Those boldly asserting that boat-people are "invading" this country and need to be met with force have a problem, the Australian navy isn't seeing it that way:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/naval-officers-would-disobey-orders-to-turn-back-asylum-seeker-vessels-under-an-abbott-government/story-fn59niix-1226251160538

Furthermore, if we put refugees on our boats and try to return them to Indonesia they won't be accepted.

The Coalition's policy is going to be an "open door" policy, no better than the status-quo. However, it's all Australia will have to vote for given Labor can't get the Malaysian swap deal up.

Are there any Greens out there to cogently explain how it will stop Mr Abbott from ascending to the lodge on the back of this issue while consigning your party's success to nothing but a temporary aberration?

Just another mouth blunder from the statesman.

Abbott has again made a fool of himself.
How ever in all honesty, quoting the Greens is counter productive.
As unpalatable as you may find it.
Greens are less popular than Abbott or Gillard.
I know, Friends leave me for saying that.
But in debate truth stands any test my words are truth.

The Greens seem intent on sinking Labor, believing they'll gain market share through intransigence and petulance. They're consigning themselves to irrelevancy while paving Mr Abbott's path to the Lodge.

Hello, is there a Green with any balls out there? I really need to have your position explained to me. Surely there's more to the Green's than empty sentiment?

What a bunch of tyre-kicking time-wasters. Stand up and be something!

I have lost those I regard as Friends here and in real life.
For just telling the truth.
Harsh and unwelcome but truth.
This hung Parliament has disenfranchised may Australians.
It, the post Rudd election gave unwarranted power to greens, and that continues to hurt Labor.
In time, post a DD election both sides will want, they will return to the numbers such supporters gain.
Truth must always be taken in to consideration.
My words are not the product of a bitter old man.
It is true,Australians do dislike the greens more than both,failures we have leading the majors.
Some could do far worse than hear and see the true impacts on the greens of increasingly radical front women.
Remember, the Greens too, stop a government following the will of the people in offshore processing.
Hand in hand with Abbott.

I think Luciferase has stumbled upon the kernel of the problem here but hasn't woken up to it yet.

Whether or not we implement the Malaysian (NON)solution is only a sideshow. The real issue is the disenfranchisement of the Australian electorate.

It is about how a self selected few can ride roughshod over the electorate.And it goes way beyond Bob Brown and his world-govt aspiring, Greens.

In the case that Luciferase has cited we have a *public servant* telling us that he and other public servants would not obey any govt policy which affronted UN covenants

And we see regular instances where activist judges seek out obscure interpretations of legislation.

And we see it here, where our Federal Attorney General has started pushing initiatives like this:

"The Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011 comes into effect today and requires all new bills and disallowable legislative instruments to be accompanied by a 'Statement of compatibility with human rights'. Statements will assess compatibility against the seven main United Nations human rights treaties to which Australia is a party"
http://www.attorneygeneral.gov.au/Media-releases/Pages/2012/First%20Quarter/4-January-2012---Human-Rights-check-for-new-laws.aspx

When were the contents of those covenants put to the Australian electorate?

At times our position in *democratic* Australia does not seem all that far different from many a middle eastern fiefdom where some mullah declares that it isn't material what the populous wants because the will of Allah expressed through Sharia reveals a higher morality--so you will have Sharia because it is good for you.

OLIGARCHS RULE OK!

The Greens seem intent on sinking Labor,
Luciferase,
Looks like they have more sense & integrity than we gave them credit for ?

Boob, boom.
Another acerbic, witty, in-depth one-liner from dear old Indy.
Ho-hum. He's doing better than the Greens tho'

Individual, do you understand you, and one other kill threads.
That such comment is not pure WIT but come with an extra T TWIT.
What is its purpose, have you one of those sense of humors that makes folk both cringe and hide from you.
How is it related to the thread, how did it contribute.
We push the wheel barrow of our thoughts and views.
That is why we come here.
But the wisest come to see other views and even modify theirs.
You aware this is not a greens friendly thread could have fleshed out you post.
To look other than a bait.
The hardest thing, for fixed minds to do, is except truth.
Hence some greens despising me, for putting these truths
More will ALWAYS hate them than vote for them
Labor will be out of office because of them.
Most Australian voters TRULY WOULD LIKE THEM GONE TOTALLY.

