http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/immigration/pms-abbott-solution-falters-as-julia-gillard-rises-in-newspoll/story-fn9hm1gu-1226141576829

JULIA Gillard is seeking to blame future asylum boat arrivals on Tony Abbott as Labor prepares to abandon offshore processing in the face of political deadlock.

The Prime Minister today accused Mr Abbott of neglecting the national interest by refusing to back Labor's Malaysian Solution, saying he was “terrified Malaysia would work”.

“His political opposition will see more boats come to this country - that's how reckless he's being,” Ms Gillard told ABC radio.

But the Opposition Leader said processing on Nauru remained the best option, and it was the government's responsibility to break the stalemate.

“My responsibility is to good policy and consistent policy,” Mr Abbott told Seven's Sunrise program.

“If the government wants offshore processing, it can have offshore processing, it should have offshore processing, and it should be at Nauru.”

He also held out the possibility of Coalition support for processing on Papua New Guinea's Manus Island if the government agreed to the opposition's proposed changes to the Migration Act.

But Labor is standing firm. Immigration Minister Chris Bowen said if the stalemate was not resolved the government would be forced into onshore-only processing.

The government wants to allow offshore processing in countries that provide protections offered under the UN refugee convention without having to be signatories to the agreement.

“If the legislation does fail that will mean any offshore would not be legally sound and we would not be able to proceed,” Mr Bowen said.

As the government prepares to introduce its changes to the Migration Act to parliament tomorrow, Mr Bowen accused the opposition of “Malaysia bashing”.

“Being a signatory to the refugee convention is important but it is not the be-all and end-all,” Mr Bowen told ABC Radio.

“Malaysia went into this in good faith and why should we or anybody doubt their commitment to abiding by the undertakings we have negotiated? We have negotiated this in good faith and I think some of the Malaysian bashing is very unfortunate.”

The opposition wants processing countries to be full parties to the refugee convention.

Opposition legal affairs spokesman George Brandis said the Coalition was prepared to go “some of the way” in helping the government change the Migration Act.

“But we will not tolerate an Act with absolutely no human rights protection,” he told ABC Radio.

Under Labor's Malaysian arrangement, up to 800 asylum-seekers arriving in Australia by boat would have been transferred to Kuala Lumpur in exchange for Australia accepting 4000 properly-processed refugees.

The Coalition says its alternative - reopening an offshore processing centre in Nauru - is an effective deterrent with a more humane outcome.

LIBs has a bad policy = LIBs fault

Labor has a bad policy = LIBs fault

Labor has a bad policy to fix Labor's bad policy = LIBs fault

Tony Abbott is a piss weak bigot and a prick with ears who will hide under his bed like the sniveling coward he is if he ever becomes Prime Minister

corporate_whitey wrote on Sep 20^th, 2011 at 6:24pm:

Tony Abbott is a piss weak bigot and a prick with ears who will hide under his bed like the sniveling coward he is if he ever becomes Prime Minister

That's why Gillard has 26% primary vote

Maqqa wrote on Sep 20^th, 2011 at 6:26pm:

corporate_whitey wrote on Sep 20th, 2011 at 6:24pm: Tony Abbott is a piss weak bigot and a prick with ears who will hide under his bed like the sniveling coward he is if he ever becomes Prime Minister That's why Gillard has 26% primary vote

Big deal, Abotts is 28%

The Coalition if they become the Government will not win an election, the Labour party will lose it. They will have no mandate and that is why they too will be pitifully weak.  Social change is coming - move with it or get rolled over by the collective.

had to take this govt seriously... it really is..blame blame blame.. from the govt that said AND THE BUCK STOPS WITH ME..lol..

so far they have tried to dodge everything...

shes a nasty piece of goods isnt she..

first she doesnt want to give single pensioners an increase claims they dont vote for labor..

then she pretends to be kevins friend

then she stabs him in the back all the time smiling smiling..

then she tells us THERE WILL BE NO CARBON TAX..

then she TELLS US THERE WILL BE A TOXIC TAX SO THERE>>> FOOLED YA!

and NO YOU CANT HAVE A SAY IN IT>> SO SUCK IT UP..

now everything she touches turns to ashes.. and its all the LIBS fault..


hey I see where Wayne got treasurer of the year.. :D

do you think they might give Costello a bit of credit for leaving them a surplus and a great economy????.dont be silly!

Seriously, give it up Julia. We've had it. Who:

1. got rid of the successful Pacific Solution?
2. stuffed up the pink batts?
3. promised no carbon tax, then introduced one?
4. promised to not send boat people to a non signatory of the UN convention?
5. is supporting an MP who used union funds to stick his manhood up pros?

We're not stupid, take responsibility for your own actions. Yes, Mr Abbott and the Coalition are being negative, but what other way is there to be about this pathetic, inept, corrupt, incompetent so called government?

Looks like Abbott's going to vote to keep the boats comming.

Hypocrits support this while at the same time posting other topics complaining about the refugees.

How do you guys justify playing both sides of the fence at the same time?

Remember Abbott freely made the offer to help change the legislation then he quickly regeged on his own deal.

Yes, how many times must a man look up
Before he can see the sky ?
Yes, how many big ears must one man have
Before he can hear people cry ?
Yes, how many deaths will it take till he knows
That too many people have died ?
The answer Mr Abbott is blowin 'with the wind
Tony is blowin' with the wind.

Quote:

The Prime Minister today accused Mr Abbott of neglecting the national interest by refusing to back Labor's Malaysian Solution, saying he was “terrified Malaysia would work”. “His political opposition will see more boats come to this country - that's how reckless he's being,” Ms Gillard told ABC radio.

Sums it up nicely.

Dnarever wrote on Sep 20^th, 2011 at 8:45pm:

Quote: The Prime Minister today accused Mr Abbott of neglecting the national interest by refusing to back Labor's Malaysian Solution, saying he was “terrified Malaysia would work”. “His political opposition will see more boats come to this country - that's how reckless he's being,” Ms Gillard told ABC radio. Sums it up nicely.

