What a dopey bloody article.

'Australia exports its draconian immigration system'

No it didn't. Europe adopted Australia's policy... because it worked.

When was the last leaky boat full of queue jumping illegal immigrants sighted off Australia's coastline?

Come on be fair dinkum and then ... well tell us why they've stopped.

So the Europeans have finally woken up to the fact real and effective action is needed to stop such criminality.

But of course the biased author with his tired and jaded ideas won't have a bar of that ... it's far too obvious and simple to be true.

Oh goody, another member of the Chardonnay left is here to tell us how wonderful multiculturalism is (all those fab restaurants, doncha know) and berate us about the guilt trip these morons are into. Immigration levels in this country are simply too high, we don't have the arable land (fast disappearing under concrete, tarmac and lawns) nor the water to support the riduclous levels foisted on us by successive governments. I'm no fan of Johnny H, but he did right as far as illegal immigrants are concerned (although I have to say, some of the decisions took forever, regarding illegals' status, not helped by our legal system). As many have pointed out, the supply of illegals dried up. Nobody forced these people into leaky boats- it was the thought of an easy ride at the other end that did it. Similar situation in Europe. Finally they've woken up, probably too late though- their countries and cultures have been riddled from within.

Disabuse me of this silly notion if possible, but I've always thought that negative gearing increased the number of properties available for rent? One of the reasons Keating did a turnabout when he thought to get rid of it (decreased rental property numbers).

I get mighty peeved when I return to the city/suburb of my birth/childhood and see migrants with no visible means of support (i.e. they don't work) living in houses I can't possibly afford despite receiving a fairly decent wage. On top of that, I get the looks from the inhabitants of some of these suburbs along the lines of "what are you doing in MY territory, dirty infidel"?

Bloody Hell Keith!
Come storming in here with your common sense and logical approach evidencing rationality and presence of mind! What the hell are you thinking?

(lol!)

You're obviously not wearing your idiot chip today, are you? I forgot to wear mine as well. Never fear though, the rant chanters are still amongst us.

Let's paraphrase and take poetic license with that movie, "The Sixth Sense"

"...I see dumb people...They're everywhere!...They walk around just like everybody else...They don't even know they're dumb!..."

rpg

<<The current ALP government can dismantle the detention centres because the policy worked, the boats stopped.>>

A falsehood also perpetuated by Mr Right. Most detainees arrived by plane - but leaky boats make better media stories.

<<Europe is adopting the policies because they worked.>>

International Herald Tribune 28 may 2008: President Sarkozy announced that on July 1 France would open its borders to all workers from eight countries that joined the European Union four years ago. Only Britain, Ireland and Sweden threw open their borders immediately; France has been among the most reluctant to open its frontiers. http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/05/28/europe/france.php

Mr. Right,

<<Illegal entrants and visa over stayers were the only people detained.>>

The word 'illegal' is misused. People who arrive in Australia seeking asylum do so legally under international law. They are gaoled without committing a crime.

What sort of argument are you running by reference to 'the loony left' (and encouraging plerdsus)? Lazy cliche can't replace logic and evidence. And 'left-leaning Europe and, especially France'? When was the last time you looked at European governments' political leanings?

Lots of Australians were ashamed of the inhumane treatment of asylum seekers and public opinion led to the significant Rudd changes.

daggett,

While not conceding your immigration figures are wrong, you now add natural increase to immigration to try to make an argument about...something.
<<To deliberately increase our population to this extent in these circumstances criminally reckless in my view.>> Colourful language, but is this an argument for abortion or forced repatriation?

Trakka,

What's to be done with our 1,000,000 Australians who are 'freeloading' to use your term in other countries? Hope none of them drowned on the way.

plerdsus,

<<... entry by an alien into a country without leave constitutes invasion, and needs to be treated accordingly.>>

Know anything about the history of Britain? You obviously are totally ignorant of Australia's invasion history.

We may not be able to change 'human nature' (magic words), but you're right about the ballot box - as Kim Beazley found out in 2001, and John Howard found out in 2007.

"President Sarkozy announced that on July 1 France would open its borders to all workers from eight countries that joined the European Union four years ago. Only Britain, Ireland and Sweden threw open their borders immediately; France has been among the most reluctant to open its frontiers.

The relevance of this to illegal immigrantion is what, exactly? Your quote above specifically mentions opening borders to other EU members, not every failed state in Africa or the Middle east.

France would probably be reluctant to throw open its borders because it has enough problems with indigestible immigrants, let alone additional Europeans who are generally from the former Russian bloc. Britain and Sweden are already close to stuffed from unregulated immigration.

Maybe some countries think they have a big enough population already and might like to find employment for their existing citizens?

There is certainly an environmental imperative to limit Australia's population at the present time, but there is no justification to do for economic purposes. Our economic worries relate far more to easily accessed credit, a culture of living on credit, and our link to the global sharemarkets subsequent exposure to problems in other countries. Nothing to do with immigration.

The point here is that we have a global economy, and consequently a globally mobile population who will follow the money. This is human nature, and we see it in our own country where people are flocking to the West to take advantage of the mining boom where the pay is good and there are not enough people to fill the positions.

Also, keeping 'them' out is not a viable long-term strategy as it this is likely to increase the long-term chances of instability in other our and other regions through competition for scarce money and resources, unless we are prepared to signficantly increase out overseas aid program and help foster the expansion of the economies in developing countries. This, of course, is likley to put increasing pressure on our own economies through more competition from cheaper overseas imports.

Another option is to put up the shutters in the futile hope that we will be shielded from negative impacts because 'it's not our problem'.

But let's be real here. Immigrants are, and always have been, an easy target. Always easy to blame society's ills on 'them'.

(puts hands over ears)
La la la la la la!