Luciferase,

I wonder if you are capable in seeing the ironic self contradiction of your different posts.

Firstly you claim (with no proof whatsoever) that the entire success of the Pacific solution was that the coalition turned back a handful of boats.

Next you claim that the navy are likely to disobey an order to safely turn back boats, that according to your own reason would save 100s of lives a year. (it is estimated 1000 have perished since 2008) based on a statement from an EX naval commander.

Juliar's government has no regard for the interests of Australia, in that it has chosen the Greens agenda of off shore processing over using Nauru which has been offered as a compromise by the coalition. Nauru may not be the entire solution, but it would prevent the asylum seekers automatic access to the Australian courts that is turning a 70% acceptance into a 99% acceptance and costing billions.

Please explain to me how the Indonesians can refuse entry to an
Indonesian vessel with Indonesian crew ?

What utter nonsense .. that a hung parliament has disenfranchised many Australians ... (Belly)

the hung parliament was expressed the will of the people ...

it has effectively ended the unfettered power of the major parties ... and meant that issues have to be discussed openly .. and argued .. not just rammed through by a party majority (Labor or Liberal)

From SM: "Firstly you claim (with no proof whatsoever) that the entire success of the Pacific solution was that the coalition turned back a handful of boats."

Nauru, a euphemism for removing the right of appeal from asylum seekers, didn't work and won't work again. That is the advice of the Immigration Department after having talked to a few more boat-people than you obviously have, SM. Force is what did it and Mr Abbott knows that even if you don't. I'm not going down this path with you again, been there done that ad nauseum. Look me up in users and go over all my posts and links therein.

"Next you claim that the navy are likely to disobey an order to safely turn back boats, that according to your own reason would save 100s of lives a year. (it is estimated 1000 have perished since 2008) based on a statement from an EX naval commander."

How do you think some boat-people did make it all the way in during the time boats were being forced back a decade ago, SM? Desperate actions by boat-people caused the Navy to forget the orders of the Gov't and adhere to maritime law.

http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/11/07/the-consequences-of-turning-boats-back-siev-towback-cases/

Why do you think the Navy wouldn't act similarly now? It was, and will again be, compromised in similar situations only they will be much more frequent to the point that standard policy will be to escort boats in or bring boat-people onboard. Chris Barrie is stating what we already know, in support of a Navy that agrees with him.

Only you, SM, can key in your last paragraph without hands shaking uncontrollably with mirth. The master of weaving lies and half-truths into fabric strikes again! Surely you write stuff like that just to see what happens next and I for one don't feel like picking you apart at the seams, yet again.

traveloz, do I detect a hue of Green in your comments?

When the Coalition wins a ruling majority on the back of this single issue, Green's will be able to congratulate each other on standing firm on flawed principle all the way to oblivion. So much then for open discussion and argument vs unfettered power.

The vast majority of voters will not support an open border policy, for good reason, and wishing otherwise won't change that. As bitter a pill as it is for Greens to swallow, the Malaysian swap is the lesser of two evils for them.

Remaining relevant in Australian politics is about more than sentimentality and unbending, flawed principle. If Greens want a significant hand in shaping Australia they must overcome lemming instincts and cutting off their nose despite their face. It's time for them to evolve.

Luciferase,

Now I have caught you in a lie.

The immigration department did not claim that the pacific solution or Nauru as part of it did not work, ever.

As for its future, only one person in the immigration department (headed by Chris Bowen) claimed that Nauru would not work as well. Notably the same genius that claimed that the Malaysian solution was legally sound.

Your previous posts never managed to explain the more than 30 x increase in boats since the lifting of the Pacific solution, and your claims of unpicking my arguments are laughable, as you have yet to provide any proof other than you own twisted opinion.