That's utter stupidity even by your standard dna

Labor created this mess and they are trying to allocate blame

If Abbott did the same you would be scream blue murder

Maqqa wrote on Sep 20^th, 2011 at 8:48pm:

Dnarever wrote on Sep 20th, 2011 at 8:45pm: Quote: The Prime Minister today accused Mr Abbott of neglecting the national interest by refusing to back Labor's Malaysian Solution, saying he was “terrified Malaysia would work”. “His political opposition will see more boats come to this country - that's how reckless he's being,” Ms Gillard told ABC radio. Sums it up nicely. That's utter stupidity even by your standard dna Labor created this mess and they are trying to allocate blame If Abbott did the same you would be scream blue murder

If Abbott wants to block fixing the problem he should be happy to accept the blame for the results of his action - its very obviously what he deserves.

Watch cspan from capitial hill and you'll know Tony's next move.
His playing from the exact same playbook as the repugs over there.
Power at all costs, never mind the damage, we'll try and clean it up once we are in power.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 20^th, 2011 at 8:59pm:

Watch cspan from capitial hill and you'll know Tony's next move. His playing from the exact same playbook as the repugs over there. Power at all costs, never mind the damage, we'll try and clean it up once we are in power.

P off with your power at all costs. Juliar lied to the Australian people to get power at all cost. She told the people that they were extremists for thinking the way they do.

Labor, power at all costs.

progressiveslol wrote on Sep 20^th, 2011 at 9:02pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 20th, 2011 at 8:59pm: Watch cspan from capitial hill and you'll know Tony's next move. His playing from the exact same playbook as the repugs over there. Power at all costs, never mind the damage, we'll try and clean it up once we are in power. P off with your power at all costs. Juliar lied to the Australian people to get power at all cost. She told the people that they were extremists for thinking the way they do. Labor, power at all costs.

Do you enjoy being manipulated by corporate interests?

I think it is marvellous that Abbott and Gillard's ridiculous race to the bottom on asylum seekers, and their desperate attempts to play politics over the issue, will actually lead to the end of off-shore processing for a long time to come.

If the Liberals don't support the Labor amendments while they are in opposition, they sure as hell won't get their own amendments passed through  when they are in Government. The Greens won't be supporting the legislation and its highly likely they will still have the balance of power in the Senate come 2013.

The two majors cut off their noses to spite their face and we get onshore processing for at least another electoral cycle.

Every cloud does have a silver lining.

Luke Fowler wrote on Sep 20^th, 2011 at 9:20pm:

I think it is marvellous that Abbott and Gillard's ridiculous race to the bottom on asylum seekers, and their desperate attempts to play politics over the issue, will actually lead to the end of off-shore processing for a long time to come. If the Liberals don't support the Labor amendments while they are in opposition, they sure as hell won't get their own amendments passed through  when they are in Government. The Greens won't be supporting the legislation and its highly likely they will still have the balance of power in the Senate come 2013. The two majors cut off their noses to spite their face and we get onshore processing for at least another electoral cycle. Every cloud does have a silver lining.

Hope you are right.

Hello macca, long time no see, so to speak.  

Am I right about this -

1.  Gillard gets into the Political bed with the loopy Greens so she can form Goverment
2.  Brown proceeds to call the shots and Gillard obeys
3.  The Greens are behind the "air we breath" tax and Julia obeys because she must have their support
4.  But then, Brown won't support Gillard's people trading Policy of sending refugees/illegals to Malaya, a country not a signatory to the UN Refugee Convention.  Gillard said she would never send refugees to such a country.........ho, hum
5.  Gillard now attacks the Libs because she can't get her stinking way.  Why isn't she attacking Bob Brown and his merry band of loonies?  They are her partners in her watermelon alliance after all.
6.  According to Gillard, she is the only one who can run Australia, only she is right and only she is acting in the 'NATIONAL INTEREST".  

I must have heard her and her cronies mention the slogan "national interest" dozens and dozens of times in recent days.  It's a pity she didn't think of that when she and her mates went on a $billion upon $billion upon $billion spendathon with taxpayers money.  It's a pity she didn't think of that when she and her mates dismantled Howard's Pacific Solution, a solution that worked as it virtually stopped the boats in their tracks, and stopped the terrible drownings at sea as well.

But no, it's all Abbott's fault.  Gillard is blaming others for something that she and her mates did.  But that's what Labor do well, isn't it?

What I can't understand is how Laborites on here and also other blog sites, attempt to defend the indefensible....what a sorry lot they are

Dnarever wrote on Sep 20^th, 2011 at 9:28pm:

Luke Fowler wrote on Sep 20th, 2011 at 9:20pm: I think it is marvellous that Abbott and Gillard's ridiculous race to the bottom on asylum seekers, and their desperate attempts to play politics over the issue, will actually lead to the end of off-shore processing for a long time to come. If the Liberals don't support the Labor amendments while they are in opposition, they sure as hell won't get their own amendments passed through  when they are in Government. The Greens won't be supporting the legislation and its highly likely they will still have the balance of power in the Senate come 2013. The two majors cut off their noses to spite their face and we get onshore processing for at least another electoral cycle. Every cloud does have a silver lining. Hope you are right.

If Abbott gets a big enough majority at the next election (which is very likely), stand by for a double dissolution at the first sign of Senate (ie Green) obscurantism. If the electorate gives Abbott a big majority, it will still support him if he can show that the Greens are acting against his pre-election policies that got him elected.

So if Abbott wins big, the Greens will be wiped out soon after as Abbott will still get over 50% of the vote in a double dissolution. The Greens will be out in the cold for 8 years - a very long time for a minor party. Brown will be gone and the green and red factions will tear the party apart.

Soren wrote on Sep 20^th, 2011 at 10:22pm:

Dnarever wrote on Sep 20th, 2011 at 9:28pm: Luke Fowler wrote on Sep 20th, 2011 at 9:20pm: I think it is marvellous that Abbott and Gillard's ridiculous race to the bottom on asylum seekers, and their desperate attempts to play politics over the issue, will actually lead to the end of off-shore processing for a long time to come. If the Liberals don't support the Labor amendments while they are in opposition, they sure as hell won't get their own amendments passed through  when they are in Government. The Greens won't be supporting the legislation and its highly likely they will still have the balance of power in the Senate come 2013. The two majors cut off their noses to spite their face and we get onshore processing for at least another electoral cycle. Every cloud does have a silver lining. Hope you are right. If Abbott gets a big enough majority at the next election (which is very likely), stand by for a double dissolution at the first sign of Senate (ie Green) obscurantism. If the electorate gives Abbott a big majority, it will still support him if he can show that the Greens are acting against his pre-election policies that got him elected. So if Abbott wins big, the Greens will be wiped out soon after as Abbott will still get over 50% of the vote in a double dissolution. The Greens will be out in the cold for 8 years - a very long time for a minor party. Brown will be gone and the green and red factions will tear the party apart.

