Does anyone know?

Or is this simply ANOTHER unfunded labor policy.

It appears that some things never change, even with a new leader.

I say agin, stop the foriegn aid, you will at least stand a chance of stopping the boats from leaving.

Lots!

Why would stopping foreign aid stop the boats?

The threat of being sent to camps and resettled in PNG hasn't.

.......

Rechtub is your thread about stopping the boats.
Or is it about the costs.
Maybe it is about cutting costs.
This much is true, a Tony Abbott lead country would be confronted with?
Stopping the boats.
Poirot, and others, must confront harsh truths.
Debate in this matter has pushed both sides to the right.
Include, dislike it if you want to, a truth, behavior of Muslim Migrants is at least in part behind our not wanting boat people.
Unkind but ultimately true.
Never forget, most know/think a lowering of our borders fence would see hundreds of thousands come.
All harsh but true.
Even you may agree with that.
Now.
Tell me, how will the sponsor of these boats/people having sabotaged every attempt to stop them.
Actually stop them if elected?
Abbott has the intellectual ability's of a concrete garden gnome, some of his supporters are not much better.

It hasn't pushed my debate to the right.

But yes, Labor has lurched far right to join the LNP.

Hint: they're gonna come anyway....big refugee crisis now underway, of which Oz receives few by comparison.

I'm thinking that Howard's 'solution" was achieved in part because refugee numbers shrank around that time. There are many more displaced people at present.

Besides, the two parties are merely trawling for votes, whipping up hysteria and playing on paranoia.

That doesn't necessarily translate into actually being able to stem the flow.

Belly, it's not about sabotaging anything, I'll be surprised if either offering can stop them.

Poirot, stopping foreign aid to Indonesia may just force the law makers there to better control who leaves their shores.

It is quite obvious at the moment that one, either they don't care, or two, they are on the take, or three, a combination of one and two.

Belly, while I fully understand, and agree with you that stopping the boats will be the biggest challenge of the incoming government, if we don't do something, and soon, who knows where we will end up.

How on earth anyone can forgive Rudd for this, almost as if he had no involvement defies logic.

Rectub come into the year 2013, what worked temporarily years ago will not work now. Smugglers were always going to find a way around any obstacle.
If what you are saying holds water, how come Abbott is not taking the option of 10years ago up.
Abbott is proposing a system that has been in place since 2005 and adding a star. Did he forget or is he stupid.
I suggest he is stupid. Putting a price on a smugglers head may do just as much as twenty shipps can do. temporarily.
The problem is far bigger and more complicated than, you are giving credit for. Abbott covers his tracks by saying it will take 100 days to implement, even though it is in place now.

Okay, we get it, Doog hates Abbott. You make that point perfectly clear in just about every post you write.

Calling Abbott names as a way of getting your opinion across fails. Like him or not, Abbott is a Rhodes scholar and not stupid. You disagree with his ideas many of which you make up and attribute to him, and then you bag the hell out of him.

Rudd certainly isn't my favourite politician and I fear what he will do if he remains the PM. As mush as I distrust him, I wouldn't call him stupid just because I think he won't follow through.

The boat people are a problem that both sides of Government agree needs attention. In fact most people in the country would like to see almost any solution other than throwing the doors open as would be Poirot's first choice. No one is claiming they have a quick fix and in reality if we knew for certain 100 days is all it will take, which I doubt, I'm sure we will be glad when the boats stop coming. I'm confident Rudd has taken an initial first step in the right direction; pardon the pun.

how come Abbott is not taking the option of 10years ago up.
doog,
Because of so many non-thinkers backing Rudd in dismantling the previous policy we can now not use that policy anymore. A new solution needs to be found. Hopefully Abbott's team has one to announce before the election & late enough not to be sabotaged again by the ignoramuses like last time.

individual,

"..... Hopefully Abbott's team has one to announce before the election...."

What was this then?

http://www.tonyabbott.com.au/LatestNews/PressReleases/tabid/86/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/9311/Operation-Sovereign-Borders.aspx

Here's another angle on the cost of the PNG solution.

My guess is that at the moment the members of left faction of the labor party are very unhappy little Vegemites -- they are fuming and bubbling deep down inside about the PNG solution.But they wont speak up because they want Kevin to walk on water and deliver them the keys of the kingdom.

