http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/gillard-turns-to-howards-pacific-solution/story-e6frf7jo-1226050819450

The last month when Julia Gillard's immigration policy has clearly gone up in flames, and her East Timor promise has sunk without trace, in a move spurred by desperation, she looks to abandon the pacific solution that Labor has long scorned.

Re branded temporary protection visas also look likely to make a re appearance.

Welcome to the real world.

Meanwhile, the person who is most responsible for reopening this terrible onshore asylum-seeker wound has effectively sidestepped the whole caboodle and become entrenched in a very cushy job…. which he utterly doesn’t deserve.

He should have been booted clean out of the country for that almighty stuff-up.

So now the desperate Laborites are… um…desperate to do something about this situation… and yes, they can see that the only real solution, short of just turning the boats around, or sending the vast majority of asylum seekers home under a much tougher interpretation of a refugee, is just what Howard did.

The sooner this is done, the better.

Chris Bowen's quote from last year

'The Pacific solution was a cynical, costly and ultimately unsuccessful exercise introduced on the eve of a federal election by the Howard government.'

What a shameless Government. Continuing to eat humble pie does not deter them.

There has been no back flip by PM Gillard.

What she proposed was a assessing centre in the region that had the backing of the UN on refugees.

Timor was investigated as an option. This now appears unlikely and other similar countries are being looked at.

It has been known for some time that New Guinea was interested. Nothing new has occurred. This option is not the same as Nauru.

What I question is the need for further action. The number of refugees coming by boat has more than halved in the last year. The reality is that the problem will solve itself over time, when conditions in the countries they are fleeing from improve.

Flo,

I was a Labor supporter -

Labor was full of criticism the whole set-up involving Nauru - the Pacific Solution (what a chilling term) and "offshore processing" in general before they gained power.

They've been desperate and dateless ever since - and have resorted to cruising the curbs of our poorest neighbours looking for succour.

In almost every aspect of governance and and style of policy formation they are indistinguishable from the Liberal Party...ie, they take their cues from populism and are media driven entities. They both resort to dog-whistling when it suits their agenda.

How disappointing that in this day and age we have two clones vying for government - with neither brandishing a skerrick of wise leadership between them.

Good morning Australia.
As the newly appointed leader of the Australian Labor party I wish to say I am sorry.
Sorry that we reacted to polls and opposition confrontation.
That we appeared to place little value on good policy's and stick to them.
I understand we have been all over the shop on many issues.
That we in doing so took your eyes, and yours ,off the oppositions true intentions and hollow promises.
I too beg for forgiveness, truly, that our great party,lead by fear, failure and cronyism at times, feared the growth of the greens more than our own fate.
This morning is day one.
I undertake these changes, we will stop the boats, UN or no UN Australia will decide who comes here,it is unfortunate that we have gone out of our way to help those who can afford to pay criminals to travel here. .
Further climate change, I forgive Australia,I too am having difficulty in understanding what our policy is/are will be has been.

continued

As a result of the ETS becoming a tax,the fog over just what Australia can do about global warming it is my party's intention to stop implementation at this time.
Firmly of the belief a majority, on both sides of politics understands global warming is real, we intend a referendum to be held at the next election.
As you are aware this government changed leadership after the opposition did so,and our polling fell ten points.
I have met with the opposition leader, we agreed the country comes first.
Commitments have been made, now and after the election to come both sides agree in the upper house to give reasonable passage to each others bills in order to see majority views rule our country.
My government reminds Australia while we are now back on track we undertake to stay there and on voting remember the greens had the power to implement an ETS and failed.
Good evening.
The man/woman Australia awaits.

there is a simple solution
build camps..at their own country

house them on the land from which they fled
with aussie passports..and aussie protection
giving them a safe home base
in their own land

think like santuray at a church
or diplomatic [refugee] protected* status

ps note there was a damming report on the rate of employment
and trouble fitting in...see 7.30 report from yesterday

Me again as new Labor leader I have been asked to consider the opinions of all Australian voters.
Including those who vote for my party, [it is true we often take them for granted].
Refugees has become a point that divides many Australians, some even claim we do not need to grow our population.
But while that debate is not supported by either side of politics we need to consider rules for refugee in take.
A future election will include as well as a referendum on climate change a questionnaire refugees.
You will be invited to contribute your views.
Government will also be proposing legislation to allow voters to vote one vote one value as is the case in some state elections.
If supported by majority in both houses and the public it will be implemented.
You will then have these choices, vote for your candidate and have your vote expire or put your preferences down and have them counted.
An end to candidate who finishes third winning the seat should be a result of such changes.
Before the election next month all refused refugee status will have been removed from Australia.
All camps, except those holding people yet to go before courts for appeal or sentence for crimes will be empty.
yours the person Australia is waiting for.