Even if Tony Abbott manages to force a DD, methinks you are overestimating the popularity of an incumbent who would mess with our democracy thus!

Abbott has already demonstrated a flagrant disregard for both parliamentary and judicial processes - and a willingness to dispense with his own party's principles in the process...

Don't bet on the general public putting up with Abbott's incessant crap on an indefinite basis!

I'd still wager that Abbott's Tropposition is the most popular opposition never to be elected!

You've got it back to front, numpty bird.

Abbott will not force a DD - the Greens will because they will have no choice. To retain credibility, they will have to oppose an Abbott government. Their success at the last election will be the rope they will b hung by at the next.

If the current polls are reproduced in an election, the Abbott majority in the Lower House will be massive, giving him a comfortable margin to take on the Greens. It will be a case of the Grens finding themselves opposing a government that has an even bigger mandate than they do. So the Greens will be wiped out of the Senate in a DD.

Howard will be GG,  Costello the Governor of the Reserve Bank.

Luke Fowler wrote on Sep 20^th, 2011 at 9:20pm:

I think it is marvellous that Abbott and Gillard's ridiculous race to the bottom on asylum seekers, and their desperate attempts to play politics over the issue, will actually lead to the end of off-shore processing for a long time to come. If the Liberals don't support the Labor amendments while they are in opposition, they sure as hell won't get their own amendments passed through  when they are in Government. The Greens won't be supporting the legislation and its highly likely they will still have the balance of power in the Senate come 2013. The two majors cut off their noses to spite their face and we get onshore processing for at least another electoral cycle. Every cloud does have a silver lining.

How many seats will the ALP and/or Greens win with those numbers?

How many seats are up for re-election in 2013

Luke Fowler wrote on Sep 20^th, 2011 at 9:20pm:

I think it is marvellous that Abbott and Gillard's ridiculous race to the bottom on asylum seekers, and their desperate attempts to play politics over the issue, will actually lead to the end of off-shore processing for a long time to come. If the Liberals don't support the Labor amendments while they are in opposition, they sure as hell won't get their own amendments passed through  when they are in Government. The Greens won't be supporting the legislation and its highly likely they will still have the balance of power in the Senate come 2013. The two majors cut off their noses to spite their face and we get onshore processing for at least another electoral cycle. Every cloud does have a silver lining.

Will you also think it wonderful when a few more boats are lost at sea with all hands, or more boats end up on the rocks at Christmas Island?
Some silver lining that is.

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Sep 21^st, 2011 at 6:54am:

Luke Fowler wrote on Sep 20th, 2011 at 9:20pm: I think it is marvellous that Abbott and Gillard's ridiculous race to the bottom on asylum seekers, and their desperate attempts to play politics over the issue, will actually lead to the end of off-shore processing for a long time to come. If the Liberals don't support the Labor amendments while they are in opposition, they sure as hell won't get their own amendments passed through  when they are in Government. The Greens won't be supporting the legislation and its highly likely they will still have the balance of power in the Senate come 2013. The two majors cut off their noses to spite their face and we get onshore processing for at least another electoral cycle. Every cloud does have a silver lining. Will you also think it wonderful when a few more boats are lost at sea with all hands, or more boats end up on the rocks at Christmas Island? Some silver lining that is.

OUCH!!

;D ;D

Dnarever wrote on Sep 20^th, 2011 at 8:45pm:

Quote: The Prime Minister today accused Mr Abbott of neglecting the national interest by refusing to back Labor's Malaysian Solution, saying he was “terrified Malaysia would work”. “His political opposition will see more boats come to this country - that's how reckless he's being,” Ms Gillard told ABC radio. Sums it up nicely.

hardly. Labor mucked up a WORKING policy and then wants abbott to support this amoral incompetent legislation? pass.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 20^th, 2011 at 8:59pm:

Watch cspan from capitial hill and you'll know Tony's next move. His playing from the exact same playbook as the repugs over there. Power at all costs, never mind the damage, we'll try and clean it up once we are in power.

i think you are referring to labor there. the party with less seats, less votes but formed a govt. 'POWER AT ALL COSTS' (J Gillard 2010)

Dnarever wrote on Sep 20^th, 2011 at 8:53pm:

Maqqa wrote on Sep 20th, 2011 at 8:48pm: Dnarever wrote on Sep 20th, 2011 at 8:45pm: Quote: The Prime Minister today accused Mr Abbott of neglecting the national interest by refusing to back Labor's Malaysian Solution, saying he was “terrified Malaysia would work”. “His political opposition will see more boats come to this country - that's how reckless he's being,” Ms Gillard told ABC radio. Sums it up nicely. That's utter stupidity even by your standard dna Labor created this mess and they are trying to allocate blame If Abbott did the same you would be scream blue murder If Abbott wants to block fixing the problem he should be happy to accept the blame for the results of his action - its very obviously what he deserves.

so what happened to your beloeved Greens? they are labors coalition partner. blame THEM.

Luke Fowler wrote on Sep 20^th, 2011 at 9:20pm:

I think it is marvellous that Abbott and Gillard's ridiculous race to the bottom on asylum seekers, and their desperate attempts to play politics over the issue, will actually lead to the end of off-shore processing for a long time to come. If the Liberals don't support the Labor amendments while they are in opposition, they sure as hell won't get their own amendments passed through  when they are in Government. The Greens won't be supporting the legislation and its highly likely they will still have the balance of power in the Senate come 2013. The two majors cut off their noses to spite their face and we get onshore processing for at least another electoral cycle. Every cloud does have a silver lining.

it is a pity your bleeding heart is matched by a bleeding brain. once onshore processing starts the people smugglers wont have enough boats or staff to meet the demand.

Soren wrote on Sep 20^th, 2011 at 11:47pm:

You've got it back to front, numpty bird. Abbott will not force a DD - the Greens will because they will have no choice. To retain credibility, they will have to oppose an Abbott government. Their success at the last election will be the rope they will b hung by at the next. If the current polls are reproduced in an election, the Abbott majority in the Lower House will be massive, giving him a comfortable margin to take on the Greens. It will be a case of the Grens finding themselves opposing a government that has an even bigger mandate than they do. So the Greens will be wiped out of the Senate in a DD. Howard will be GG,  Costello the Governor of the Reserve Bank.

