For the record, and to put an end to the squabbling over definition and application of said definition and away from all party political doctrine and inflammatory press (on both sides) please read the following:

http://www.unhcr.org/3b66c2aa10.html

Scribbler,

<<The link you provided, in particular the quote you used, was a letter to the press about an isolated case>>

Not so, Scribbler. If you look at the phrasing used:
--“[There have been] attempts by some in the community to mislead the public into believing a myth that all unauthorised arrivals are asylum seekers and that all asylum seekers have a right to enter a country of choice without authority...This is just not true.”
--“ Neither asylum seekers, nor refugees have a right to enter, without authority"
--“ The use of the word 'illegal' or 'unlawful' to describe asylum seekers entering a country without authority is standard international practice, not least by signatory states to the Refugees Convention..."
It should be pretty clear to all -- but the most blinkered --that it is not referring to a once off /isolated incident.

<<Why do we only "lock up" the boat people? Why not incarcerate ALL arrivals who come here on inadequate or false documentation and then, once here, claim asylum? The answer is simple - 1) too expensive>>

You refer to the hoary old chestnut –which despite being debunked a millions times –is repeatedly thrown-up by activists: “why are less concerned about the airport illegals?”

Because, most of the airport illegals are sent packing in short order. While, most of the boat arrivees get to stay on…partake of welfare for as long as they feel so inclined …and they even get to invite (read, sponsor) all their relos over to OZ.

<<We have a legal process by which asylum seekers' claims are assessed and processed.>>
Our processes are flawed or broken. If someone tells us they are from one of the countries on our list of baddies then they are all but assured of being rubber stamped “Found to be genuine”.

For your records:
We are not ruled by the UN at this point in time --yes, I know your side is working hard to make it otherwise --but up to the present, we are still subject to the laws of OZ.

SM says, obviously with tongue in cheek,"The pacific solution complies with the UNHCR Charter."

Forcefully turning boat loads of asylum seekers back out to sea does not comply.

In the interests of getting a solution up, if you really want your TPV's you can have them, as ineffective as they were.

Then it comes down to a likely to be effective Malaysian swap, with UN blessing (to be decided), or, proven ineffective temporary detention on an island with UN blessing (TBD).

Anyway, it's all academic. Morrison on ABC last night evaded the question of whether the coalition would even support complete reinstatement of PS legislation, saying it's now about the whole government and not just border control, or something to that ridiculous effect. The Mad Monk just can't get that smirk off his face as he rides a cock-horse all the way to the next election.

scribbler,
The UN wants a regional solution to stop boat drownings. What have you to say on my post re non-refoulement and the Malaysian swap

I am sorry that no-one has seen fit to take my comments seriously and are content to carry on the political debate about refugees seeking to come to Australia. The real solution in my opinion is a matter of spiritual and moral perception and commitment, going to the fundamentals of our global system and the nature of human beings. As long as we perceive refugees and all others external to Australia as just that, “others”, and not part of one great human family and race inhabiting one fragile and interdependent planet, refugees will continue to exist. It is a matter of personal responsibility, we need to look within ourselves and accept a new global consciousness rather than looking to national governments, their policies, secular laws and other players external to ourselves. A perception based on our more limited allegiances and prejudices will simply not resolve this issue nor any other of the pressing global issues such as the continuing prevalence of war and mass violence. Look to the root of the refugee issue and what causes people to flee. We all bear the responsibility for the present divided and often violent and grossly unfair world system that leads to refugees. This is the immediate issue, not some long term goal, and is becoming more urgent every day. We need a peaceful, fair, harmonious world, and this must begin within us. Divisive politics will never solve this problem, the suffering will continue whatever politicians decide of whatever party. The real and permanent solutions require real change within each of us first and foremost, not outside.

LF,

There is nothing in the charter that deals with what happens in international waters, on the moon etc. If you are so sure that turning back boats outside Aus territorial waters does not comply, please feel free to point out the relevant clauses.

The pacific solution was proven effective, with 5000 p.a. arriving before and after the PS and nearly none during.

require real change within each of us first and foremost, not outside.
G R,
I'd have thought the change has to come from outside before the people need to pack up & leave. You make it sound like we are the problem. The problem lies in those countries which produce the refugees, not with us.