Tampa and Siev X some illegals are even willing to put their wives and children at extreme risk to obtain their selfish goals. I understand that there is another boat 'missing' at present. This is due to our encouragement. And you support these hazardous voyages.

By supporting the corrupt you are showing yourself to have very low moral standards. Before you presume more, I am not religous either.

"and on the subject of lying and criminals. Memories are short. White australia is founded on a convict colony---....etc etc..---Natural I suppose to fear others acting like us."

So let's get this straight Mellom; because of the fact that over 150 years ago, some of the colonies of Australia were made into PRISON colonies, PARTLY filled with convicts to which SOME Anglo-Celtic Australians are actually descended from (ignoring those who came from the rest of Europe, not to mention Asia), all the people of this country have permanently relinquished the right to put their own safety above any hypothetical criminals and turn them away from our country as penance?

I just love the petty superficialities that enter debates being seriously expected to weigh against or trump practical consideration or concerns of personal wellbeing.

But if you're willing to live under such a system to feel redeemed because your great,great,great,great,great grandpa mugged some guy in London during the 1800s, by all means knock yourself out- but kindly spare the rest of us your shallow childish rants.