Interesting point

The Greens generally oppose LIBs policies

So Brown will have to justify why he supports Abbott

Without it he'll lose what's left of his credibility

bluejay7 wrote on Sep 20^th, 2011 at 9:44pm:

Hello macca, long time no see, so to speak.   Am I right about this - 1.  Gillard gets into the Political bed with the loopy Greens so she can form Goverment YES 2.  Brown proceeds to call the shots and Gillard obeys YES 3.  The Greens are behind the "air we breath" tax and Julia obeys because she must have their support YES 4.  But then, Brown won't support Gillard's people trading Policy of sending refugees/illegals to Malaya, a country not a signatory to the UN Refugee Convention.  Gillard said she would never send refugees to such a country.........ho, hum YES 5.  Gillard now attacks the Libs because she can't get her stinking way.  Why isn't she attacking Bob Brown and his merry band of loonies?  They are her partners in her watermelon alliance after all. YES. Because she can't upset the apple cart 6.  According to Gillard, she is the only one who can run Australia, only she is right and only she is acting in the 'NATIONAL INTEREST".  YES I must have heard her and her cronies mention the slogan "national interest" dozens and dozens of times in recent days.  It's a pity she didn't think of that when she and her mates went on a $billion upon $billion upon $billion spendathon with taxpayers money.  It's a pity she didn't think of that when she and her mates dismantled Howard's Pacific Solution, a solution that worked as it virtually stopped the boats in their tracks, and stopped the terrible drownings at sea as well. But no, it's all Abbott's fault.  Gillard is blaming others for something that she and her mates did.  But that's what Labor do well, isn't it? YES What I can't understand is how Laborites on here and also other blog sites, attempt to defend the indefensible....what a sorry lot they are

hello blue

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 21^st, 2011 at 8:48am:

Dnarever wrote on Sep 20th, 2011 at 8:53pm: Maqqa wrote on Sep 20th, 2011 at 8:48pm: Dnarever wrote on Sep 20th, 2011 at 8:45pm: Quote: The Prime Minister today accused Mr Abbott of neglecting the national interest by refusing to back Labor's Malaysian Solution, saying he was “terrified Malaysia would work”. “His political opposition will see more boats come to this country - that's how reckless he's being,” Ms Gillard told ABC radio. Sums it up nicely. That's utter stupidity even by your standard dna Labor created this mess and they are trying to allocate blame If Abbott did the same you would be scream blue murder If Abbott wants to block fixing the problem he should be happy to accept the blame for the results of his action - its very obviously what he deserves. so what happened to your beloeved Greens? they are labors coalition partner. blame THEM.

The greens are standing by their beliefs on the issue - I would support their position.

All I am pointing out is that it is supposedly Abbott who wants to stop the boats but it is also Abbott who is trying his best to block the legislation which would stop the boats, Makes you wonder if he really likes the boats arriving - he does get good political mileage from it.

I suspect that the last thing in the world that Abbott would want is for the boats to stop coming to Australia.

I am personally not in favour of anyones off shore solution - just pointing out Mr Abbotts usual hypocricy in both supporting and opposing all issues all at the same time.

My Abbott is very reliable when it comes to blowing in the wind.

Equitist wrote on Sep 20^th, 2011 at 10:36pm:

Soren wrote on Sep 20th, 2011 at 10:22pm: Dnarever wrote on Sep 20th, 2011 at 9:28pm: Luke Fowler wrote on Sep 20th, 2011 at 9:20pm: I think it is marvellous that Abbott and Gillard's ridiculous race to the bottom on asylum seekers, and their desperate attempts to play politics over the issue, will actually lead to the end of off-shore processing for a long time to come. If the Liberals don't support the Labor amendments while they are in opposition, they sure as hell won't get their own amendments passed through  when they are in Government. The Greens won't be supporting the legislation and its highly likely they will still have the balance of power in the Senate come 2013. The two majors cut off their noses to spite their face and we get onshore processing for at least another electoral cycle. Every cloud does have a silver lining. Hope you are right. If Abbott gets a big enough majority at the next election (which is very likely), stand by for a double dissolution at the first sign of Senate (ie Green) obscurantism. If the electorate gives Abbott a big majority, it will still support him if he can show that the Greens are acting against his pre-election policies that got him elected. So if Abbott wins big, the Greens will be wiped out soon after as Abbott will still get over 50% of the vote in a double dissolution. The Greens will be out in the cold for 8 years - a very long time for a minor party. Brown will be gone and the green and red factions will tear the party apart. Even if Tony Abbott manages to force a DD, methinks you are overestimating the popularity of an incumbent who would mess with our democracy thus! Abbott has already demonstrated a flagrant disregard for both parliamentary and judicial processes - and a willingness to dispense with his own party's principles in the process... Don't bet on the general public putting up with Abbott's incessant crap on an indefinite basis! I'd still wager that Abbott's Tropposition is the most popular opposition never to be elected!

Why is a DD a breach of democracy? it is part of the constitution and has (ironically for you) been used by LABOR in the past. Rudd had the opportunity but didnt use it because he was a vacillating fool.

Dnarever wrote on Sep 20^th, 2011 at 8:45pm:

Quote: The Prime Minister today accused Mr Abbott of neglecting the national interest by refusing to back Labor's Malaysian Solution, saying he was “terrified Malaysia would work”. “His political opposition will see more boats come to this country - that's how reckless he's being,” Ms Gillard told ABC radio. Sums it up nicely.

This is what you are saying:

Gillard makes an absolute dog's breakfast of asylum-seeker policy, proposes measures that large swaths of her own party find reprehensible and suddenly it's Abbott's responsibility to fix it.


Stupidity is unmistakable unifying marker of the green/left pillockracy.

Soren wrote on Sep 21^st, 2011 at 9:21am:

Dnarever wrote on Sep 20th, 2011 at 8:45pm: Quote: The Prime Minister today accused Mr Abbott of neglecting the national interest by refusing to back Labor's Malaysian Solution, saying he was “terrified Malaysia would work”. “His political opposition will see more boats come to this country - that's how reckless he's being,” Ms Gillard told ABC radio. Sums it up nicely. This is what you are saying: Gillard makes an absolute dog's breakfast of asylum-seeker policy, proposes measures that large swaths of her own party find reprehensible and suddenly it's Abbott's responsibility to fix it. Stupidity is unmistakable unifying marker of the green/left pillockracy.

