david f - take a look at a map of countries that signed the refugee convention here -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_Relating_to_the_Status_of_Refugees
Now look how many countries these people coming here could go that are much closer than Australia but don't instead they come thousands of miles - most are economic refugees or as I say welfare for lifers.

Dear Anthonyve,

I agree that 100% of nothing gets one nowhere. However, they exist and have members who are aware that 100% of nothing gets one nowhere. The realisation may penetrate that one can take small steps to reach a goal. I see little hope in the government and opposition for even taking samll steps toward the goal. I had hopes of Kelvin Themson, the Labor MP, who is concerned with adopting a sustainable population policy. However, in the recent charge of the Ruud brigade he backed Ruud who is for a BIG Australia. Babies and migrants to the right and left of them volleyed and thundered.

Off shore processing and everything in the pacific solution complied with the letter of UNHCR treaty. That it does not apply with the Green's interpretation is irrelevant.

The combination of the Looney "provide the asylum seekers with a taxi service" and the impact on households of the carbon tax, the greens no longer perceived as well meaning air heads rather a costly impost to Australian families.

Australia in regard to the asylum seekers is simply repeating the pattern set in 1938 with different excuses. Crap like: “They’re really economic refugees. Australia really is observing the Refugee Convention.” The refugees are now mostly Muslim with Hindu Tamils and some others, but the pattern is the same. It is simply mean-spirited.

Rudd now has recognised the wrong Australia did in 1938. Maybe in 2086 some Australian will apologise for the actions of the current Australian government and opposition toward the asylum seekers. It will then be much too late.

http://www.jewishnews.net.au/rudd-regrets-evian-failure/18277

Referring to the 1938 conference at Evian, France, where no delegation, except the Dominican Republic, agreed to take Jews whose lives were threatened by the Nazis, Rudd said: ”What we did then as a nation was wrong. Just plain wrong.

“What we did then, in closing our hearts to the Jewish people, was unspeakably wrong,” he told an audience that included the chair of Yad Vashem Avner Shalev. “When it was all said and done and six million people were murdered, the world thought again.”

Unfortunately some don’t seem to think very hard

david f - You avoid my comment with the skill of a politician not wanting to answer something.
Again
Take a look at a map of countries that signed the refugee convention here -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_Relating_to_the_Status_of_Refugees
Now look how many countries these people coming here could go that are much closer than Australia but don't instead they come thousands of miles. WHY? because most are economic refugees

David-f,

For all your bluster, I see that essentially you have admitted that the pacific solution does not conflict with the UNHCR charter.

P.S. What imminent danger are the asylum seekers in whilst in Indonesia?