However, should Kevin deliver (or fail to deliver), they will break their silence and demand huge changes to it.

So the cost or the PNG solution needs to include the cost of adjusting (read emasculating) it to suit ALP leftside sensibilities.

What was this then?
Poirot,
That's just the thing for you lot. Tear into that between now & the election, it'll give you something to do.

"A Coalition government will establish a military-led response to combat people smuggling and to protect our borders – Operation Sovereign Borders."

I'm sorry Individual, but didn't you already know about Abbott's plan to stop the boat people?
Why are you waiting for another 'plan'? I thought Abbott could do no wrong in your eyes?

Rehctub isn't worried about how much the PNG solution will cost Australia, he is more worried about whether people will support Rudd's plan by voting Labor back into office again next election.

I don't like Abbott, but I am now worried about the salary packaging of cars that Labor plans to mess with.
Hmmmmm....but will that be enough to sway me towards the Libs?

individual,

Well I did enjoy the Australian Defence Association "tearing" into Mr Abbott's fiendishly clever plan yesterday - so that's a start.

And I enjoyed Morrison's line that "It isn't a military campaign - it's a military-led campaign."

(?)

That was good.

So our political stage is getting more like a Punch and Judy show by the day - and just as amusing. ( if you like slapstick)

Poirot, no it has not pushed you to the right.
And it has not pushed may be 25% to the right.
But what it has done is remind us maths rules who wins elections.
On this matter, suck it up, because it is true!
Howard won elections.
Labor under Gillard very nearly lost this and the next two.
Like it or lump it my reasons above are near this country,s true views.
And like it or not, much of the hate generated by the greens wish to control our country,s migration and refugee policy,s, if unanswered, will destroy more than one party.
The true focus should be on this.
Can an Abbott government, having rejected or stopped every Labor attempt to stop the flow actually stop them .
Should Australia find the truth pre election Tony Abbott wants them to continue, he will lead his party over a cliff.

Poirot, you just don't get it do you, all this arguing about who's right or who's wrong IS ONLY BECAUSE your beloved Mr Rudd, in all his wisdom ABOLISHED a perfectly functioning system.

All Mr Abbott is trying to do is come up with a solution to a problem that is not of his making.

All you and your labor mates can do is bag him for it.

Talk about hypocrites!

........I'm confident Rudd has taken an initial first step in the right direction; pardon the pun.

Yes sbr108, but at what cost?

Is this too much to ask?

Does ANYONE know?

.....how come Abbott is not taking the option of 10years ago up.
doog, I am the first to admit that what worked prior to Kevins brain fart, would not necessarily work today, HOWEVER, had the previous WORKING SYSTEM been left in place, I have NO DOUBT it would have been easier to tweak that WORKING SYSTEM than to throw it away and start afresh.

Suz, I am very concerned about how much the PNG solution is going to cost, why, because ONE, we don't have the money, and TWO, we don't have the money.

Now as for Kevin getting back in, yes, I am worried, not because of Kevin, because I actually quite like the man, but more because he is simply a puppet, as it's the party that runs labor, not the man, as his strings are pulled from above.

Now of cause the likes of Belly will jump at me for saying that, but seriously, Bill shorten was the ONLY reason Kevin got the job, and he's still there doing what he does best, pulling the strings, or at least holding them till the next time they need pulling.

Every labor lover needs to remember one very very important fact, that being we are only trying to fix something that wasn't broken until your beloved Kevin came along.

NEVER EVER FORGET THAT!

rectub Have you found out what this is going to cost yet.
Your opinion is your opinion, doesn't add up to anything. The best laws of long ago need updating from time to time. Abbott is a rabbit and nothing is going to change that. To rebadge a system that is already there is for small minds.

P,

Pity you have so little to go on. A few ex servicemen criticizing the structure of Abbott's plan (not its effectiveness), which was put down immediately by Gen Hurley.

The point of the coalition's plan is not a magic bullet, it is a combination of TPVs, detention, towing the boats back, off shore processing, settlement in PNG etc.

The alternative is the Greens / Labor plan which involves drastically increasing the size of the morgue at Xmas island.

Abbott would have done better to join forces with the govt; rather than come up with something that is hypothetical.
We will vote for a govt; not a solution.
That naval person did not retire for no reason.
Abbott has not only got PNG, Indonesia, against him now it's the Navy.

rehctub,

Why would you say "my beloved Rudd"?