No not at all - he has no say in fixing anything - in fact he would be incapable of fixing it.

But if he is going to block the legislation which would fix it he needs to take responsibility for his negative wreaking actions and for not acting in Australias interests.

His own actions in this also block his recomended policy Nauru and this method is what he had originally suggested and offered to support.

He has clearly taken both sides of this discussion in being

Both:

For and Against changing the Legislation.

For and against Offshore Processing.

For and against stopping the boats.

Tony Abbott is blowing in the wind. He has no credability and can not even support his own commitments.

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Sep 21^st, 2011 at 6:54am:

Luke Fowler wrote on Sep 20th, 2011 at 9:20pm: I think it is marvellous that Abbott and Gillard's ridiculous race to the bottom on asylum seekers, and their desperate attempts to play politics over the issue, will actually lead to the end of off-shore processing for a long time to come. If the Liberals don't support the Labor amendments while they are in opposition, they sure as hell won't get their own amendments passed through  when they are in Government. The Greens won't be supporting the legislation and its highly likely they will still have the balance of power in the Senate come 2013. The two majors cut off their noses to spite their face and we get onshore processing for at least another electoral cycle. Every cloud does have a silver lining. Will you also think it wonderful when a few more boats are lost at sea with all hands, or more boats end up on the rocks at Christmas Island? Some silver lining that is.

Funny, when Siev X happened it was
"take the risk suffer the consequences"
Now it's all "think of the children"
FFS
Hypocrisy thy name is Liberal

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 21^st, 2011 at 8:46am:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 20th, 2011 at 8:59pm: Watch cspan from capitial hill and you'll know Tony's next move. His playing from the exact same playbook as the repugs over there. Power at all costs, never mind the damage, we'll try and clean it up once we are in power. i think you are referring to labor there. the party with less seats, less votes but formed a govt. 'POWER AT ALL COSTS' (J Gillard 2010)

Labor got the same number of seats and had more votes.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 21^st, 2011 at 9:40am:

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Sep 21st, 2011 at 6:54am: Luke Fowler wrote on Sep 20th, 2011 at 9:20pm: I think it is marvellous that Abbott and Gillard's ridiculous race to the bottom on asylum seekers, and their desperate attempts to play politics over the issue, will actually lead to the end of off-shore processing for a long time to come. If the Liberals don't support the Labor amendments while they are in opposition, they sure as hell won't get their own amendments passed through  when they are in Government. The Greens won't be supporting the legislation and its highly likely they will still have the balance of power in the Senate come 2013. The two majors cut off their noses to spite their face and we get onshore processing for at least another electoral cycle. Every cloud does have a silver lining. Will you also think it wonderful when a few more boats are lost at sea with all hands, or more boats end up on the rocks at Christmas Island? Some silver lining that is. Funny, when Siev X happened it was "take the risk suffer the consequences" Now it's all "think of the children" FFS Hypocrisy thy name is Liberal

hey we didnt open the borders remember???..its your mob thats now claiming they are all heart and soul trying to stop people taking their lives in their hands and paying people smugglers.. what a bloody awful hypocracy is that???

she was there she was right there when they dropped the pacific solution... when we told her the boats would come she laughed...

not at all let me say this?????....you Libs dont know what you are talking about..



now almost 4 years later... how many deaths we will never know as a boat disappeared in 2009 with over 100 on board..and no one knows anything about it..???????especially this govt... even though our Navy reported it..

its amazing how blind you are to what is happening RIGHT NOW..its like very convenient memory loss..

how many people lost their lives during the Pacific Solution???????

Dnarever wrote on Sep 21^st, 2011 at 9:36am:

Soren wrote on Sep 21st, 2011 at 9:21am: Dnarever wrote on Sep 20th, 2011 at 8:45pm: Quote: The Prime Minister today accused Mr Abbott of neglecting the national interest by refusing to back Labor's Malaysian Solution, saying he was “terrified Malaysia would work”. “His political opposition will see more boats come to this country - that's how reckless he's being,” Ms Gillard told ABC radio. Sums it up nicely. This is what you are saying: Gillard makes an absolute dog's breakfast of asylum-seeker policy, proposes measures that large swaths of her own party find reprehensible and suddenly it's Abbott's responsibility to fix it. Stupidity is unmistakable unifying marker of the green/left pillockracy. No not at all - he has no say in fixing anything - in fact he would be incapable of fixing it. But if he is going to block the legislation which would fix it he needs to take responsibility for his negative wreaking actions and for not acting in Australias interests. His own actions in this also block his recomended policy Nauru and this method is what he had originally suggested and offered to support. He has clearly taken both sides of this discussion in being Both: For and Against changing the Legislation. For and against Offshore Processing. For and against stopping the boats. Tony Abbott is blowing in the wind. He has no credability and can not even support his own commitments.

Pre 2007 policy that worked = Nauru + TPVs.

Easy fixed.

The Malaysia option has no merit. Why support it?

Maqqa wrote on Sep 21^st, 2011 at 12:59am:

Luke Fowler wrote on Sep 20th, 2011 at 9:20pm: I think it is marvellous that Abbott and Gillard's ridiculous race to the bottom on asylum seekers, and their desperate attempts to play politics over the issue, will actually lead to the end of off-shore processing for a long time to come. If the Liberals don't support the Labor amendments while they are in opposition, they sure as hell won't get their own amendments passed through  when they are in Government. The Greens won't be supporting the legislation and its highly likely they will still have the balance of power in the Senate come 2013. The two majors cut off their noses to spite their face and we get onshore processing for at least another electoral cycle. Every cloud does have a silver lining. How many seats will the ALP and/or Greens win with those numbers? How many seats are up for re-election in 2013

