Australia has only recently passed the 23 million in population.

Yet from 1945 it has taken in 11 million migrants.

Some trickle, eh Poirot?

How does it compare with (say) Japan?

The negative, serial dumpers on Australians could well listen to the remarks of Labor's Bill Shorten on Q&A, Monday 22 July, 2013. See at 28:50 for instance.

http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s3795782.htm

"I take your point about boat deaths, but I've already stated that in my opinion asylum seekers who arrived by boat are driven by the number of people fleeing in general. At this present time in history there is a crisis emanating from that geographical area."

That's your answer/non-solution, Poirot, plus an indication of even deeper revulsion by what happened in Manus that colours your view of the entire PNG solution (Burke is on his way to Manus this week)?

So, coming down to the crunch, we should not attempt to deter boat arrivals with their ongoing deaths (almost daily now). The cognitive dissonance involved in holding such a position must be interesting to live with, Poirot.

Hi Poirot & Luciferase,

The point about 'stopping the boats' is that pretty quickly, if it could be managed, the flow of genuine refugees AND economic refugees INTO Indonesia would dry up. People come to Indonesia because - I don't think this is being too up-myself as an Australian - they want to come to Australia. If that option was ruled out except for an orderly, scheduled annual quota, then people wouldn't waste their money (no offence, Indonesia) travelling all the way to Indonesia.

By the time people get to Indonesia, it represents at least a second-stop, i.e. fleeing out of Afghanistan into Pakistan and from there to Indonesia, or third- or fourth-stop, i.e. fleeing out of Uganda to South Sudan to Kenya and from there to Dubai and then to Indonesia (oops, sorry, that's gthe zero option, there's almost nobody who can afford to do that, so they stay stuck in some sh!thole desert camp, overlooked by the humanitarians in the Greens).

There's a queue. Stop the boats one way or the other and the flow of refugees into Indonesia will wind down. At least, then, the people at the head of the queue, who have been waiting desperately for ten or more years, can get a chance of a level playing field.

Being able to pay smugglers won't then put some others unfairly at the head of the queue - in fact, to be able to completely trash the notion of a 'queue': 'If you can pay a smuggler, the Greens will help you get here while those who can't, can't'. Everybody else can whistle. Year after year.

Cheers,

Joe

The Green want our immigration intake to expand to accommodate anybody arriving by boat. They do not wanta anybody dissuaded from arriving by boat and we have seen the result as trickle has grown to flood and continues to grow, with accompanying deaths.

I think the only thing stopping great numbers turning up in steamships rather than small boats is the cost self-sinking them, if not the extra danger. It's all well thought out, really, so I'd expect the numbers of small boat arrivals to continue to grow without a deterrent.

Luciferase,

I've already stated that I believe Australia should up its intake from Malaysia and Indonesia - so will you stop repeating the question and ignoring my answer.

"....The cognitive dissonance involved in holding such a position must be interesting to live with, Poirot."

Okay.......

As far as cognitive dissonance is concerned, perhaps you should examine your own.

What makes you think that an Australian detention camp set up as a torturous inhuman prison is going to whip itself into some kind of respectable operation? The Minister is only now addressing this issue because he's been "forced" to acknowledge it through the actions of a whistle-blower and ensuing media coverage.

Why shouldn't it colour my view of the Manus "solution"? We're now gearing up to send women and children to the chamber of horrors.

So, while you rightly lament boat deaths, you don't appear at all concerned about sending children off to a place like Manus - and have nary a word to say about the "existence" of such a place operating and presided over by Australian auspices.

Poirot,

Can you understand that the flow of boat-people will not subside by increasing the intake from Malaysia and Indonesia ? Quite the reverse ? That if desperate people elsewhere think they can improve their chances of being part of an annual intake by travelling to that region, and can afford to do so, they will do so ?

In other words, increasing the intake from the region will encourage more people to come, and more people to try it by boat ?

If our government can find a humane way to stop the flow, (maybe by flying everybody who tries it straight back to their departure point?) and actually take FEWER people from the region, i.e. more from other regions like Pakistan and Africa, then FEWER people will travel to Malaysia and Indonesia. What would be the point, after all ?

Just trying to clarify ....

Cheers,

Joe