Dear Bazz,

May I politely suggest that you re-read
the previous link I gave you.
The author has thoroughly researched
this subject for her PhD and as she
clearly states:

"If anyone tells you that TPVs were a fact
in stopping boats in 2001 rest assured they
have no idea what they are talking about or
they are simply lying."

Bazz,

I'd urge you to take a look at some of comments attached to the bottom of Lexi’s article/link, which demolish her hypothesis.


Like this one:

<<GrazingGoat66 : 15 Jun 2011 10:01:51pm
How about some facts from the website that the apologist author herself quoted from at the start of the article.
Between 2001 and February 2008 a total of 1637 people had been detained in the Nauru and Manus facilities. Of these, 1153 (70 per cent) were ultimately resettled in Australia or other countries. Of those who were resettled 705 (around 61 per cent) were resettled in Australia.[69]

Not 95% or some of the fantasy figures being quoted by the soft left, but the figures as quoted above.
And now let's look at the arrivals for the period which was unfortunately (and obviously inadvertently??) missing from the original article
2002 1 person on 1 boat
2003 53 persons on 1 boat
2004 15 persons on 1 boat
2005 11 persons on 4 boats
2006 60 persons on 6 boats
2007 148 persons on 5 boats

Just presenting the facts in the interest of informed discussion....unlike the author>>

Or, this one:

<<Hahaha : 15 Jun 2011 5:25:53pm
Pre-2001: TVP is changed variable.

2001-2008: TVP is one factor among others.

Post-2008: TVP is abolished.

Author's hypothesis:
TVPs increased the number of boat people who attempt to reach Australia, ergo, TVPs are not a deterrence factor.

Confirmation:
If TVPs have a positive relationship with boat people numbers, then this relationship would be supported by 2001-2008 data, while post-2008 data would show this relationship in reverse.

Data:
No data after 2001 provided.

Conclusion:
Not enough information provided to support hypothesis. Dismissed.>>

And , here’s a further piece of evidence. The *Refugee Industry* which relies on a constant flow of new “refugees” for its self actualization, and ultimate funding is scared stiff of any talk of re-introduction of TPV’s .

Actually their reaction/emotions pretty well parallels those of a shonky merchant selling medicine-show tonic who suddenly gets visit from the health department wanting to test his goods!

Lexi,

I clearly understand the figures, and you clearly do not. Quoting refugee advocates is no way approaching balanced.

Just look at the figures that SPQR posted. In 6 years under the pacific solution there were 288 asylum seekers arriving via boat. The following 4 years without the pacific solution have seen 18000. The only explanation you have given is that a 20% increase in refugees world wide has lead to a 6000% increase in boat refugees to Australia. The simple maths is against you.

TPVs were an active deterrent. It stopped the boats sending a single family member then bringing the rest over. No one pretends that it is a solution in itself.

Likewise 30% of those going to Nauru were repatriated, whereas today where the courts give the benefit of the doubt, 70% are getting approved by the tribunal, but 99% are getting residence, and costing Australia a fortune in legal costs.

Dear Shadow Minister,

There is precious little diversity in your
views and frankly I am tired of being polite
and responding to them. I don't want to be rude,
or anti-social - but frankly you're not that
interesting. However, do continue to talk to
those who have the wisdom to see things your way.
I'm not one of them.

Dear SPQR,

I can't be held responsible for your
comprehension skills old chap.
But keep posting the way that you do -
and I shall try to figure out what you're
compensating for.

LOL

Thanks Lexi --I love you too.