Refugee advocates say that there is no such thing as a queue of people wanting to come here. That must mean that they see no difference between people whose lives are in danger and those who would prefer to live in a decently run country.

A report a few days ago that about 50 people are missing after flying from Palestine to Indonesia then engaging "smugglers" to bring them to W.A. highlights the fact that people see that it is better to pay much more than an airfare to come in that way. Most arrivals appear to be Moslems who one would think would be quite secure in the world's largest Moslem country.
We are indeed seen as a nation of simpletons to allow the present situation to occur.

As has been pointed out, about the only group in Australia that still supports onshore process is the greens, and that says a lot about the greens.

Kerry Murphy has one valid point to make in that there is no immigration queue. Quite so, the analogy is closer to a crowd at the gate, all hoping to get in, and by coming here illegially the boat people are, in effect, forcing their way to the front of the crowd. Thjey should not be given an advantage in the immigration crowd, simply because they have the money to come illegially.

Thanks to immigration quotas, as noted by other posters, exactly the same number of refugees come whatever happens.

Murpy is simply pushing her own barrow with this article, and should have known better than to write it.

We learned fairly recently that "ONE" of the criminal cartel of people smuggling criminals, came here as a supposed refugee; and then outrageously, got his family transferred under our family reunion policy!
We know why he threw all his identifying documentation overboard! He like others had something to hide!
We have a law that basically refuses entry to known/proven criminals!
Both Malaysia and Indonesia aren't signatories to the UN human rights charter. Designed in the fifties to ensure we never ever again turned our collective backs on criminal genocide, like that which occurred in the Nazi death camps.
Given a very different world and the way this charter is being patently manipulated by criminal organisations, perhaps we should abandon it?
We should still offer sanctuary/TPV's to genuine asylum seekers, always providing they arrived with some verifiable documentation or able to satisfy the rigours of space age lie detection tests.
As temporary residents they would be free to work assiduously to improve their permanent residency prospects.
Learn English, attend free TAFE/UNI courses to upgrade or learn new skills?
We could vastly shorten the so called queue or waiting time, by immediately repatriating those who arrived without identifying documentation; and or, then failed triplicate space age lie detection tests?
We need to stop people drowning themselves and or family members, by paying criminals to transport them.
I mean, it would probably be cheaper/quicker/safer, to travel by plane on a legitimate tourist visa! Then claim asylum on arrival?
This means would also prevent the applicant from being processed offshore?
Those like the Author, a paid advocate, who earns income from irregular arrivals? Clearly already knows this? Which makes a complete nonsense out of her evocations, for the continuance of illegal trade of people smugglers, and its often extremely sad results?
Rhrosty.

If there isn't a que Kerry there damn sure should be, starting on the other side of the world, where we can chose who we give our help to.

Far from the assertion that the report recommends harsh treatment of these gate crashers, it in fact is far too soft in it's recommendations. If these clearance centers were built of old army tents, with limited facilities it would be about what most receive around the world.

I noticed in the report of the condition of the facilities, all the units had air conditioning. This is ridiculous. I & most of the people I know can no longer afford to run the airconditioning we have bought & paid for, with hard earned after tax money. Hell, I can't afford to run a heater either.

Interesting that we are paying for gate crashers airconditioning when we can't afford the power to run ours.

This is because of a government grasping every bit of money it can in taxes to pay for it's mistakes. Treating gate crashers as worthy folk is one of their biggest mistakes. Hopefully the next one will listen to it's citizens, not noisy people out of step with the majority.

The whole point of policy on boats should be to shut down the people smuggling trade which will happen if asylum seekers know that getting on a boat will not get them into Australia ahead of other refugees.

Had Rudd/Gillard not dismantled the Howard Pacific Solution in 2007, we would probably still have no significant smuggler trade, and no more deaths at sea. Having dismantled the Pacific Solution, the Gillard Govt has a mighty job to get the Genie back in the bottle. It can be done though.

1. Offshore processing: The benefit of offshore processing is that it is a deterrent. If asylum seekers know that they will be assessed offshore, and not allowed into Australia unless they meet stringent requirements, they will be less keen to get on the boats.

2. TPVs: An important element of the policy. Again, it is a deterrent in that it is designed to assist asylum seekers avoid immediate peril, but provides that should things in their homeland return to normal, they will be returned. TPVs should not be used by genuine refugees seeking permanent residency in Australia. Those refugees should apply under other programs.

3. Turn back the boats: Given Indonesia's policy, and the recent tendency of the smugglers to scuttle their boats, the turn back the boats policy has problems. A possible solution might be for Australia to lease from Indonesia an uninhabited island (there are plenty near the zone of activity) and install a wharf and initial processing centre. Then boats can be intercepted, and escorted to the island. Or rescued people can be taken there for initial processing.

To be continued......

.... Continued.

Those elements constitute the effective Pacific Solution of the Howard government. Today additional measures will be needed.

4. No entry without documents: Many asylum seekers throw away their passports, licences, and their mobile phones. This creates a problem for Australian authorities, since it is difficult and expensive to identify the people, and check out their stories. The right policy would say that if you arrive in Australia without documents, you will be sent to an offshore processing facility until your identity can be established and your story checked out. Given limited resource, that course of action could take years.

Be aware too, that we may require you to pass lie detector tests and to give up DNA samples so that your story can be checked out. If you are found to be lying, then you forfeit any chance of being admitted to Australia.

Some people will genuinely not have documents. They should be encouraged to approach Australian Embassies, Consulates, and Rep Offices (in 131 countries) to explain their situation. If convinced, officials would give them temporary ID papers to enable them to enter into processing.

5. Publicity program. Australia needs to publicise its policy on people smuggling widely, in many languages. It should explain that there are limited places for refugees and asylum seekers (currently 13,500, though likely to increase) and that there are many more applicants than places. As well, there are many refugees and asylum seekers who have been approved who are waiting for a place.

Asylum seekers need to understand that those arriving by boat will not have any advantage over refugees and asylum seekers that have followed proper process through UNHCR systems and the like.

There may be other measures that could be implemented. However, if the Australian government, and particularly the frontline officials, promulgate and implement such policy, we would soon see the people smuggling racket shut down.

Having said all that, we must ensure that genuine asylum seekers and refugees are catered for in a humanitarian fashion. The frontline, though, should be Australian Embassies, Consulates and Rep Offices rather than Christmas Island.