From the article: "to live on one or other of those Australian offshore islands until a place can be found for them in the ordinary offshore humanitarian migration program"

I am not quite as enamoured with this as the rest of you seem to be.

As Howard found out, there are no "offshore humanitarian migration programs". If we don't want them, they are presumably poorly educated and can't speak the language. There isn't exactly a shortage of refugees out there. It is fairly presumptuous to assume others will let us pick and choose, and be happy to take our castoffs.

Rstuart,

In the latter part of my post I was having a tongue in cheek dig at the instant solution brigade.

The bulk of the post also showed reasons why I think that the island solution will ultimately fail.

In Q&A tonight it was stated that one of the reasons Howard's policy was successful what that we ran a naval blockade which clearly discouraged the people smugglers. Not the reasons commonly given.
If that is true then the pacific solution was merely the cherry on the top.

One stated view supported my assertion that it's only a matter of time before the Indonesians close their doors and we have to do something more meaningful.

I don't believe that a permanent blockade is a viable option therefore we're back to moving deck chairs.

I am deeply concerned that we should treat everyone humanely. the reality is Australia has an the undercurrent of prejudice and fear which needs to be dealt with through sound measured leadership. Not vacillation by the govt while the opposition run around generating fear for political party gain rather than benefit to Australia.

I can see that if Rudd does take the 78 to Christmas Island, every other wanna asylum seeker will see us as the better option.

This is especially so if international shipping take note of Indonesia's reluctance. Therefore making Aus the most probable port of call regardless of where they're picked up, or simply letting them drown.

It is a no win game. I half joked about the country workers. If the objective is to move asylum seekers out of harms way it seemed a possible solution in that it reduced costs and would mollify the rabid right, albeit imperfect. What do you think?

It is pity that Gilbert and Sullivan are not still around as they could have produced a superb comic opera out of this ongoing asylum seeker/refugee/illegal immigrant/whatever imbroglio.

What all of you are missing is that Australia needs more people like a hole in the head.Whether immigrants come here via air or sea,by legal or illegal means,by the rorts of student, work or family reunion visas,by buying their way in via the business immigration program - it is all immaterial to the real issue - too many people.

To some extent bleeding hearts like you lot are comical,but you and your cohort are doing a lot of damage to Australia.A dose of reality is in order.

I am not one of those who has been taken in by the Opposition's fear and prejudice campaign. However, I am against queue jumpers and therefore against giving them visas. Not only does that mean that those in refugee camps and pushed farther back in the queue, but it also means that more and more people will use traffickers to jump the queue.

Therefore, I support Rudd's stance on the 78 Sri Lankan's. I feel he needs to take strong steps to do whatever is necessary to control and whenever possible, reject those who jump the queue via the traffickers.

One stated view supported my assertion that it's only a matter of time before the Indonesians close their doors and we have to do something more meaningful. I don't know what the answer is but I feel very strongly about not honouring queue jumpers. I can only hope that wiser heads than mine will come up with a good solution. Meanwhile, I ensure I do not listen to the Coalition's rubbish in this serious issue. I hope that Rudd will not be forced to back down in re those Sri Lankan 'bullies.'

examinator: "The bulk of the post also showed reasons why I think that the island solution will ultimately fail."

I hadn't seen your post at time. Sometimes it takes a while for me to make up mind on a topic. :(

examinator: "we ran a naval blockade which clearly discouraged the people smugglers"

Did we? I wonder if it worked as described. The obvious counter move to being towed back is to deliberately sink your boat to force the Australian ship to take you aboard. It has happened a few times, so surely it must be common knowledge that is a winner. The Viking King is graphic proof of that, if we needed any. Its possible genuine people smugglers may want to keep their boats, but surely the odds of doing that after you have dropped some people off near the Australian coast are slim.

I don't have much sympathy for claims that these people are economic refugees. The evidence is they left their own country in fear for their lives. The latest lot then found themselves in some hell hole in Indonesia where they are beaten and drink water contaminated with their own faeces. We Australian's treat them very well in comparison. Even if we corral them onto an island as the article suggests, we will feed them, house them, provide health care and educate them. If it carries on long enough we will probably even find work for them to do.

While we continue to do that, the asylum seekers will continue to cross hell and high water to come here. At least that is what I would do if I were in their position. Since the article says we should keep doing it, the essential problem remains - we are the best 1/2 way house in the region if your own house has turned into a living nightmare.

I am glad I don't have to solve this problem. I can't think of a single solution my conscience could tolerate.

Examinator
" Conversely why not let these people fill our needs as they earn money doing jobs we won't ? Harvesting picking etc. while they're waiting"

This is false, They are already doing this work along with backpackers. It is very hard to get this work if you are Australian citizen. I have been down this track and have written to the government of my experiences. The exploitation of this labour is already preferred option. When the government floated the idea of bringing in Pacific Islanders I wrote and gave proof the farmers were ignoring requests from locals for work.

So you want more competition for us that struggle while you sit in comfort. I am not happy.