Juliar's humiliation is now nearly complete.

As the previous shadow minister for immigration Juliar was personally responsible for drawing up the Labor immigration policy. As with other policy ideas, this is proving to be a complete disaster.

"With the Gillard government's apparent decision to resume sending asylum seekers who arrive by boat to Manus Island in Papua New Guinea, there is little beyond details to distinguish Howard's supposedly inadequate policy from what Labor is planning. The principle is the same. As backdowns go, this is about as big as they get. Howard, Labor is saying, was right."

Previously I asked what are labor's values really?

The answer is whatever it takes to stay in power.

hey shadow..
how about this 'gem'?

http://www.immi.gov.au/media/publications/research/_pdf/settlement-outcomes-new-arrivals.pdf

[released sneakilly
while the presscorpse
was obessing about 'the right/royal''weeding.....destractions]

actuually that search title
turns up some great info
http://www.google.com/search?q=settlement+outcomes+of+new+arrivals+pdf

anyhow enjoy
[and give me feedback on my plan]
imprison them on their own homelands
but under our protection[as our refugies]
bringing them 'home'

so dictraiters know running away
wont avoid full truth being revealed

govt then engages with the peoples govts
[think of the boon just to intell..!
current govt intel is poor

UOG,

Interesting link. According to this we don't have enough dole bludgers and need to import them, with the majority of "asylum seekers" unemployed years later.

belly,
You might wake up from your dream soon. Why don't you implement Citizens Initiated Refenda while you are dreaming and give us democracy.

Back on issue.

It will not matter where the 'illegals' are processed, as long as we give them what they want they will keep coming.

To stop them coming we have to stop giving them permanent residence. Simple, after many years the previous government discovered this.

Remove the right for them to bring out their family mambers and they will stop trying to come here. This can be done by denying them PR or by altering the conditions of PR to exclude 'family reunion'

We allow over 90% in because we cannot establish there identity and nationality, so why not state those without bona fide passports and papers will never get PR.

This government has this problem because it placed ideology before pragmatism and thousands are now here and 200 have drowned. Good intentions do not always work.

banjo...id papers..is a sore/point
with many frightend people
[see so called check points often seize their 'papers'

best we globally circumvent this issue
by using eye scans...and fingerprints

even dna samples...[by licking a stamp..]
and sealing it..onto their papers

they need only declare their problem's
and we figure it out for them

[if they arnt in the global id scam]
then we give them the id..stating what they say to be true

any liers will be returned to where they claim to come from
immediatly..default of promise...and get expulsed

but do thecright thing
you got papers..and we send you home as an honery/ozzie
till you embaris us..or violate the terms
of your joining the global citisenry

the eyes scan.fiongerprints dna
allways stoy on file..[no name changes..

not even with marrage]
think laterally...give them the least they need
at their own homeland...with ausie passport/protections

send em home
under sanctury/protections
to sort out their own lives
in their own home/land

I think Banjo any look, even from a blind man passing on a galloping horse,at my fantasy will see I basically agree with you.
I think the UN can get off at the next stop, that throwing papers away to make it harder to return them should bring a 5 year minimum prison term.
The to and frowing by Gillards lost team on this issue is,, well best not say.

now its Malaysia, next week India, following week Sth Africa and then lets get the Kiwis back! Unbelievable!

This is another nail in the coffin for Tony Abbott and the Liberal Party. This type of solution, whether it be good or bad, is what the majority of the Australian public want. Labor delivered. The Liberals have nowhere to go now on the issue other than to constantly whinge that Labor has ditched old policy and embraced new policy.

The mark of a functional government is the ability to change policy when needed. If a government can only dig it's heals in and refuse to accept change, like the old Liberal government in it's last term, then that government is dysfunctional and doomed.

Labor has shown that it can adopt change.

It's virtually guaranteed that they will win the next election, because they embrace that change.