In the Senate??.....Half of the seats ar up for re-election in 2013..(or at the next election)

cods wrote on Sep 21^st, 2011 at 10:20am:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 21st, 2011 at 9:40am: chicken_lipsforme wrote on Sep 21st, 2011 at 6:54am: Luke Fowler wrote on Sep 20th, 2011 at 9:20pm: I think it is marvellous that Abbott and Gillard's ridiculous race to the bottom on asylum seekers, and their desperate attempts to play politics over the issue, will actually lead to the end of off-shore processing for a long time to come. If the Liberals don't support the Labor amendments while they are in opposition, they sure as hell won't get their own amendments passed through  when they are in Government. The Greens won't be supporting the legislation and its highly likely they will still have the balance of power in the Senate come 2013. The two majors cut off their noses to spite their face and we get onshore processing for at least another electoral cycle. Every cloud does have a silver lining. Will you also think it wonderful when a few more boats are lost at sea with all hands, or more boats end up on the rocks at Christmas Island? Some silver lining that is. Funny, when Siev X happened it was "take the risk suffer the consequences" Now it's all "think of the children" FFS Hypocrisy thy name is Liberal hey we didnt open the borders remember???..its your mob thats now claiming they are all heart and soul trying to stop people taking their lives in their hands and paying people smugglers.. what a bloody awful hypocracy is that??? she was there she was right there when they dropped the pacific solution... when we told her the boats would come she laughed... not at all let me say this?????....you Libs dont know what you are talking about.. now almost 4 years later... how many deaths we will never know as a boat disappeared in 2009 with over 100 on board..and no one knows anything about it..???????especially this govt... even though our Navy reported it.. its amazing how blind you are to what is happening RIGHT NOW..its like very convenient memory loss.. how many people lost their lives during the Pacific Solution???????

Actually I think you'll find I have been consistent in my attitude to refugee's.
Onshore processing, maximum 6 months detention, deportation of those found wanting.
I also stick by my thoughts that we should tie Indo funding to allowing AFP officers to operate within Indo to arrest & deport smugglers, who then face lengthy gaol stays and assets stripped.

Why don't you try a bit of consistency instead of cheap dis-ingenious crocodile tears.

but dsmithy

you've not expressed any comment about ILLEGALS

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 21^st, 2011 at 9:40am:

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Sep 21st, 2011 at 6:54am: Luke Fowler wrote on Sep 20th, 2011 at 9:20pm: I think it is marvellous that Abbott and Gillard's ridiculous race to the bottom on asylum seekers, and their desperate attempts to play politics over the issue, will actually lead to the end of off-shore processing for a long time to come. If the Liberals don't support the Labor amendments while they are in opposition, they sure as hell won't get their own amendments passed through  when they are in Government. The Greens won't be supporting the legislation and its highly likely they will still have the balance of power in the Senate come 2013. The two majors cut off their noses to spite their face and we get onshore processing for at least another electoral cycle. Every cloud does have a silver lining. Will you also think it wonderful when a few more boats are lost at sea with all hands, or more boats end up on the rocks at Christmas Island? Some silver lining that is. Funny, when Siev X happened it was "take the risk suffer the consequences" Now it's all "think of the children" FFS Hypocrisy thy name is Liberal

Oh smithy, they are the new gay lesbian whale family friendly party.
Cmon, we can  change. :)
Well, maybe not this week. :-/
But I think we can all agree that a few more episodes of smugglers boats being smashed to pieces on the rocks with a bloodsucking media showing live video of woman and children drowning right on our screens is bad for business. :'(

Soren wrote on Sep 21^st, 2011 at 10:33am:

Dnarever wrote on Sep 21st, 2011 at 9:36am: Soren wrote on Sep 21st, 2011 at 9:21am: Dnarever wrote on Sep 20th, 2011 at 8:45pm: Quote: The Prime Minister today accused Mr Abbott of neglecting the national interest by refusing to back Labor's Malaysian Solution, saying he was “terrified Malaysia would work”. “His political opposition will see more boats come to this country - that's how reckless he's being,” Ms Gillard told ABC radio. Sums it up nicely. This is what you are saying: Gillard makes an absolute dog's breakfast of asylum-seeker policy, proposes measures that large swaths of her own party find reprehensible and suddenly it's Abbott's responsibility to fix it. Stupidity is unmistakable unifying marker of the green/left pillockracy. No not at all - he has no say in fixing anything - in fact he would be incapable of fixing it. But if he is going to block the legislation which would fix it he needs to take responsibility for his negative wreaking actions and for not acting in Australias interests. His own actions in this also block his recomended policy Nauru and this method is what he had originally suggested and offered to support. He has clearly taken both sides of this discussion in being Both: For and Against changing the Legislation. For and against Offshore Processing. For and against stopping the boats. Tony Abbott is blowing in the wind. He has no credability and can not even support his own commitments. Pre 2007 policy that worked = Nauru + TPVs. Easy fixed. The Malaysia option has no merit. Why support it?

Abbott is totally correct in not sponsoring bad policy from a bad government, and would win very few friends if he did so.
Oddly enough, Labor aren't wailing at their 'partners in incompetence', the Greens for not supporting them.

Dnarever wrote on Sep 20^th, 2011 at 8:45pm:

Quote: The Prime Minister today accused Mr Abbott of neglecting the national interest by refusing to back Labor's Malaysian Solution, saying he was “terrified Malaysia would work”. “His political opposition will see more boats come to this country - that's how reckless he's being,” Ms Gillard told ABC radio. Sums it up nicely.

LABOR negotiated the Malaysia deal with the Malaysians, with the Coalition playing no part in that debacle whatsoever other than to assert their opposition to the deal. It was LABOR that was defeated in the High Court in a majority decision of six judges to one. It was a LABOR Immigration Minister who was given an almighty smack-down by the High Court for over-extending his authority. It amuses me that this entire farce is of Labor's own making and that the Coalition played no part in it whatsoever, yet they somehow think they can tie Abbott to it and blame him for it. What a joke!

Maqqa wrote on Sep 21^st, 2011 at 1:30pm:

but dsmithy you've not expressed any comment about ILLEGALS

Because I believe everyone has the right to seek asylum.
Therefore they only become "illegal" after processing & found to be non genuine refugee's.
However if you wish to discuss true "illegals" i.e the visa overstayers who come via plane, well we need more immgration officer's to hunt them down & deport them on the NPO (next plane out)

How would you deport illegal boat arrivals who come without passports?