I've been just as robust in criticising him on this issue as I have Abbott.

You say you quite like him....except that he is a puppet of the party.

That's kinda strange, since he roared back and turned the "party" upside down, knocked all the collective heads together, etc to give them a fighting chance at the election...

I'd say the party is a puppet of him....but a willing one at the moment.

Shadow Minister,

I do note that that media release by the ADA is no longer up on the site.

Notwithstanding, the "first" thing General Hurley did was release this:

http://news.defence.gov.au/2013/07/25/a-statement-from-the-chief-of-the-defence-force-2/

Frankly, if the rate of refugees emanating from that region remains the same as it is at present, I think that both schemes are going to be ineffectual.

I note in the wake of Rudd's announcement, the boats haven't stopped yet.

Doog I welcome your contributions, as can be expected from a Labor owned bloke like me.
But gee hope you like a laugh.
You will note the near verbal snearing about Rudd.
But under a post of yours above a snear-er seems up set, that you dislike Abbott good stuff!
And we are about to see just how close this race is and wait for it!

That removing their leader, just as Labor did, could tilt the scales.
Hopefully after we smack them.

And we are about to see just how close this race is and wait for it!
Belly,
If they had an election in a lunatic asylum would you expect the 5 bureaucrat managers getting voted in by the 3 wardens or would the leader of the 150 lunatics get more votes ?

You want to know how much the PNG solution(?) is going to cost? heaps, and my guess is it won't work anyway.
http://rightnow.org.au/topics/asylum-seekers/the-economic-cost-of-our-asylum-seeker-policy/

To summarize the situation, it is costing Australia about $120,000 per asylum seeker per year, under the current detention arrangements, and the so called PNG solution would be even more expensive.

At this point in time people are prepared to risk their lives to get here, and so it should be obvious that none of the proposed measures, that either the labour, or liberals have come up with is going to stop asylum seekers from trying to reach Australia. If it is indeed the view of the majority that we should put a stop to this mode of travel, then as far as I can see there is only one way this can be achieved, and that is to simply put them straight back on a plane to their point of departure. That would then mean we would have to withdraw our support for the UN refugee convention, which at this point in time we are probably not complying with anyway.

It would be practical to say to Indonesia we will take all the take all the refugees and asylum seekers you currently have in the country (about 10,000) and then no more, after that we will simply fly them back to you. It would also be sensible to bring all those people in our various offshore detention camps to Australia, where after suitable security checks, we would allow residency. In addition it would improve our standing in the world if we also increased Australia's total refugee intake.

Much as I would like to see Australia accept all refugees and asylum seekers I believe it is simply not practical to do so.

....Abbott would have done better to join forces with the govt; rather than come up with something that is hypothetical.

doog, the same could be said about Rudd, whereby he would have done better to leave a working system alone. He just couldn't resist could he, now we are all paying the price, oh, not him though I might add.

Thanks for that warmair, or should I say thanks, but I wish you didn't.

So, hands up who thinks Rudd deserves another shot a this, because after all, he did cause this mess.

At this point in time people are prepared to risk their lives to get here,
warmair,
That does sound dramatic & many actually do pay the ultimate price. They calculate that risk & they take their chances based on the average outcome that is reaching Australia. I guarantee that if the failure rate was as high as it would be if they weren't saved they would not take that risk.
Those who send them are of course not too perturbed as long as the numbers are building up here as this is the main aim.
Ask around & see if Australians would be more willing to take in refugees if they weren't fanatic religious agenda based. You'd be surprised how many wouldn't object.

"Frankly, if the rate of refugees emanating from that region remains the same as it is at present, I think that both schemes are going to be ineffectual. I note in the wake of Rudd's announcement, the boats haven't stopped yet."
Poirot, good point, I supported Rudd's "solution" simply because I believed it would stop the boats and save peoples lives. I never though that anyone would end up being resettled in PNG. The jury is still out as to the effectiveness of it all. Rudd and Labor have a lot riding on it politically, if it fails then its curtains for Labor. The danger then is if the conservatives solution is implemented and it fails then I can see even more inhuman and draconian measures being implemented by the Coalition, particularly if they were to take control of the Senate.

Rehctub "Every labor lover needs to remember one very very important fact, that being we are only trying to fix something that wasn't broken until your beloved Kevin came along."

