If Howard's policy worked then it must have also spread to those refugees heading toward Europe because that number coincidentally declined at the same time.

The simultaneous reduction in hostilities in Afghanistan and Iraq were just a happy coincidence.

I frequently see a similar relationship between rainfall and me polishing my car.

I'm sure that all the people-smugglers include updates of our legislation in all their travel brochures.

As Malcolm Fraser said - "Once you scratch the redneck nerve of a significant number of Australians as happened post-Tampa, then it becomes a political play thing and it’s very hard to put the genie back in the bottle."

Considering the recent attacks against Indian students and the recent Hey-Hey fiasco, maybe the foreign media have a point about our attitude.

If we're not prepared to live up to our obligations as a signatory to International Refugee Conventions we should at least have the courage to have ourselves formally removed from them.

Meanwhile, nobody's mentioned Turnbull's leadership for the last few days have they?

Beneath the opening satire, there are some often overlooked facts here - http://www.safecom.org.au/pdfs/boatstopper.pdf

Even back in 2005 there was disagreement about the effectiveness of the get-tough policy - http://www.theage.com.au/news/immigration/howards-boat-people-claim-rubbished/2005/07/01/1119724809508.html

TRTL,
Below are the current figures from DIAC website. You will see that the 'illegals' entering by air is about 1600 and are the equilivant catorgory to the 'illegals' that enter by boat. As I said most are sent packing ASAP. See link below.

http://www.immi.gov.au/media/publications/compliance/managing-the-border/pdf/mtb-chapter3.pdf.

There is nothing to stop any person, that comes legally, from applying for assylum, be they arrive by air or sea. They could be either passengers or crew.

I can tell you why I object to the 'illegals',no matter how they arrive. Simply because they are dishonest and trying it on. their intention is to deceive and make it difficult for our authorities by destroying their documents. They are frauds who are trying to buy their way here rather than go through proper proceedures. They think nothing of lieing and bribing their their way.

I class them the same as a bookseller trying to tell me he is interested in my kids education. Rubbish, he is only interested in selling the books!

I would certainly not give them protection or permanent residency and would simply send them back to where the boat or plane came from.

They would soon desist once they knew they would not get what they want.

There is no hatred or racism in my views, I object because they are selfish and deceitfull.

I am quite happy to receive genuine refugees from Africa, Burma, the ME or elsewhere.

Well well well, ruddy's had an idea.

He's going to slip a few 10 of millions to the "right" people in Indonesia. This will of course, be to help the poor illegals, to settle there, although we all know who will get it.

Shouldn't be to hard to find somewhere to settle them, there's half of PMG to fill up yet.

Still, if that's all it takes to stop this flood of boat people, it will be a pretty good deal, much cheeper than the Pacific solution. I'm quite sure those "right" people won't let any bleeding hearts get in the way of a flow of the folding stuff.

Well done ruddy, you've finally got something right.

Banjo, you state: "I can tell you why I object to the 'illegals',no matter how they arrive. Simply because they are dishonest and trying it on. their intention is to deceive and make it difficult for our authorities by destroying their documents. They are frauds who are trying to buy their way here rather than go through proper proceedures. They think nothing of lieing and bribing their their way."

This doesn't take into account the reality on the ground. Desperate times call for desperate measures.

The 'proper procedures' take decades. That second steketee piece I linked to indicates how brutal it can be on these people.

There's no orderly 'line'. There's no safe waiting room. In many cases, in order to apply for refugee status, people are asked to provide paperwork and evidence, however I suspect that's a bit tough given that legitimate refugess are on the run.

I'll agree that some of them are indeed opportunists. I don't think it would be a majority, by any stretch. In many cases, they have children and doing whatever it takes for your children isn't opportunism in my book.

All that being said I do agree you can't simply open the floodgates, though methods such as the Pacific Solution have failed. Utterly. They cost a fortune and they didn't work as a deterrence. Given that Ruddock was the architect of such a solution, it's a bit rich for him to come forward now without any real new suggestions save for failed policies his own government was dismantling when they were in power.

Andrew,

Keith writes: “Come on now [ Andrew] you've got all the stats, and have known leadership ... so how about suggesting a reasonable solution?”

I’ll second that Andrew.

--- A policy that lacks Italy’s & others “brutality and contempt for human survival”

---A policy that doesn’t have the “massive human damage and cost”( to refugees & Australian residents –please don’t forget the wider community).

But, an approach that still leaves us in control of our immigration settings –able to say no.

Yes indeed, I like to see that…
So how about you sketch out your blueprint?