And what does the Liberal party offer? Tony Abbott, that's what. And what a joke he's become.

Dear Banjo,

You said "We allow over 90% in because we cannot establish there identity and nationality".

What rubbish!

Please funish any proof you have.

It seems like labour has pulled off a major coup with this Malaysian agreement.

What all those who have criicised labour on this issue are forgetting is that the vast majority of the general public want offshore processing, and an end to the queue jumping. Labour simply could not afford to ignore the public sentiment on this issue. It had the potential to deliver Tony Abbot the next election on a platter.

It will be interesting to hear how they pulled it off, but on the surface, this looks like a masterstroke.

It has the potential to satisfy the concerns of those who resent the "wealthy" "queue jumpers" and their violent protests, relegating those who come here illegally to the back of the queue, and removing the unique advantage that those who have enough to get here enjoy by merely arriving on Australian soil. It may also satisfy the more progressives, who should appreciate that we will significantly increase our refugee intake, and allowing the selection of refugees on a 'most deserviing' basis.

The solution that has been proposed today is along the line of what I have been pushing for the last twelve months. I suggested that Indonesia as a possible country. The problem with my suggestion is that Indonesiais not a signature to the UN Commission on Refugees.

I see this as a way of creating the queue that many claim already exists and the mechanism of returning or moving people on.

It allows for an orderly movement of refugees and ensures that getting on a boat putsyou back on theend of the queue. There will be issues raised, one Malaysia's past treatment of refugees. I am sure this can be managed if the UN Refugee commision oversees the process.

It also allows the refugees already in Malaysia to move onto a permanent home.

I hope some similar process can be worked out with Indonesia.

This process should prove much more humane, cheaper and be a long term solution.

For me the possibility of an Abbott government is a nightmare.
Have no doubt however my party my government has not won anything in this deal.
Only a REAL SOLUTION, will do.
First we have agreed to take, read understand,4.000 refugees currently in Malaysia.
Over the next FOUR YEARS.
In return, that country has agreed, over an unknown period, not stated.
To take 800, not more.
Arriving boat people.
What is not said, is those 800.
Are to be processed ,AND MAY be sent for settlement.
Even here.
Great deal Julia.
My fellow ALP followers, do we want good working policy? do we want our team elected because it can deliver better.
I do, believe me this is rubbish, not policy.
Next question, can any side win an election if it is servant only to fear it must stop its voters leaking to a party such as the greens?
If the ALP is to degrade its self in fear of such radicalism it will die.
Follow the voters Julia not the lost.
those 80%% who destroy a humans most important document, proof of ID,SHOULD never be granted refugee STATUS EVER.

Malaysia is not a signatory to the UNHCR convention, and the conditions they are likely to find are far worse than could be expected at Manus Island or Nauru.

But 800 refugees total. That should see us through the next 4 months, and then what?

This is at best a stop gap, but has potential if it can be extended to include all refugees.

Shadow Minister,

You took the trouble to point out that Malaysia is not a signatory to the UNHCR convention, and then made comment on probable worse conditions for refugees....but then you go on to say that the new arrangement has "potential" if it can be extended to all refugees....interesting viewpoint.

As for Julia, she's fast approaching the Howard benchmark for hocus pocus and smoke and mirrors.
She said, ".....this solution has been born of a regional process motivated by the region's desire to tackle this regional challenge."
What a load of pollie-speak mumbo jumbo....

PM Gillard's new policy is nearer that of Mr. Fraser than Mr.Howard. I cannot imagine many getting on a boat that leads them going to the end of a queue in another country.

I believe we take about ten theousand a year now. The thousand a year will not be a large part of that number.

I cannot see why the overseeing of this country and the UN Refugee Commission cannot ensure the wellbeing of these.

The policy of the last few years has been expensive, cruel and wasteful.

Shadow minister,

I think you'll find that the number of refugees willing to shell out 20k and risk their lives and those of their families to get to Australia, only to be sent to Malaysia and the back of the queue, will be extremely limited.

This solution has the potential to dry up the flow of illegal boat arrivals. As things currently stand, arriving in Australia by boat is an almost certain method of achieving permanent residence. If arriving by boat makes you A LOT LESS likely to receive permanent residence than if you were going through the correct procedure in a country near you homeland, why would anyone persist in trying? And since the malaysians don't need to provide five star accomodation and won't tolerate the endless court challenges, and rioting etc, it is far more likely refugees will stay in camps as near to their home countries as they can. Which is what the UNHCR advises is the best policy for all concerned.

