diver dan:>>…Maybe that is a category to be included into our processing procedures in Australia with some vigour. This is one for Abbott to solve soon. My bet is, he will be no more successful than Labor or the Italians. Get ready for the lies<<

DD, you approach the solution as if it not fathomable. This is not one for Abbott to solve, Howard solved it and it is sitting ready to be implemented again, the Pacific solution. Sitting on Nauru with no status other than to be processed stopped the fly then cruise illegal’s before.

Hey, that's not the way to refer to a lady!

(assuming you are a gentlemen, Shadow Minister)

You should be aware that direct accusations are impolite - the correct way is to just say: "The party is over, Madam".

Do the voters have the same emotional energy to reach the heights of hysteria as does Tony Abbott and his colleagues - who offer no solutions only empty promises. I think not. I wonder how successful will Tony Abbott be in convincing the Senate to roll back the carbon "tax" if he is elected? Is a broken promise worse than an
empty one? Besides, most voters remember only too well the broken promises of John Howard (35 and counting). Voters came to learn over those years that election promises are simply self-destructing statements made during election campaigns. Following the election the promises self-destruct because either the promise becomes inoperative "due to changed economic circumstances," or the promise is found to have been so cunningly worded that it did not mean what it said and careless voters misunderstood the terms of the original promise. The law of obfuscation or "That wasn't what I said." All political statements whether by government or opposition, must be worded so that the opposite meaning can be extracted from them. But then Shadow Minister knows this - once again he's merely stirring.
Tony Abbott (if elected) will definitely get rid of the carbon "tax," he tells us. That should of course read - subject to the state of the economy, if the Senate lets him, if he doesn't have more important things to do, if it suits the international bankers, and mining companies, and if there is no more important measure necessary to win the next election.

Sonofgloin:

…Panic is no option to a universal problem others can’t solve; Gillard fell into that trap with the East Timor solution , so too will Abbott with an oversimplified solution imposing on the generosity of others, as the Pacific solution did.

…Labor Government is accepting 90% of illegals into Australia. Howards Pacific solution accepted 30% of illegals into Australia, 30% were accepted in other countries and 30% were returned home.

…So it appears that on the surface of it, the problem is not that the Pacific solution was particularly successful, but that the entry criteria is the problem. Thus, my suggestion to align our criteria with the Italians, is one small answer to a growing part of a universal problem we are unlikely to solve humanly

Diver dan,

By comparison, the pacific solution had less than 3% of the asylum seekers of the Juliar solution.

If the pacific solution was not a success then Labor's answer is an abysmal failure.

Shadow Minister:

...The objective problem is simply the number of Illegals with successful entry applications, under Gillard, 90%; under Howard, that figure was 40% (sorry, I did state 30% above). But the reason behind those figures belies the truth: During Howards Pacific solution 2001-2007, the global incidence of legitimate refugees fell by 50%, which puts to question the success of Howards Pacific solution.

...Let’s string the words together....The Pacific solution has not passed a legitimate test of success, and remains the stuff of “smoke and mirrors”; remains unproven and is a touted, oversimplified solution.