Scratch, there is no such law and never has been. The law is that everyone has the right to seek asylum from persecution and the convention says clearly they do not have to stay in the first country to apply to the UNHCR.

The fact is under the law it is SIGNATORY STATES who generally assess refugee claims, not the UNHCR and the UNHCR has not got a country so they can't protect anyone.

The camps might have assistance from UN agencies but people in those camps by law have no right to come here as they already have the protection of a state.

For god's sake is it asking too much for morons to read the law before spouting racist crap?

Philip there is no such thing as an economic invader unless you count the 130,000 people on 457 visas.

We are not being invaded by refugees though and your ignorance is truly astounding.

1. we pay the UNHCR a paltry $50 million a year to help millions of urgency cases in the world and spend $2.3 billion jailing a few thousand here.

Misanthrope glad to see you are so welcoming of uninvited gate crashers.

I need some where to stay for a few years. I'll be round to move into your front room. I know you won't mind feeding me as well, I'll have spent my money on the boat fare.

Oh & don't go insulting me, or I'll put you on your ass, with a bloody nose. You won't find me gutless, just the opposite, so watch your self.

Just remember, what's yours is mine, & don't you forget it, or does that only apply to those who were stupid enough to let you in in the first place.

Dear runner,

Why do you assume I ever backed Latham?
Again, you're making wrong assumptions
and allowing your own prejudices to come
through. I thought Latham a basket-case,
and certainly did not support him.
The same way that I find Mr Abbott
not worthy of support. He may well be a
great father and husband, but that does not
qualify him to be a PM.

I found Latham's statement about
the Coalition's policies on
asylum seekers - the least intelligent
thing he said all evening on "Q and A."
It was interesting that Malcolm Turnbull
did specify that they would turn the boats
back only when and if it was "safe," to do
so. Now Turnbull is an intelligent man
and he knows that dingy leaky boats are never
going to be "safe." They'll probably get
scuttled anyway before they get a chance to
send them back.
This gives the Coalition
the loop-hole they need - when they have to
explain why their policies don't work
if and when they get into government. Just like
Howard's "core" and "non-core" promises.
Politics is a dirty business. It makes the dirt
in my garden look so clean.

Dear Philip S.,

Just to clarify things for you:

The author who wrote the article I cited
earlier is a psychologist - therefore her
article is written from her professional
judgement. It's more then just an "opinion."

Cheers.

More drowning at sea, by people who invite themselves, and in so doing, push legitimate refugees further down the UNHR, waiting list!
Now, we have reinstated the Howard Pacific solution and still the boats come! Sometimes as many as three a day.
Temporary visas?
Well, given that has resulted in many gaining permanent residency, hardly a proven roaring disincentive success.
If however, arriving uninvited on a leaky boat simply resulted in automatic compulsory repatriation.
This currently highly lucrative trade in human misery, and the endlessly repeated drowning outcomes it creates, would simply cease.
But particularly if we, say, doubled our refugee intake.
Which by the way, is already one of the most generous RESETTLEMENT intakes in the world.
We need to completely control this intake, least we import the very problems, that led to these crisis situations in the first place!
Other than that, the money we could save with a vastly different approach, and an implacable resolve to control our humanitarian intake, rather than have it decided for us by an organised predatory criminal element, and the scum of the earth!
Could be invested into giving those looking here for a viable future, instead, able to create a better one, in their respective homelands.
Rhrosty.

Good old Marilyn, the moral bellwether of the immigration debate.

Over 90% of the illegal boat-people are muslims; here are some of your non-invading refugees Marilyn:

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/sydney_muslims_tell_60_minutes_the_near_beheaded_lee_rigby_was_a_dog/