rehctub

There are severe mandatory sentences for people smugglers. It's not clear that the courts will enforce them.

See:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-09-16/people-smugglers-court-challenge/2903440/?site=westernvic

Now if the aim is simply to stop the boats that's easy. Offer air tickets for the same price that people smugglers charge. Instead of risking your life in a leaky boat to get into an Australian detention facility you can travel in comfort.

(Drinks and lunch would be extra)

First we are not searching for a way to stop the boats.
We have two sides who think they, alone already know how its done.
And a warm and comfy group who do not want to stop them.
The former have said the laws we live by, that serve and protect us do not suit them.
So they fought against them in court and won.
That Victory of the few against the many will impact for years.
The Malaysian solution, not truly given a trial till that first plane took off taking its load there, never got a chance.
An opposition that sent boats back to Indonesia without protection , says it thinks it would fail.
And is not willing to risk it succeeding! think how its failure would benefit conservatives.
Labor, once so very much against the Pacific solution, sees its mistake, again back tracks.
But is held against that wall that appeared after the hight court order.
Australia, future Conservative government stands there too.
Abbott wants to side with Bob Brown! unthinkable!
What chance a future Conservative government if it needs support in the senate to pass this same bill , will it be given.
As our politicians reduce our country's ruling house t school yard fights I hope no chance.

Rehctub makes a sound point. If we are serious about immigration control, one of the things we have to do is impose heavy penalties on anyone who aids and abets the people smugglers.

What’s incredible is that we get boat load after boat load of illegals. Who tell us they have NO papers and NO way of verifying their country of origin. Yet, the boat crew that smuggled them to Australia --whom we are told originate from some poor isolated fishing villages --are always able to come up with papers that “prove” that though, they look and acting like 35 year olds, they’re actually only minors and therefore must be treated leniently.

<<Last week, a 15-year-old boy and two 16-year-olds, who were deemed adults on the basis of wrist X-rays, were released from Brisbane's high-security Arthur Gorrie jail. Their release came after revelations Australian Federal Police had ignored Immigration Department assessments and extracts of birth certificates showing the boys were under 18, contravening Federal Government policy to return home children apprehended on asylum seeker boats without charge>>
http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/breaking/9711403/family-insists-that-people-smuggler-in-jail-is-a-boy/

Such a wimpy approach is never going to stop the boats.

Some people think the vast majority of asylum seekers do not arrive without documentation in an attempt to cheat the system.

Most boat arrivals found to be genuine (85 to 90%) arriving without documentation only delays legal status resolution, prolonging their stay in detention. So for a genuine asylum seeker, of which the majority of boat arrivals are, there is no incentive to arrive without documentation.

The Refugee Convention and the Australian Government recognise that asylum seekers are not to be punished for entry because asylum seekers generally have good cause. This is because asylum seekers will often have to flee quickly and are unable to obtain the necessary documentation before leaving; especially if that requires approaching the very government responsible for their persecution in the first place.

Sometimes, asylum seekers will destroy documentation because they fear being sent back home, or more typically - are instructed to do so by people smugglers.

It’s often argued that boat arrivals who leave from Indonesia intentionally deceive authorities by destroying their documentation because, having originally flown into the country, it’s assumed they must have had a passport and visa to board the flight. However, many asylum seekers obtain false documentation in order to gain entry into Indonesia by plane and, unable to seek adequate protection there, later escape to Australia by boat.

Furthermore, many asylum seekers initially land in Malaysia where people from Muslim countries are not required to obtain a visa. They then make their way to Indonesia before boarding a boat for Australia.

Non-Muslims, such as asylum seekers from Sri Lanka, are forced to bribe Malaysian immigration officials in order to gain entry into the country and - if they can escape detection and incarceration by authorities - will then attempt to make the dangerous journey to Australia by boat via Indonesia.

@Bonmot,
<<Some people think the vast majority of asylum seekers do not arrive without documentation in an attempt to cheat the system.>>
Yeah, well, those who thought that way would be the cluey ones!

Your post reads like something copied from one of the numerous “refugee” activist websites.

<<Most boat arrivals found to be genuine (85 to 90%) >>
The high level of their success has little to do with their genuineness, and a lot to do with our impotence.
As was pointed out recently on another thread.
We are finding among those * found to be genuine* persons who have committed “crimes against humanity” –how did they get through?
We are finding some that soon after settling in OZ return to their old country to fight for fundamentalist causes–clearly they were not attracted by our liberal-democratic values!
And, we are finding that many, many more -perhaps most- return to their old country on R&R –what were they running from?
Being passed by our processes is no measure of genuineness.

<<asylum seekers are not to be punished for entry because asylum seekers generally have good cause>>
The only *good cause* that most have is a desire for a more affluent lifestyle!

<< because asylum seekers will often have to flee quickly and are unable to obtain the necessary documentation before leaving;>>
Total rubbish , fairytale stuff!
Most of the Afghanis who have come by boat to OZ have not lived in Afghanistan for decades.
They have lived and worked in Pakistan alongside of hundreds of thousands of their ethnicity who’ve resided there for generations.

<<Non-Muslims, such as asylum seekers from Sri Lanka, are forced to bribe Malaysian immigration officials in order to gain entry into the country >>
If refuge is all they are seeking.There was no need to bribe their way into Malaysia.And no need to make the *dangerous journey* to OZ.
Straight across the water from Sri Lanka is Tamil Nadu, The land of the Tamils!
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/beware-of-asylum-seekers-bearing-tales-of-woe/story-e6frg6zo-1225850659899

and what is more, at some stages of the year and tides it is but a short swim to India. Tall people can sometimes walk but no expensive boat is needed, a canoe is more than sufficient.

Only drawback is that the Border Security Force plays tough.

From Wikipedia:
"The Border Security Force (BSF) is a border patrol agency of the Government of India. Established on December 1, 1965, it is one of the Central Armed Police Forces. Its primary role is to guard India's international borders during peacetime and also prevent transnational crime. Like most paramilitary units of India, the BSF is under the administrative control of the Ministry of Home Affairs. It is one of the many law enforcement agencies of India.

With a strength of 240,000 personnel in 186 battalions, including women battalions,it is one of the world's largest border patrol forces. The . . . ".