Why would you think that we would rig the results? I notice you haven't bothered to vote - that's a good way to ensure there is an overwhelming vote one way.

Petro, don't let the Davo's of this forum with his pathetic and cynical view take you off the path. I was finally, for the first time in a lot of years, proudly Australian, rather than having my head forced down the "cesspit, but greaaaaaat, toilet economy" of this govt. Maintain the rage, and it may get you somewhere. Thanks for the bill, whatever your reasons may be.

Don't be swayed by racist and ill-informed people who don't know their facts such as gw, Divergence and Davo their comments aren't worth reading. You are taking a desperately needed step showing humanity where it is badly needed and I wish you every success with your Bill. Good Luck Petro there are many of us who are right behind you. May be one day we will be able to hold our heads up again as Australians.
Polly

All in all, a well thought out article, except for one point I must disagree with.

Women and children are as capable of being terrorists as men are, and indeed, are often recruited as terrorists because of antiquated notions that they must be innocent due to their age or sex. Religion is a powerful motivator, and this influence is not restricted to men. Women and children are as capable of strong feelings about their faith or their cause as men are. They should not be excluded from going through the same necessary checks as the men.

It is, after all, for the safety of us all.

One interesting link is: http://www.terrorismunveiled.com/athena/2004/08/women_are_deadl.html

Why does Borofkin think it would be any cheaper to get to Britain through all of Europe than to Australia? Extended families can easily raise the money for people smugglers. The main deterrent is the difficulty of getting out of detention into the community, not the cost. Why does he think I have an extravagant standard of living, when he doesn't know me? According to the New Scientist environmental footprint calculator I consume at about the European average, i.e. less than the average Australian and probably less than Borofkin.

To see the real causes of world poverty he needs to take a look at the UN Human Development Index. Countries with similar cultures group together. This gives the lie to folks on the far Right who blame it all on race, as racially different people with similar cultures group together, as in Latin America, but also gives the lie to the those on the Left who want to blame it all on us. First World elites are equal opportunity exploiters. If he then looks at an environmental footprint site like Redefining Progress, he will find that there aren't enough resources to give everyone even a very modest European standard of living, even if all the resources were shared equally. Finally take a look at Harvard economist George Borjas' site (www.borjas.com): an 8.9% cut in real wages for unskilled US workers between 1980 and 2000 due to immigration, a lot of it illegal.

Penekiko, don't worry about Petro Georgiou's future. The business elite will reward him for intentionally or unintentionally giving them the open borders they crave - bigger domestic markets, sky-high real estate prices and lots of cheap, easily exploitable labour.

I applaud Petro Georgiou, and his Liberal supporters, for the stance they have taken on the issue of mandatory detention. I'd like to make a couple of comments:

Someone in a previous post said that,under Petro's bills, asylum seekers would be able to come to Australia and, after a year in detention, be released into the community permanently. This is not true.

What would happen is that asylum seekers would be able to appear before a Judicial Assessor(probably a retired judge). The judge would examine whether it is necessary to detain each person on the basis of these criteria
- are they a danger to the public?
- are they likely to abscond while their visa application is determined or – if unsuccessful – to avoid being removed from Australia?

This means that asylum seekers would be released only if they met these conditions, and, importantly, only whilst their asylum claim was being assessed. They would not be released on any permanent visa,but a bridging visa. If they came to the end of their assessment process and were unsuccessful, they would be deported. This seems like a very reasonable approach to me.

Onto the issue of people absconding. I don't think most Australians realise that it is only asylum seekers who arrive in Australia by boat who are locked up indetention. There are 8000 asylum seekers living in the community at the moment. These are the asylum seekers who arrive by plane, on a visa such as a tourist visa, and then claim asylum. They are not locked in detention, but live in the community on a bridging visa whilst their claim is processed. These people live peacefully in our community. We have no problems with thousands of them absconding (the 'absconders' are usually backpackers from Western countries who overstay their visas).

There is no reason at all why asylum seekers who arrive by boat can't (after health and security checks) be released to live in the community along-side those who come by plane.

Go Petro! At last some common sense and decency from the Liberal party.