Excellent

Now that the issue of what to do with the minority of refugees, we can move on to solving the problem of the many, the thousands seeking refuge who arrive by plane.

Ammonite and csteele,
I don't know why you blokes are so ignorant about this issue.

There are some arrivals by plane without valid visas and they are sent back ASAP. Some, not many, arrive with valid visas and apply for asylumn. The success rate for these is very low, about 30% I think, and if unsuccessfull are expected to depart when their visa expires, same as other visa holders. See DIAC website.

The success rate for those applying for asylumn in overseas locations,run by the UN, is also very low. If we here cannot establish their identity and their nationality then no other country will take them back, so it is far easier for us to take them in, that is why there is over 90% success rate for illegal boat people who destroy their docs.

While it hurts Shadow Minister[ Still being one sided] is not far from truth here.
I would think if Gillard said every refugee would be returned home he would disagree with her still.
But here are the facts.
5 for 1 maybe.
That is this deal, we are to thank her for, we get 4.000 from Malaysia, some have been there 4 years, some will not get here for 4 more.
We give the next say 7 boat loads,800, no more.
Now that will take two years, yes SM knows and understands the last half of that number will be a very much more time in coming.
But come they will.
OF those 800 how many will be approved to come here in the end, any bets not one? no lets be honest it could be 800.
Our temporary Prime Minister wants us to say well she did it,stopped the boats.
Post say 2012 how many boat people will come?
Why is she unable to say, gee we got this wrong, sorry ocker we done a shocka.
Open, the Howard era camps, let it be known we reserve ALL FUTURE refugee positions for those in camps over seas.
Simple.
Now here is my country and my party's future, if Gillard acts to stop the growth of the greens, not to put ALP policy's in place she,and the greens condemn Australia to two decades of conservative rule.
The fool behind this policy has his finger prints, or is it hers, all over some truly stupid ones we are still paying for.
ALP go down fighting with good policy not gutless back downs.

The 800 that are sent to Malaysia will be going to the end of a 90,000 queue.

We will be taking 1000 per year of those already assessed for four years.

This announcement is only the first step of a new policy.

I would say that some agreement would need to be made with Indonesia to take a number of their refugees that have been cleared for resettlement.

Indonesia would have to agree that any that attempted to come by boat would be accepted back.

We already take 14,000 refugees a year. The new people we commit to take will form a small part of the 14,000.

Flo I admire and understand your loyalty.
But I think few will buy it, in the end this policy will cost votes not earn them.
First, those who will go green because of it, a minority but votes still.
A second impact is about to harm the ALP, badly.
We have been all over the shop on the issue, seen to be weak on those who set fire to a bout, rioted in two centers,hunger strikes and more.
Many Australians WHO HAVE NEVER VOTED CONSERVATIVE are about to.
Flo only A very minor few ever get sent home.
I will one day be proved quite right, in saying if we get tough on boat people we will only be one, off most country's about to act.
Even the UN will enforce tougher policy's in future.
If a referendum was held today this country would vote for harsher controls.
Short term, first exports of our problem will stop boats, but watch after we swap 800 for 4.000.
Weakness is visible to smugglers too they can wait.

Given a 5:1 ratio, and a quota for 13500 refugees per annum, that means that whether in Indonesia or Malaysia, sending 2600 refugees to these processing centres would consume our entire quota.

Given that the 800 is a total number, and that Malaysia has indicated that this is a one off, this is at best a stop gap. Given Labor's track record, I can see huge potential for foul ups.

How can issuing Temporary protection visas be any worse than sending the refugees to a Malaysian refugee camp? If the point is to stop the boats being a guaranteed way to get a permanent visa, the TPV is an excellent choice.

Shadow

You are ignoring the fact that this solution has the potential to STOP the flood of boat arrivals.

The point about 800 asylum seekers is moot if we don't have 800 arrive in the next 4 years.

WHY would anyone pay a large amount of money to risk their lives on a tiny boat if they KNEW that on arrival they would be shipped to MALAYSIA, and the back of the queue? Once they understand the change, they won't do it.

