http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opinion/abbott-fails-boat-test/story-e6frgd0x-1226142100161
In reading this link it would be both easy and true to gloat at the failures of the ALP in this area.
East Timor, the softening of the Howard scheme, much not done well.
Indeed part of this story is evidence of that failure.
The title of this thread could be questioned,the hight court, now Tony Abbott have not let the scheme start, so how has it failed.
What would have been the result if by now most of those 400 had been sent to Malaysia?
The link goes much further than reminding us of Labor/ or is it Gillards failures.
It has a title inferring Abbott too has failed here.
My Bias on display?
I truly think this man, his front bench in part, are failing us all, that they in the name of politics/self interest points in a school yard bully boy fight.
Betray us all.

<< But assylum seekers? How can anybody (Hasbeen included) know they are "criminals" until they have been assessed/processed according to our laws>>

It seems that even AFTER they have been assessed/processed & rubber stamped "genuine", according to our laws --we're still none the wiser!

"FEDERAL police will question a Burmese-born Brisbane man who claims to have murdered dozens of political activists while working undercover for the military regime.

Htoo Htoo Han used the media last week to confess to the killing of at least 24 people in the wake of a pro-democracy uprising in Burma in 1988. He posed as a student activist, but was in fact the commander of a military intelligence death squad"

http://www.theage.com.au/national/second-burmese-tells-of-killings-20110724-1hvdb.html#ixzz1YaZqn2km

Though one would have thought that all but the most gullible, would have garnered an insight of their real motives and morals from actions like this:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/guards-retreat-as-detainees-set-villawood-alight/story-fn59niix-1226042587099

PS: I do think Tony Abbott ought to stop his politicking long enough to support the amendments to the immigration act.

The continued promotion by both major political parties still focuses on a small issue when compared to people seeking asylum who arrive by plane, the numbers of asylum seekers who arrive in Europe, America and other countries much closer to those nations where people are under threat.

"Around the world most asylum claims are lodged in Europe, the USA and Canada—in fact more asylum claims are lodged in Europe (particularly in France, Germany and the UK) than in any other
part of the world.49 Asylum claims in Europe have remained fairly stable over the last few years with 269 900 asylum claims in 2010, 286 700 in 2009; 283 700 in 2008; and 249 600 in 2007...

...In comparison, a relatively small number—8250 claims—were lodged in Australia in 2010. RCOA commented that:
UNHCR’s statistical overview of asylum applications in industrialised countries during 2010 has again revealed that Australia’s share of global asylum applications remains very small. In 2010, Australia
received 8250 asylum applications, just 2.2 per cent of the 358 840 applications received across 44 industrialised nations. Of the 44 nations, Australia was ranked 14th overall and was 17th on a per capita basis ... Asylum applications in Australia increased by around 30 per cent compared to the previous year. In real terms, however, this amounted to only 2000 additional applications. Furthermore, while
the number of applications in Australia increased, our global share of asylum applications remained steady at around two per cent.

By comparison, the United States experienced a 13 per cent increase in asylum applications, which in real terms amounted to over 6500 additional applications; and Germany’s share of asylum applications almost doubled from seven per cent in 2009 to 12 per cent in 2010."

Statistics taken from page 15 of PDF: http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/bn/sp/AsylumFacts.pdf

Given that boat refugees to Australia have remained small in number over the past 4 decades, on shore processing remains the most effective, cheapest and humane option.

Gillard could step away from her "Malaysian Solution" - the question is why not?

SPQR

"War criminals" when found out should be investigated and dealt with as such. I don't think even you would suggest all assylum seekers (arriving by boat or by plane) are "war criminals", but I may be wrong.

As to those assylum seekers that cause havoc, chaos and destruction of property while awaiting their application to be processed (albeit it sometimes takes years), I agree with Minister Bowen ... it does not do their case any favour and in fact can be used to refuse the application. Do you agree?

.

Ammonite

Those figures you presented are an eye-opener, appreciate the homework.

I think Gillard wants to pursue the "Malaysian Solution" because it has been argued quite forcibly (by Australian, Malaysian and Indonesian officials) that it is the best thing they have got to 'stop the boats'.

Stopping the boats (and the antics of the people smugglers) is what everybody appeared to want, not so long ago.

I agree, on-shore processing is effective, cheaper and more humane - but it will not 'stop the boats'. In fact, on-shore processing would most likely lead to more boats, more people smuggling, and more tragedies at sea. Would like your thoughts.

Bonmot

On other threads I have recommended that the savings of $ through on-shore processing be used to better facilitate working WITH Indonesian and Malaysian governments to establish refuges where people do not feel so threatened for their lives that they believe their only hope is on leaky boats.

I wish there was a magic bullet solution, however this idea of "stopping the boats" does not and has been proven not to work. Best deal with the situation at its inception rather than try and deal with the consequences of over-crowded and appalling refugees camps as they are at present in the aforementioned countries.

Malaysia would certainly 'stop the boats' but is it a solution to the issue of asylum seekers? What about the many more 1000s of visa overstayers who fly in. It is much better for refugees not to go by boat, many of them unsafe, and certainly not a place for unaccompanied children. I always wonder why those who choose boats, who are cashed up by comparison to those in refugee camps around the world, don't just fly in - the airfare is cheaper from Indonesia. Others do and stay if credentials are legitimate.

The irony in all this is Abbott's opposition to changes that enable Malaysia is one of the only issues supported by many Coalition voters. His rush to oppose for opposition's sake is turning off his own voter base to some extent (probably not enough given the government's record on other issues). Abbott is playing the 'I will only do Nauru' card because it will make the government look bad and validate the previous Howard policy.

The Nauru solution resulted in about an 80% positive processing rate for asylum seekers.

I hope the 4-5,000 Burmese refugees sitting in Malaysian Camps who were promised asylum in Australia are still able to take up the offer regardless of the outcome of the policy wrangle.