I'm no fan of Rudd, and if indeed he did 'break' the former laws re asylum seekers, then what I don't understand is WHY Abbott didn't reintroduce Howard's laws again now?

Why can't we have the protection visa's back?
Isn't it true that in today's world problems , it does appear that there are far more refugees looking for help than back in Howard's day though?

I don't believe the PNG solution will work, but then neither will the wispy-washy ' military' solution proffered by the Liberals...

SOL,

"what I don't understand is WHY Abbott didn't reintroduce Howard's laws again now?"

As opposition leader that is impossible. If he could he would.

I have been thinking.
I think and hope honestly.
About my views stated here in general and just what are they.
A bias as some say? a miss informed group of my hopes?
Do any of us truly know what our posts are.
Well on this subject here are what I think are both my true thoughts and facts about this subject.
True solutions for stopping the flow of the boats are becoming rare, and very hard task with increasingly fewer answers.
I believe both sides know, this stand by Rudd is both costly, the whole issue has been and is frighteningly costly.
And both sides , seeing coalition has said it will keep the policy, think it in time, at great cost, will work.
Other country,s in the region may take part, and opponents to our rejection of mass uninvited refugees, will highlight a truth, it is costing too much.
But most, doubt if you want, are willing to pay, to stop the boats, forever.
We tend to forget, at least the teary eyed advocates of open door policy,s, that in one single day,say Egypt exploding in to internal war we could see hundreds of thousands set out to come here.
Forget at your peril, current migrant enclavism, longterm welfare reliance and a separatism never seen in past migration arrivals has driven us, mostly, to refuse that open gate not be closed.

The UNHCR refugee camps get tents, so why bother with more than that.
PNG is a good idea. If it works or not, only time will tell. Abbott has done no favors at all, while saying at the same time they will keep PNG.
All that does is show his non intelligence and treat AU as a dump.

Susie,
When the Libs get office, TPVs will likely be the first thing introduced. However the illegals and the smugglers now reckon we are so soft that it will take far more to stop them coming.

Rudd, and Gillard, have so weakened any respect the illegals had for us that they now laugh at us. That may change with a new government.

Labor will not have TPVs because it was 'a Howard thing'

Banjo, Abbott has introduced his military solution for 'if' they get into Government.
But no mention of TPV's ?

There seems to be a tendency here to argue about the wrong problem.
Egypt is in really deep trouble, they cannot feed their population, they cannot afford to buy
food or fuel.
The Nile can feed about 40 million people but their population is 83 million.
They are living on charity from the Gulf states at present but that cannot go on forever.

Either 40 million have to starve to death or 40 million have to leave the country.
How many millions will come this way ?

Egypt is said to be the first post peak oil failed state.

TPV's?

I always thought that stood for "Tony's Policy Vacuum".

(Don't mention the wa.....ahem, I mean "military-led operation")

SOL,

"Banjo, Abbott has introduced his military solution for 'if' they get into Government.
But no mention of TPV's ?"

What planet have you been on? These have been mentioned hundreds of times. The announcement of involvement of the navy in the day to day organisation of the tow back policy, does not mean that everything else is being dropped.

.....I'm no fan of Rudd, and if indeed he did 'break' the former laws re asylum seekers, then what I don't understand is WHY Abbott didn't reintroduce Howard's laws again now?

Suz, two reasons, one, he's not in government, and two, it hard to reimpliment something once it's been abandoned. However, as I have admitted, that system may well have been out dated by now, but if you have something in place, it's much easier to tweak it than to start over, as labor have found out

....Labor will not have TPVs because it was 'a Howard thing'

That about sums it up Banyo.

Bazz, birth control is the first place to start.

Rechub, well yes agreed, but that would take many decades to have any effect.
Egypt needs to do something tomorrow morning !
I reffered to a web site recently showing a petrol station totally blocked by empty cars.
Food & services are not being delivered because of diesel shortages.
Imported food is not being delivered because they have not paid their bills.

The revolutions started not because of Mubarik but because of the price of food & fuel.
It will be interesting to see how long a rope the IMF will offer them.

In the end, have no doubt, Rechtubs words probably see more voters flee the Libs than come.
I wish it was possible to put them in neon lights ten feet high in every City.