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Sep 21^st, 2011 at 1:30pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 21st, 2011 at 9:40am: chicken_lipsforme wrote on Sep 21st, 2011 at 6:54am: Luke Fowler wrote on Sep 20th, 2011 at 9:20pm: I think it is marvellous that Abbott and Gillard's ridiculous race to the bottom on asylum seekers, and their desperate attempts to play politics over the issue, will actually lead to the end of off-shore processing for a long time to come. If the Liberals don't support the Labor amendments while they are in opposition, they sure as hell won't get their own amendments passed through  when they are in Government. The Greens won't be supporting the legislation and its highly likely they will still have the balance of power in the Senate come 2013. The two majors cut off their noses to spite their face and we get onshore processing for at least another electoral cycle. Every cloud does have a silver lining. Will you also think it wonderful when a few more boats are lost at sea with all hands, or more boats end up on the rocks at Christmas Island? Some silver lining that is. Funny, when Siev X happened it was "take the risk suffer the consequences" Now it's all "think of the children" FFS Hypocrisy thy name is Liberal Oh smithy, they are the new gay lesbian whale family friendly party. Cmon, we can  change. :) Well, maybe not this week. :-/ But I think we can all agree that a few more episodes of smugglers boats being smashed to pieces on the rocks with a bloodsucking media showing live video of woman and children drowning right on our screens is bad for business. :'(

"If it bleeds it leads"

Surely you have become numb to it all chook.
The more the better, hopefully there will be some hungry white pointers around next time.

A bit off topic but has anyone else noticed how front bottom has become the new black.
No longer are we shocked to hear bugger so now the normalisation of that word begins, creeping into soundbites, comedic routines & songs.

A bit off topic but has anyone else noticed how front bottom has become the new black.
No longer are we shocked to hear bugger so now the normalisation of that word begins, creeping into soundbites, comedic routines & songs.

I read last week that one of the trendy female singers ATM, Rhianna maybe? was walking around with a necklace with the word qunt on it.

Yea here's the link

http://www.hollywoodlife.com/2011/09/02/rihanna-c-word-necklace-vulgar/

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 21^st, 2011 at 2:30pm:

Maqqa wrote on Sep 21st, 2011 at 1:30pm: but dsmithy you've not expressed any comment about ILLEGALS Because I believe everyone has the right to seek asylum. Of course - so do the LIBs. But how do you determine their claims and why can't we choose where we process them. Why should they dictate to us where processing should take place? Processing is processing after all. Why insist on on-shore processing if they are genuine? Therefore they only become "illegal" after processing & found to be non genuine refugee's. Thats where you are wrong. They are illegal and remain illegal if not genuine. If found to be genuine then the law is retrospective to the date they arrive as a genuine refugee However if you wish to discuss true "illegals" i.e the visa overstayers who come via plane, well we need more immgration officer's to hunt them down & deport them on the NPO (next plane out) There are different reasons why someone becomes "illegal" - one of it is overstaying a VISA but the other one is to enter another country without a VISA

skippy. wrote on Sep 21^st, 2011 at 2:42pm:

A bit off topic but has anyone else noticed how front bottom has become the new black. No longer are we shocked to hear bugger so now the normalisation of that word begins, creeping into soundbites, comedic routines & songs. I read last week that one of the trendy female singers ATM, Rhianna maybe? was walking around with a necklace with the word qunt on it.

more evidence that the human species is not evolving, but devolving.

Maqqa wrote on Sep 21^st, 2011 at 2:46pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 21st, 2011 at 2:30pm: Maqqa wrote on Sep 21st, 2011 at 1:30pm: but dsmithy you've not expressed any comment about ILLEGALS Because I believe everyone has the right to seek asylum. Of course - so do the LIBs. But how do you determine their claims and why can't we choose where we process them. Why should they dictate to us where processing should take place? Processing is processing after all. Why insist on on-shore processing if they are genuine? Therefore they only become "illegal" after processing & found to be non genuine refugee's. Thats where you are wrong. They are illegal and remain illegal if not genuine. If found to be genuine then the law is retrospective to the date they arrive as a genuine refugee However if you wish to discuss true "illegals" i.e the visa overstayers who come via plane, well we need more immgration officer's to hunt them down & deport them on the NPO (next plane out) There are different reasons why someone becomes "illegal" - one of it is overstaying a VISA but the other one is to enter another country without a VISA

You know what I'm going to do Maqqa.
I'm going to say that whatever system FRASER had in place worked a treat.
We had as many if not more boat arrivals & everything seemed fine.
Go back to what the Libs were doing in 76

Soren wrote on Sep 21^st, 2011 at 10:33am:

Pre 2007 policy that worked = Nauru + TPVs. Easy fixed. The Malaysia option has no merit. Why support it?

You guys should be smarter than this dribble.

The Nauru solution working supposidly and the Libs have been saying that for the exact same reasons the Malaysia method would not work - have you been smoking anythng nasty.

Today is not 2007 - the Nauru solution led to settlment in the end mostly in Australia or comparable, this makes Nauru no longer a deterant as going back to the start of your queue would be.

The new method would work - the old one is past its use by date and would no longer be effective at all.

opps,
THE federal opposition has had to  contacted senior Malaysian officials to address growing concerns in Kuala Lumpur over Tony Abbott's portrayal of the nation during the offshore processing debate.

It is understood Malaysia is deeply offended at the Opposition Leader's depiction of the country, believing he had portrayed it as a "repressive regime practising an extreme version of Shariah law" with respect to its treatment of refugees.

Dnarever wrote on Sep 21^st, 2011 at 3:27pm:

Soren wrote on Sep 21st, 2011 at 10:33am: Pre 2007 policy that worked = Nauru + TPVs. Easy fixed. The Malaysia option has no merit. Why support it? You guys should be smarter than this dribble. The Nauru solution working supposidly and the Libs have been saying that for the exact same reasons the Malaysia method would not work - have you been smoking anythng nasty. Today is not 2007 - the Nauru solution led to settlment in the end mostly in Australia or comparable, this makes Nauru no longer a deterant as going back to the start of your queue would be. The new method would work - the old one is past its use by date and would no longer be effective at all.

70% (?) of those sent to NAURU ended up in Australia.
500% of those sent to Malaysia will end up in Australia - we get 4000 for 800 sent there.

This is an improvement only in the minds (if that's the word I want) of Julia's supporters.  

Soren wrote on Sep 21^st, 2011 at 5:05pm:

Dnarever wrote on Sep 21st, 2011 at 3:27pm: Soren wrote on Sep 21st, 2011 at 10:33am: Pre 2007 policy that worked = Nauru + TPVs. Easy fixed. The Malaysia option has no merit. Why support it? You guys should be smarter than this dribble. The Nauru solution working supposidly and the Libs have been saying that for the exact same reasons the Malaysia method would not work - have you been smoking anythng nasty. Today is not 2007 - the Nauru solution led to settlment in the end mostly in Australia or comparable, this makes Nauru no longer a deterant as going back to the start of your queue would be. The new method would work - the old one is past its use by date and would no longer be effective at all. 70% (?) of those sent to NAURU ended up in Australia. 500% of those sent to Malaysia will end up in Australia - we get 4000 for 800 sent there. This is an improvement only in the minds (if that's the word I want) of Julia's supporters.

