Pericles - Oh how wrong you are, I did not want to get into an economics debate with you simply because there is 2 factor you simply do not want to accept.

If we did not have these ECONOMIC INVADERS coming this country would be far better of.

There is very little net gain to the economy the wealth goes mostly to a very few individuals the bosses of serco etc.
Also it is unproductive as the more we pander to them the more will come.

Dear SM,

How disappointing that you didn't even consider
at least some aspects of the
solution that was being suggested in the link
that I cited. Instead of the huge costs involved
in what we currently have.
You merely brushed it aside as
a "goup hug," whereas it was far more than that
but then of course you support a Party that has
now made cuts to foreign-aid while increasing
its military budget so of course you wouldn't
see the value of striving towards bettering the
situations of those in their own countries to
stop them from getting on boats in the first place.

Ah well, At least I did try.

SM,

I wasn't asking for formal qualifications (as you, no doubt, are well aware) I was enquiring as to this doctor's expertise in assessing asylum claims.

She is employed as a medical professional, not as an assessor.

Or should we just let all the doctors tell us who is and who isn't a bonafide refugee, on the grounds of their requests and responses during the health check-up?

Poirot, "Or should we just let all the doctors tell us who is and who isn't a bonafide refugee, on the grounds of their requests and responses during the health check-up?"

Interesting then that you didn't challenge Foxy's post and link where two doctors (two would be doubly worse than one in your book) propose an international 'solution' to the economic invasion.

Rudd's idealism has cost Australia very dearly according to Foxy's link:

"The financial cost of maintaining the extensive naval and air operations and a national and international detention system is more than $8 billion a year - more than that of the national disability insurance scheme and the national broadband network combined."

As someone who is gravely concerned about politicians' travel perks (on one side at least), you should be even more angry, livid in fact, about Rudd's $8 billion dollar a year waste (and counting as others try to correct his mistake). That is a record as far as mistakes go!

Any wonder the electorate recently put the rubbish out in Canberra.

Dear OTB,

May I politely suggest that you go back and re-read
the link I gave earlier.

Neither side of politics comes out of dealing with this
emotive problem of asylum seekers rather well.

And as stated, "neither side discusses the moral cost
of maintaining a network of prisons" that house men,
women, and children indefinitely, let alone the costs
to the people themselves. Some of the harshest policies
and most expensive came from the Howard government's
term in office. Plus the current government when in
Opposition had an unshakeable determination to return
all boats to their origins. So, as the article ppoints
out, "The two major parties were competing with each other
for the cruelest, harshest policies."

Then, go back and again read
the qualifications of the two distinguished writers,
their qualifications, and experiences, and perhaps then
you shall grasp as to why they are indeed qualified to
write and speak about human rights issues and why Poirot
did not object.

PhillipS, SM and OTB carry on about a doctor's ability to decide who is or who isn't a 'genuine' asylum seeker.

May I politely suggest that you guys are even less qualified than the doctor to decide these issues either.

Do you honestly believe that the Immigration officials, who definitely ARE qualified to make these decisions, can so blatantly and easily have the wool pulled over their eyes by what you all consider are economic refugees?

Do you not think they have heard and seen it all before?

They already KNOW all the tricks and schemes tried out before by illegal immigrants and are trained to root them out.

However, it seems the vast majority of these boat people have been accepted as refugees.
So, everyone else is wrong except you 'special' guys with obvious 'special' knowledge of all the asylum seekers' situations?

ROFL...