The majority of Australians are offended by the fact that boat people are self selecting australian residence. Thats the heart of the problem for the gov't. Not the actual arrival and resettlement of refugees that we have vetted, and in many cases have useful skills that we need.

This is a game changer if the gov't can sell it properly. It fits all their key criteria

1) its a regional solution,
2) It will stop the boats.
3) it ends the perverse system of punishing those who play by the rules, and rewarding those who break them
4) It encourages refugees to stay in camps near their homes, which the UNHCR recommends

Paull

This solution in itself will not stop the flood of boats, as given that in 2010 there were nearly over 6000 arrivals, the 800 is only a few months at present flows. However, it is better than the absolute fiasco that is Labor's present policy.

The devil will be in the details, and this could easily turn pear shaped. Just look at what happened on the Oceanic Viking.

Shadow,

The reason why there were 6000 arrivals in 2010, up from 149 in 2008, is that under the existing policy, arrival by boat = permanent residence for over 90% of applicants.

If we shift everyone who is arriving now to the back of the queue, then noone is going to pay a fortune and risk their lives only to be placed in a Malaysian refugee camp.

It will stop the boats. And it will provide a fairer go for those without the money to jump the queue.

PualL while much of what you are saying is true you will not progress a debate with SM.
And unhappily not with middle Australia.
Under J W Howard Rudd then Gillard, few Australians know the true cost per head of each single boat arriving refugee.
Know, understand, I am ALP every inch of me, But know J W H owned the lodge, he not Rudd made a choice to leave, he called it WORK CHOICES.
He won middle Australia and ALP voters with refugee policy's.
As we stagger from one half planned badly thought out plan to another we have shed voters like a balding man lost his hair.
Had this been our policy instead of east Timor, had we not settled 9 in ten of these better off financially refugees,we may be able to defend it.
We are talking about a nightmare.
An Abbott lead government,a NSW like destruction ok yes the bleeding heart say I have no heart , but I have eyes.
Our policy makers are rubbish, our leader the wrong person, defend us if you want but the day after the last of the 800?
Gillard, on your way out repudiate the UN convention on refugees.
Offer to take only those in camps, warn those who destroy documents they face imprisonment and deportation, without an out,
Poll not the greens, not Labors left , ask those who put Rudd and Howard in the lodge how they intend to vote, then leave please leave.

Many, such as Flo in an early post to this thread, believe that as
conditions improve in the source countries the numbers will decline.
However I believe that propersition is totally wrong.
With declining food production, declining economies and either no
growth or indeed contraction a repeat of the Egypt syndrome will be
much more widespread and severe.

Some might not be aware of what caused the Egyptian crisis.
It started as a protest against food prices.
Prices increased because the government reduced subsidies on food.
They reduced subsidies because they had less income from oil sales.
Oil sales reduced because of Egyptian oil production is in depletion.
Food imports have had to continue, despite less income.

The population had increased to 80 million which is more people than
the Nile Valley can sustain.
This story will be repeated almost everywhere and will increase the
number seeking other places to live into 100s of millions.
Our policy will have to change dramatically to cope with the new world
situation. The UNHCR organisation will have to change or collapse.

I don't have an answer, except to pull up the drawbridge.

PaulL

Juliar would like us to believe that she has a silver bullet for this problem, however, given that she is not going to build any detention facilities in Malaysia, and that the options for the refugees are either the appalling detention camps there or being released amongst the population there where they don't have the right to work or any aid, the implementation of this agreement is going to be politically very tough, given that the greens have announced their intention to challenge this in the courts.

As I mentioned before, With the Oceanic Viking, the asylum seekers simply refused to disembark, and Australia had to accept them.

If this is not implemented very carefully, it has all the hallmarks of another Labor stuff up.

Right as I post Tony Abbott is talking, it is question time in Parliament.
I still very firmly think Gillard can not win an election.
That her supporters such as Simon Crean betray my party.
But I soften my stance on the Malaysian solution.
See I had help,the faces of Christopher Pyne, The deputy leader Bishop, SMIRKING like unruly children.
Abbott's bluster, Cooks intransigence while having nearly the same policy's .
I am reminded of this, Tony Abbott is propping up my dysfunctional party.
It seems evident this proposal is at least going to work,and that yes we take more but we pick them.
In any debate we will never get every thing we want.
I now back the government plan as better than any it has had so far, and remembering ANYTHING is better than an Abbott led government.
I can not however stop hoping Gillard/Crean and about 4 more consider a future in anything out side politics.