Dream on Belly, it's about the only thing that's left that's free amd doesn't require cuts to the budget to implement.

So enjoy!

Talking to an Afghan refugee the other day, he reckons, from talking to other Afghans who all agree, that when the foreign forces withdraw from Afghanistan and the Taliban take over, which will take about 5 minutes, it will be a case of "you ain't seen nothin' yet" when it comes to asylum-seekers.

It might even have got to the stage where no legal or policy change will stop them.

Shadow Minister "What planet have you been on? These have been mentioned hundreds of times."

I didn't ask you the question Shadow Minister. I realise I have never been on the same planet as you...thank goodness.

Did you read rechtub's answer?
I tend to believe someone who explains it quite plainly, as opposed to someone who is being rude.
If you want to speak to me like that, you really should get me a chew toy...

Joy! that I think must be the feeling of a very hungry spider after a fly stumbles in to its web.
Rechtub.
Any observer of politics understands with no room for doubt Abbott,s intentions if he wins.
Is to cut, just about every thing.
You in throwing that at me, seem unable to know that it is true.
And the depth of your understanding should, like me, know the election is on a knifes edge.
Considering my view just a month ago? I have every right to my happy view.
And it must have shocked you, to see the coin on the foot path turn and run as you nearly had it in your pocket..

"Fiji's Foreign Minister Ratu Inoke Kubuabola has accused Australia of using its economic muscle to persuade PNG to accept thousands of people who are not Pacific Islanders into its country."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-07-29/fiji-government-slams-australia-png-asylum-deal/4850136

Mr Kuuabola makes a good point about Australia thinking it can use poor third world countries in the region as a dumping group for asylum seekers.

The 7.30 Report last night covered the situation on Manus Island as far as the locals are concerned. It would seem someone thinks its okay to turn the place into a rubbish dump.

MOAT JOHNLOW, VILLAGER (voiceover translation): We get lots of blowflies and the rubbish affects our environment that we use to grow sago.

LIAM FOX: This is where waste from the processing centre is dumped. Flies fill the air. Maggots cover the ground. The stench is indescribable.

MOAT JOHNLOW (voiceover translation): When we're eating our dinner, the flies come and disturb us. When we catch fish and leave them outside before we cook, the flies spoil them and we have to throw them away.

LIAM FOX: Countless thousands of plastic water bottles, plates, knives and forks have been left in the open, along with everything from rotting food to bed linen. Local villagers have asked for the rubbish to be buried or burned.

MOAT JOHNLOW (voiceover translation): They don't care. They don't care.

Would we tolerate this in the middle of Sydney?

It is interesting that little regard is being given to the feelings of the local PNG population on this. Maybe Mr Kubuabola is right.

SOL,

R said that Labor is not going to introduce TPVs, as to the pacific solution, it is more difficult to re install once labor has stuffed it up.

As to your comment wrt TPVs, the coalition has made is clear that it intends to introduce TPVs. Abbott in announcing one policy change was unlikely to feel the need to review all his policies in one statement.

Dudd in announcing the PNG solution did not mention Nauru or other detention.

Butcher spelt back to front wants to know how much, i say it should be sponsored from foreign aid money. This is a foreign situation, so that spending has to be justifiable.
Tents cost money, they can live on coconuts, who knows they might want to go home or take their chances with a spear.

Here's an interesting article.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2013/coalitions-tent-city-trip-funded-by-logistics-company-that-provides-tents-20130730-2qws3.html

"A logistics company that stands to profit from the Coalition's "tent city" on Nauru funded the trip of its immigration spokesman Scott Morrison and a journalist and photographer from News Corporation to the remote island to announce the plan.

The trip to Nauru was facilitated by Toll Holdings, which has multimillion-dollar contracts already to help handle asylum seekers and is eager for more business in the area."

Maybe Labor can "strike a deal" too.

The mind boggles.

@ Poriot,

<< "A logistics company that stands to profit from the Coalition's "tent city" on Nauru...>>

Still, it is a darnside better that a tax-payer funded entity like the ABC (and SBS) actively campaigning for open borders, and daily vilifying the Oz population.

In recent weeks BOTH SBS & the ABC have dropped any pretense of balance. They are both hard at it campaigning for open borders.

It is no longer *OUR* ABC, if it ever was, but more the Asylum-scammers Broadcasting Service.