Traveloz Gday welcome, and thanks, truly.
Haveing you tell me my post is rubbish is a badge of honor I will wear it with pride.
And re state my view Australian voters have been disfranchised by the hung Parliament.
I with the exception of Wilkie and Xenophon think the independents are ok.
But Australia may not think so.
You will be unhappy, but DEMOCRACY was never intended to be government by the minority of the majority.
You too, and others,will be repelled by me for this, but Greens now and forever are intensely disliked, and unwanted, in fact considered extremely dangerous, to more than will EVER vote for them.
It is true,SOME within the Greens are great folk, dreaming of better, but trapped in a party too infiltrated by the loony left /radicals, to ever gain traction.
In my view, a poll held today, asking these questions, would give the results I use here.
1
Would you be happy to see the Greens party no longer exist!
65% yes
Are you committed green?
6% yes
Are you an ALP voter protesting by voting green then seeing it goes to Labor
6% yes
Now for my view of reality, just as the DLP kept conservatives in power,by betraying those they claimed to support,Greens best serve Conservative Australia.

A desperate SM, writes: "Now I have caught you in a lie.

The immigration department did not claim that the pacific solution or Nauru as part of it did not work, ever."

I had written, excluding what I now add in parentheses: "Nauru..... didn't work (my opinion) and won't work again (the Department of Immigration's opinion accepted by senior Coalition members)."

My statement derives from the article http://www.smh.com.au/national/malaysia-plan-still-possible-says-ruddock-20111220-1p421.html where it is written: "....senior Coalition sources said yesterday Mr Abbott should acknowledge Immigration Department advice that opposition policy for processing on Nauru alone would no longer act as a deterrent."

I admit to being clumsy in not parsing my sentence to make clear where my own opinion stopped and the ID's started. However I would ask that if the ID thinks Nauru would have no future effectiveness, why would it think it had any in the past? As I said, it has had countless discussions with refugees past and present in coming to it's opinion. In any case, the desperate actions of refugees in many SIEV encounters to fight to be under Australia's care, regardless of where, is indicative enough of the lack of Nauru's deterrent effect on boat arrivals.

Neither I nor the Immigration Department ever tried to claim the Pacific Solution's only effective working part, the forceful turning back of boats, was ineffectual.

Enough from me on that topic already covered in other threads.

If I may come again to the main point of this thread, are there any Green's out there who wish their party to maintain a hand in shaping this country by supporting the Malaysian swap arrangement. Or, by adherence to flawed principle and sentimentality, are they going to continue to pave the way for a Coalition ruling majority built on this issue and thereby make themselves irrelevant?

Well, a week has passed on no reply from a Greens supporter. Nor was there a reply to a similar challenge in a thread a month ago.

Conclusion? Greens don't read OLO? Greens don't feel they can or need to defend their position? Feel free, anyone, to add their own suggestions here. I give up.

Again I ask;

Please explain to me how the Indonesians can refuse entry to an
Indonesian vessel with Indonesian crew ?

Why is it that no one who is adament that the boats cannot be
turned back because the Indonesians will refuse entry, cannot show why.

Bazz, I wrote: "Furthermore, if we put refugees on our boats and try to return them to Indonesia they won't be accepted."

i.e. should boat-people scuttle their boats and be picked up by our navy they will not be accepted by Indonesia should Australia wish to return them. The Indonesians have said this.

The answer to your question/request, "Please explain to me how the Indonesians can refuse entry to an Indonesian vessel with Indonesian crew?" is they can't and don't.

Sorry not to have addressed this before. I'm not adamant that boats "can't" be turned back, that was happening a decade ago. I'm adamant that they "shouldn't" be turned back again and that the Malaysian swap should be given the chance to work.

The Greens and the Coalition are adamant that it shouldn't be given the chance for different reasons, the former because of flawed, blind principle and sentimentality and the latter because for the cynically astute political reason to get elected.

Hmmm, even if they are rescued by our naval ships, I think the Navy
would be required to return them to their port of departure, especially
if they were picked up in the Indonesian rescue zone.
I suspect, but am not certain that the zone extends almost to Christmas Island.
It might only take a more determined government to point out to
Indonesia their responsibilty for Indonesian vessels and its passengers.

If they are rescued, there is nothing stopping them being taken directly to Nauru, even now.