*OK. Let's here your solution to the problem *

Foxy, there would be people in Govt who could word it far better
then I can, knowing all the legal ins and outs.

But basically that Australia stops being compelled to
take anyone who applies and happens to arrive here,
by one way or another.

Australia should agree to take whatever annual quota that
our parliament agrees on, all from refugee camps around
the world. The Minister for Immigration would be given the
power for special dispensation, in limited, unusual cases.

Short term there would be much squealing and howling, but
even countries like Indonesia would cooperate, as they know
its a problem that needs fixing.

Once it became clear that paying 10'000$ does not help to
get to the front of the queue, the boats would stop.

People won't spend money, unless they think that it is likely
to benefit them.

Yabby

Since when is an agreement legally binding if it causes harm to people?
Would a repayment contract be legally binding if it gave the creditor the right to remove digits for non-payment? Is "folllowing orders" a justification for war crimes? Do you keep killing people with faulty roofing insulation because that was what was decided? So why then can the continuing cruel and senseless killing of refugees be justified on the basis of a legally binding agreement? Clearly such an agreement is void if it is shown to be harmful. How many tens of thousands have died already? More than enough I think.

Lexi,

Simply reverse the policy changes they made to appease the greens.

As i showed, the relaxation lead directly to the increase in boats. the restoration of the off shore processing and TPVs will slow the boats considerably.

Yabby and Shadow Minister:

From everything that's said on both sides of the political spectrum regarding this issue it seems that no one has a solution to this complex problem. Scott Morrison )opposition spokesman on immigration argues that the outlook is brighter now that more countries are, like
Britain, signing up to refugee resettlement. However, when asked if he seriously expects Britain - where refugees are a huge political issue - to take people off Australia's hands? his reply was, "No."
"So what other country will?" His reply, "In government, I would approach the issue in a positive frame of mind." "And would those who could find no country to accept them end up in Australia?" His reply,
"There are too many hypotheticals in that proposition." The problem appears huge, if it was that simple, I'm sure that things would have worked out by now, but they haven't. Anyway, Thanks for your inputs,
I'll keep my fingers-crossed that an acceptable solution is found sooner than later - that will appease everyone. Before I forget- Have a Merry Christmas, and a Great New Year (you too Bazza, I'm sorry if I annoy you - frankly, I don't have the answers, I simply read and quote what the "experts" have to say on the topic and then I go with my gut feeling on the issue).

Fester, I agree with you. But right now, all that needs to happen
is for people to sail from Indonesia to Christmas Island and they
become our problem, due to us signing an agreement 60 years ago,
that was meant to deal with the Jews fleeing Germany etc.

At that time, the German Govt had declared war on jews. Today's
issues are more tribal and ethnic. Hazaras live in Afghanistan,
Tamils live in Sri Lanka, Kurds live in Iraq. Their Govts have
not sentenced them to death. Yet under the convention any of these
people can seek asylum due to the loopholes that exist.

So we create expectation, by what we have signed and agreed to.
There are formal processes in place, by which we can change that.

Its not just a problem here. Tony Blair and his Govt understood
the problem and felt it needed dealing with. But everyone in
Western politics is to chicken to address it, fearing all the name
calling from our feelgood brigade.

There are a whole heap of boats, trying to get from Africa to
Europe. Many sink, people die regularly.

Most of this would change, if the UN convention would finally
be brought up to date, and expectations were not raised, as they
are now.

Lexi et Al,

A final thought on the boats. Australia has a quota for refugees of 13500 p.a. so every boat refugee accepted displaces a far more needy person elsewhere.

As we clearly cannot accept all the millions of desperate displaced people, the choice is clear. Do we give preference to those that can afford the $15000 to get a boat place, or do we take back the agenda from the smugglers and give the most needy a place?