SPQR,

I think you're working from an old script regarding the ABC.

Abbott, for instance has received just as smooth a ride there as he has in the independent media.

He face barely a whimper from the ABC in the wake of revelations about his having to repay travel expenses.

He was interviewed by Chris Uhlmann a while back on his policy for turning back the boats...and this interview took place on the rather convenient night that the harder hitting Leigh Sales had a "night off". Uhlmann kept hitting him with a feather - so much so that Abbott had to keep regurgitating (5 times) that "Howard did it".

I'm inclined to think these days that the ABC are behind the LNP to win the election, from those and other instances

Apparently Morrison remarked that journalist Jonathan Swan's report on Toll was "sour grapes" - because he didn't get an invite.

Yep, Morrison is representative of our pollies these days - race to the bottom and all that.

@Poriot,

No. I’m very much reading from the lastest ABC script.

I suggest for starters --anyone with an open mind (which kinda leaves you out!) have a listen to:

1)Jonathan Green's --Sunday Extra (last Sunday).Un-beeeeeeeeeeeeeliiiiiiiiiiiiievably bias! I am sure I've heard somewhere that the govt is not permitted to show the faces of asylum scammers when it runs adverts etc, as part of the provisions of one of the convenants we've signed.

Yet, there Jonahan Green with his tame academic in tow citing the blurring of facial features in the adverts as evidence we were trying to objectify them, depersonalise them, and how characteristic it was.... yada yada yada.I would love --if only I had the time -- to go through the transcript of his show --it was absolutely dripping with bias

2) Have a look at Fran Kelly's - The Breakfast Program, last interview with SCot Morrison. In the course of 3 minutes she morphed from a disinterested interviwer to a raving advocate.

But as I said before, my observations would be all lost on you --you're all for such *educating* of the public!

P,

The only people I see racing to the bottom are the boat people.

Given that there is a direct ratio between the number of boat arrivals and the number of drownings, your obvious unwillingness to take any action to deter people from getting on these boats implies that:

a) you don't care about the drownings, or

b) you believe this is a separate (or someone else's problem), or

c) you have a magic solution that no one else has thought of.

P.S. I am amazed at how easily your mind is boggled. I assume that it is also boggled by Dudd's jetting everywhere at the taxpayer's expense.

SM,

I have no simple solution to the refugee crisis.

I do, however, know when I see two parties revving up their populist rhetoric, tossing ethics to wind, etc merely to get themselves re-elected.

When have I defended Rudd on this issue?

Rudd and his cohorts stink on this issue, IMO.

Abbott and his cohorts stink on this issue, IMO.

"a) you don't care about the drownings"

Thanks, mate, you really think that's how I feel.

I do see through the rhetoric that most of the people crying crocodile tears on "the drownings" are amongst the most rabid spruikers against allowing "these people" safe haven, whatever the circumstances.

"b) you believe this is a separate (or someone else's problem)"

Well, that's a laugh - Here are our political representatives dumping "our problem" on our poor neighbours for political kudos, seemingly with your tacit approval...and you accuse me of criticising the move.

P,

"I have no simple solution to the refugee crisis."

No one has!

While I agree with you that the drownings issue has be suborned by those that just don't like the boats, the harsh reality is that there is no concrete counter answer to it. More boats = more people drowning, stopping people drowning = stopping the boats.

The point where refugee advocates could argue that the increase in boats was because of push factors has been passed years ago, and there is no doubt that a deterrent or "punishment" is required no matter how odious.

Labor's half Rssed approach has let the situation deteriorate to the point where the already harsh Pacific solution deterrents are not sufficient, and the harshest yet PNG solution is now needed.

The coalition's response is to use all the effective deterrents incl tow backs and TPVs. The tow backs should not be underestimated, as it means the people lose all their money and risk an Indonesian detention center. A handful of tow backs in the 2000s had a disproportionate effect on the flow of boats. TPVs stopped people from bringing in relatives.

To do nothing is to let people die.

Article on Serco and its contracts with the government,...costs, profit, etc.

http://m.smh.com.au/national/serco-profits-rise-as-detention-contracts-hit-186bn-20130419-2i5ln.html

For goodness sake stop arguing;
The answer is simple, do exactly what we do virtually everyday when someone arrives without proper documenttion.
Put then on the next lane back to where they came from.