Does Jo have any suggestions on how to stem the flow of boat people from Afghanistan who, in the main, are economic refugees?
(surveys carried out in Afghanistan prove the point)

The more accommodating we are of boat-people, the more they will come, exponentially. Something must be done deter this.

I have no problem accepting those fleeing persecution, but their case is compromised by queue jumpers seeking an economic improvement. The Malaysian solution will both remove the incentive for the latter group, and improve the lot of five times as many others.

The Gillard Government is naive to think that Malaysia sets a more valid alternative to that of a centre on Nauru. It is just the Government trying to avoid criticism from the opposition by accepting that they were wrong. Malaysia is not a signatory to the Refugee Convention, and is not a realistic alternative as a processing destination. Shame on this Government.

With the "aid" we are giving Malaysia for this "deal" the cost to Australia per asylum seeker returned is nearly $400 000, and then we take back 5. Then as soon as Juliar announces the deal, the conditions start to worsen further, with limits being placed on

There is a saying "There is a sucker born every minute."

Julia, I can sell you the Harbour bridge if you are interested.

But then there is a very good chance that this deal will also fall through, as all Juliar has is Malaysia's assurances that the asylum seekers will be humanely treated. Interestingly enough, the Malaysian ambassador insists that the existing refugees are humanely treated. REALLY? Treating boat people far worse than the coalition is not a tag the ALP wants to take to an election.

The East Timor lie managed to last nearly a year while the one sided "negotiations" dragged on. Maybe the "negotiations" will drag on until the next elections so that Labor can claim that it is at least trying.

Everything I see in this article says "bring them on, the more the merrier". Any "solution"? No.

So, Jo is saying we don't need a solution, there is no problem, just bring all who want to come, bring them directly (no boats), don't keep anyone waiting, bring them, house them, feed them, etc,... Our hearts and homes are open to all!

That's great. We don't have unemployment, or a budget deficit, a housing problem, any underprivileged (except refugees), any health care shortages, education deficiencies etc. We're so fine Jack, it's such a shame we can't just share all this with the rest of the world!

How many refugees world wide? What's our immigration policy? Do the Australian people have a say? Or, is it just multi-multi-culturalism bedlam, bring it on?

Ok, not everyone can find a queue to join to make a nice, quiet application for refugee status (with preferred placement in Oz, please), so have to pay a few thousand bucks to a smuggler to get us in the back door. Such a pity things can't be made easier.

Reality 1: Some people have to run from persecution, to bolt to the nearest refugee centre. Why isn't it possible to apply for refugee status there? No, too simple, have to go to Malaysia. Why?

Reality 2: Some people seek greener pastures, and have heard Oz is a soft touch. How to differentiate these from "genuine"? See 1.

Best Case: Give people a better reason to stay at home - political and economic reform (Tunisia?) What good is the UN? Toothless, token?

Second (or 3rd) Best: Stay at home and fight for a better deal. (Egypt, Libya, Syria, Bahrain...) Or, turn tail and run to Oz.

Oz: Migration Act should Not apply to illegal aliens; TPV's are a workable mechanism for reducing detention and keeping options open; Try like hell to bring about the Best Option (don't equivocate about ousting Gadhaffi, etc); use Malaysia or Nauru, but get the UN to do its job (and ASIO).

the second paragraph of this article had me choking.

It is costing us, the taxpayer $19,000 to fly a refugee from Malaysia to Australia.

Why? That is astonishing? $19,000 for a one way flight to Australia from Malaysia.

Why isn't that the issue?

Why are you not enraged with that Jo? Doesn't this type of waste worry you?

I think it's great we are taking the genuine refugee.

I think this exercise is just Gillard trying to show how tough she is and putting all the other quite justified objections aside that is just as disgraceful as the wastefulness.

She is absolutely unsupportable in this action and should be utterly condemned. She's a bloody disgrace. Nobody should try to explain her or her disgraceful conduct.

Jo why do you think that more important than the $19,000 one way air ticket or her sending refugees to be ill treated in Malaysia just to show how tough she is? Btw isn't that harsher than anything Howard did?

Keith,

$1,900 or $19,000 ?