Actually,

Until such time as their status has been resolved and they are given residence, they still fall under the definition of "someone who comes to live in another country without official permission" the permission being the residence permit.

Which is why the state can detain them.

Thus they are illegal immigrants. Until such time as the definition of the term illegal immigrant or the law is changed the term is still valid.

If you want to white wash the language, then feel free to bask in your self delusion, but trying to label people as racist while using the correct, but non PC term is pure propaganda.

Jennifer Wilson like anyone that has a heart, pains over the inhumane conditions of refugees coming to this country.

I regret that these cruelties cannot be avoided nor diminished until we, in Australia, succeed in achieving a truly democratic mode of governing ourselves.

At present, any one with the gift of the gab can seize constituted levers of power over ordinary people as Ms. Wilson, those who comment on her posting, me and everyone in the country.

Great help toward humanizing governance would start if people, who have the mental energy displayed by Wilson, put under observation the fundamental traits of a Politician (or anyone that vests the mantel of Privilege) and divulged the findings.

I have lived under Fascism since its inception in my country of birth and the memories that cannot be suppressed tell me that a Politician, a power grabber charlatan, cannot possibly harbor within his being any shred of humanity.

It is only when the attributes of Power are duly laundered that we can see clearly what makes of us a bunch of Bastards.

Machiavelli made an attempt at debugging the beast and the roots of his work should be critically re-examined under today light.

Light not distorted by Educational Corporations.

Shadow Minister,
They actually come under the definition of 'People seeking asylum in another country after fleeing their homeland."
It is not illegal to seek asylum in this country.
The State does not detain them because they are illegal immigrants. They aren't illegal immigrants therefore they cannot be detained as such. They are asylum seekers.

Every country that accepts asylum seekers detains them for varying amounts of time, for health and security checks, not because they are "illegal."

Every country can of course decide the term of detention - in Australia it is indefinite. In many countries it is weeks or a couple of months, then the asylum seekers are allowed to live in the community until their refugee status has been established.

Illegal immigrants are deported if and when they are caught. They have no rights to refugee status and do not go through the processes of assessment.

They are entirely separate categories.

No propaganda, neither a collusion, just a firm believer in survivor of the fittest. No help should have been rendered help to the sinking boats. This would have been the best thing to do.

Let nature take its course.

Diver Dan lambasts Christian Australia whilst the refugees move through five Islamic countries? Tell me Dan are the Islamists refugees picking their economic favourite? That would be discrimination surely? Or are these countries NOT letting them rest but moving them through?
It really annoys me when people like the diver libel Australia and Australians! Try some of this in any of the Islamist countries and see where it gets you mate?

Asylum seekers who arrive in Australia by boat are neither engaging in illegal activity, nor are they
immigrants.
The UN Refugee Convention (to which Australia is a signatory) recognizes that refugees have a lawful
right to enter a country for the purposes of seeking asylum, regardless of how they arrive or whether
they hold valid travel or identity documents. The Convention stipulates that what would usually be
considered as illegal actions (e.g. entering a country without a visa) should not be treated as illegal if a
person is seeking asylum. This means that it is incorrect to refer to asylum seekers who arrive without
authorization as “illegal”, as they in fact have a lawful right to enter Australia to seek asylum.
In line with our obligations under the Convention, Australian law also permits unauthorized entry into
Australia for the purposes of seeking asylum. Asylum seekers do not break any Australian laws simply
by arriving on boats or without authorization.
Australian.



Compared to other refugee-hosting countries, Australia receives a very small number of asylum
applications. In 2009, Australia received 6 170 onshore asylum applications, just 1.6% of the 377 160
applications received across 44 industrialized nations. Of these applicants, 2 726 arrived by boat – a
mere 0.7% of the total number of asylum applications in industrialized nations. In the same year, over
77 000 asylum seekers arrived by boat in Yemen, a developing country with a GDP per ca-pita of just
over $US1 000 (compared to Australia’s GDP per ca-pita of over $US45,000)5; and almost 1 500
asylum seekers arrived by boat in Malta, a country of less than 420 000 people.6
No. of irregular arrivals by sea, by country 2006-097
Country 2006 2007 2008 2009
Australia 60 148 161 2 726
Greece 9 050 19 900 15 300 10 165
Italy 22 000 19 900 36 000 8 700
Malta 1 800 1 800 2 700 1 470
Spain 32 000 18 000 13 400 7 285
Yemen 29 000 29 500 50 000 77 310....

And I wonder how many more next year.....