Well you just blown it for some.
Apparently it wasn't about refugee's per se but how they arrived and whether they were genuine or not, "taking the place of those waiting their turn" I've heard more than once.
The 1 & the only good thing about Malaysia was the fact we were taking 4000 GENUINE REFUGEE'S FROM THE CAMP WHERE THEY HAVE WAITED THEIR TURN replacing 800 unknowns
But now you want to make it about numbers, apparently 4000 is now too many for you.
At least Andrei is upfront & honest about his bigotry.
Free yourself Soren & just say brown people with funny eyes & head wear suck & are not welcome 8-)

... well it IS !!

Dnarever wrote on Sep 21^st, 2011 at 3:27pm:

Soren wrote on Sep 21st, 2011 at 10:33am: Pre 2007 policy that worked = Nauru + TPVs. Easy fixed. The Malaysia option has no merit. Why support it? You guys should be smarter than this dribble. The Nauru solution working supposidly and the Libs have been saying that for the exact same reasons the Malaysia method would not work - have you been smoking anythng nasty. Today is not 2007 - the Nauru solution led to settlment in the end mostly in Australia or comparable, this makes Nauru no longer a deterant as going back to the start of your queue would be. The new method would work - the old one is past its use by date and would no longer be effective at all.

Please tell us the why

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 21^st, 2011 at 3:00pm:

Maqqa wrote on Sep 21st, 2011 at 2:46pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 21st, 2011 at 2:30pm: Maqqa wrote on Sep 21st, 2011 at 1:30pm: but dsmithy you've not expressed any comment about ILLEGALS Because I believe everyone has the right to seek asylum. Of course - so do the LIBs. But how do you determine their claims and why can't we choose where we process them. Why should they dictate to us where processing should take place? Processing is processing after all. Why insist on on-shore processing if they are genuine? Therefore they only become "illegal" after processing & found to be non genuine refugee's. Thats where you are wrong. They are illegal and remain illegal if not genuine. If found to be genuine then the law is retrospective to the date they arrive as a genuine refugee However if you wish to discuss true "illegals" i.e the visa overstayers who come via plane, well we need more immgration officer's to hunt them down & deport them on the NPO (next plane out) There are different reasons why someone becomes "illegal" - one of it is overstaying a VISA but the other one is to enter another country without a VISA You know what I'm going to do Maqqa. I'm going to say that whatever system FRASER had in place worked a treat. We had as many if not more boat arrivals & everything seemed fine. Go back to what the Libs were doing in 76

Why go back to Fraser when it was Keating that started this whole thing?

Soren wrote on Sep 21^st, 2011 at 5:05pm:

70% (?) of those sent to NAURU ended up in Australia. 500% of those sent to Malaysia will end up in Australia - we get 4000 for 800 sent there. This is an improvement only in the minds (if that's the word I want) of Julia's supporters.

Apparently we will accept the 4,000 anyway so it looks like effectively 800 for free.

No this is no improvement it is every bit as much of a disgrace as the Howard rubbish.

Just that to see old Blowing in the wind Abbott shouting out stop the boats but at the same time blocking the legislation which he suggested and promised to support which would stop the boats is hilarious, dishonest and hypercritical.

Also very funny that on other topics you guys are with the chorus in stop the refugees /illegal’s/boats etc and then you cone on here and support allowing the boats to continue coming to Australia.

Maqqa wrote on Sep 21^st, 2011 at 6:09pm:

Why go back to Fraser when it was Keating that started this whole thing?

I think he was being genuine in saying that Fraser managed this issue well - you are right it was Keating who started the stuff up, though only in a very mild way compared to Howard.

Maqqa wrote on Sep 21^st, 2011 at 6:09pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 21st, 2011 at 3:00pm: Maqqa wrote on Sep 21st, 2011 at 2:46pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 21st, 2011 at 2:30pm: Maqqa wrote on Sep 21st, 2011 at 1:30pm: but dsmithy you've not expressed any comment about ILLEGALS Because I believe everyone has the right to seek asylum. Of course - so do the LIBs. But how do you determine their claims and why can't we choose where we process them. Why should they dictate to us where processing should take place? Processing is processing after all. Why insist on on-shore processing if they are genuine? Therefore they only become "illegal" after processing & found to be non genuine refugee's. Thats where you are wrong. They are illegal and remain illegal if not genuine. If found to be genuine then the law is retrospective to the date they arrive as a genuine refugee However if you wish to discuss true "illegals" i.e the visa overstayers who come via plane, well we need more immgration officer's to hunt them down & deport them on the NPO (next plane out) There are different reasons why someone becomes "illegal" - one of it is overstaying a VISA but the other one is to enter another country without a VISA You know what I'm going to do Maqqa. I'm going to say that whatever system FRASER had in place worked a treat. We had as many if not more boat arrivals & everything seemed fine. Go back to what the Libs were doing in 76 Why go back to Fraser when it was Keating that started this whole thing?

Thats right Keating changed the system and put us on the path we find ourselves now on.
That's why I said Fraser.

Maqqa wrote on Sep 21^st, 2011 at 6:08pm:

Dnarever wrote on Sep 21st, 2011 at 3:27pm: Soren wrote on Sep 21st, 2011 at 10:33am: Pre 2007 policy that worked = Nauru + TPVs. Easy fixed. The Malaysia option has no merit. Why support it? You guys should be smarter than this dribble. The Nauru solution working supposidly and the Libs have been saying that for the exact same reasons the Malaysia method would not work - have you been smoking anythng nasty. Today is not 2007 - the Nauru solution led to settlment in the end mostly in Australia or comparable, this makes Nauru no longer a deterant as going back to the start of your queue would be. The new method would work - the old one is past its use by date and would no longer be effective at all. Please tell us the why

The first Liberal argument for the Labor plan to not work was that with 800 vacancies the smugglers would quickly fill the prison up and we would be back to square 1.

Capacity of Nauru = 800. It is obvious that if the Labor plan was going to fail for this reason - Nauru would not have worked either for the same reason.

i.e 800 = 800

Ah well, it's too hard, then, let anybody and everybody in. Wishing to have an orderly immigration program is obviously too racists and so it is not what foreigners want so we might as well do what they want.
I hope this is inclusive enough for ya.