Posted by Belly, Tuesday, 10 May 2011 3:16:36 PM

" ... But I soften my stance on the Malaysian solution. ... "

I actually share *Belly's* above sentiment on this one, though that is not to say that I do not have immediate concerns visa vi Human Rights issues, however.

..

I do not how it is that we expect all members of both houses to make valid comment on issues if they are not all equally informed.

I just can't believe Australia wastes so much time debating what is a trivial amount of people - 5000 people/year...

I mean really, this is nothing compared to the millions of refugees fleeing atrocious conditions around the globe..

And further, we seem somewhat surprised that some refugees try to get here by boat... Hello!! We live on an island... Last time I checked, I couldn't walk a water.. Unless other's out there are suggesting something different I think we need to grow up as a country and get over this issue.

Other western nations have land borders and have much larger volumes of illegal immigrants fleeing into their countries..

The issue should no longer be politicised, we should follow suit and do what every other humane modern country does to process their refugees:

- end mandatory detention
- perform initial health and security checks
- then allow these people to work and contribute to the community whilst their applications are processed

We should at least give them a chance at a new life and a chance to contribute to our society..

As our a society we're in desperate need of a slap across the face to wake up from this bad dream..

I've written a bit more about this in two articles on my interactive website - Progressive Talks: http://www.progressivetalks.com

- http://progressivetalks.com/social/item/1586-asylum-seekers.html
- http://progressivetalks.com/social/item/1610-detention-centres-unnecessary.html

ProgressiveTalks,

You're entirely missing the point. The stats for the arrival of people by boat are
2008 161
2009 2849
2010 6879

As you have pointed out for us, there are millions of refugees fleeing war, famine, drought persecution etc across the world. Our current intake for refugees is now set at 13500 per year. As we can see from the above figures, in the very near future it is likely that there will be more people arriving by boat than there are places for them on the program. This is very bad news for refugees in foreign countries who are already assessed and have been waiting in camps for their opportunity. The problem for them is that refugees who show up by boat have a 90% chance of having their applications approved, whilst those in camps have well under 10%.This obviously has the perverse effect of encouraging people to get on a boat and try and sneak into Australia.

You also ignore the fact that more than 30 people died trying to illegally enter this country by boat last year. Boarding rickety fishing boats in order to sneak into australia is not something we should be encouraging.

The reason the numbers of boat arrivals have increased exponentially in the last few years is because the existing system rewards those who come by boat. If 90% of the people who arrive by boat are eventually allowed to stay, many more people will take the chance, pay the money and risk their lives. Processing those who arrive here illegally in Malaysia and placing them at the back of the queue is a good start.

I’m not against raising the number of asylum seekers we take in, although I don’t support allowing such arrivals to access the dole etc. The fact is that we have a right to decide who we allow to come to this country, And we have an obligation, in a limited intake program, to ensure that the places go to the most deserving, not the wealthiest, most daring or closest to hand.

No one seems to take account of the water problem.
We should be planning for drought times not flood times.
After all, the flood is no good if you don't survive the drought.
There is a world wide food shortage coming over the horizon.
We had better get our act together before the starving millions start moving.
Already diesel shortages are affecting food production in Pakistan.

One aspect to all this that really doesn't get discussed enough is the reality of the currently in force immigration legislation.

My family has recently successfully completed the process for "Permanent Residency" visas and first entered Australia as family unit earlier this year.

..

The submitted appplication in paper width was the best part of 2 inches thick.

..

The wait post application was nearly 5 months due to the backlog at the time.

..

Inquiries going back more than 20 years were made, including full criminal record exposure.

..

There were obviously in depth medical and security inquiries.

..

In reality, we started the process of acquiring requisite legal documents in late 2006.

..

My refusal to entertain certain what could be considered as corrupt local practices made matters at the time additionally time consuming and difficult.

..

Now, if an applicant does not have any documents, and given the relevant immigration legislation alone, then the legal process is largely confounded, and additionally dependent in some instances on 3rd country support, which also has an additional cost, above and beyond the cost of keeping the claimants here.

..

To me, if the Greens and others are serious about reform in this area, then they ought be proposing some very specific legislative changes.