http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/pacific-solution-ends-but-tough-stance-to-remain/2007/12/07/1196813021259.html

December 8, 2007

WHILE 81 Sri Lankan and Burmese refugees held on Nauru are to be allowed to settle in Australia, the Federal Government has announced it will repatriate 16 recent Indonesian boat arrivals to their home island, Roti.

The imminent relocation from Nauru marks the beginning of the end for the highly controversial "Pacific solution" - clearing the way for closure of the detention facility there and a second already empty one on Manus Island in Papua New Guinea.

However, the decision to quickly send the latest boat arrivals back to Indonesia from detention on Australia's Christmas Island is intended to send a message that Labor will maintain a tough stance on border security.

In Bali next week for climate change talks, the Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, and the Foreign Minister, Stephen Smith, are expected to hold up the decision as evidence that asylum claims that are economically motivated will not be countenanced.

The 10 children and six adults were rescued from their sinking boat 650 kilometres west of Darwin on November 20.

Family members on the small island of Roti said they owed money to illegal fishing syndicate operators because Australian authorities had previously burnt their boats for illegally fishing in Australian waters.

But the new Labor Government accepts the argument that such claims do not fit the internationally accepted refugee convention definition for people fleeing persecution for political, religious or social reasons.

"This represents a firm but fair approach to the orderly migration of people to Australia," the Immigration Minister, Chris Evans, said yesterday when announcing the repatriation.

Labor has complained that detention of boat arrivals on Nauru and Manus by the Howard government had wasted around $300 million since 2001 and had tarnished Australia's international human rights reputation.

The new Government is reviewing private contracts covering administration of both detention facilities.

In February, 83 Sri Lankans were intercepted in a leaking boat off northern Australia. Under the previous government it was determined that 74 of them were genuine refugees, but as a disincentive to others third resettlement countries would be sought.

One was refused refugee status and seven charged with the indecent assault of a Nauruan woman have not had their applications decided yet. One Sri Lankan remains in hospital in Perth for shrapnel injuries sustained in his homeland.

Seven Burmese asylum seekers from the Rohingya ethnic minority, who arrived in Australian waters by boat and have been on Nauru since September last year, were like the Sri Lankans awaiting third-country resettlement.

But finding countries to take the Nauru detainees proved problematic before the change of government and critics argued that if they had gone to a developed country such as the United States it would not have constituted a disincentive to other would-be boat arrivals.

There were tensions between the Howard government and Indonesia over the granting of asylum to 43 people who arrived by boat from Indonesia's West Papua Province, which borders Papua New Guinea.

Although the decision in relation to the latest boat arrivals was made simpler because there was no claim of human rights abuses, any future arrivals from West Papua claiming rights violations could again strain relations between Canberra and Jakarta.

Since Rudd and Gillard came to power - there are now over 20,000+ who made that perilous journey that we know of

How many more have died due to this Labor + Greens evil association?

Never mind the PS numbnut. We're talking about today, not when your grandad was at school. TODAY.

TODAY the Noalition demands that all asylum seekers be sent to Nauru for processing. No exceptions.

My question to all you righties is - what happens to them once they are processed?

PS. You can run but you can't hide  :D

Gist wrote on Jun 26^th, 2012 at 3:17pm:

Never mind the PS numbnut. We're talking about today, not when your grandad was at school. TODAY. TODAY the Noalition demands that all asylum seekers be sent to Nauru for processing. No exceptions. My question to all you righties is - what happens to them once they are processed? PS. You can run but you can't hide  :D

The same that happened back in 2007

Maqqa wrote on Jun 26^th, 2012 at 3:31pm:

Gist wrote on Jun 26th, 2012 at 3:17pm: Never mind the PS numbnut. We're talking about today, not when your grandad was at school. TODAY. TODAY the Noalition demands that all asylum seekers be sent to Nauru for processing. No exceptions. My question to all you righties is - what happens to them once they are processed? PS. You can run but you can't hide  :D The same that happened back in 2007

THEY GOT SENT TO AUSTRALIA IN 2007. EVERY LAST FVCKIN' ONE!!

What a USELESS policy THAT is! YOUR LOT demands we spend megabucks running a detention centre in Nauru to keep them there for a few years just to bring them here? WE MAY AS WELL STOP DICKING AROUND AND JUST ACCEPT THEM HERE IN THE FIRST PLACE YOU MORON!

Gist wrote on Jun 26^th, 2012 at 3:36pm:

Maqqa wrote on Jun 26th, 2012 at 3:31pm: Gist wrote on Jun 26th, 2012 at 3:17pm: Never mind the PS numbnut. We're talking about today, not when your grandad was at school. TODAY. TODAY the Noalition demands that all asylum seekers be sent to Nauru for processing. No exceptions. My question to all you righties is - what happens to them once they are processed? PS. You can run but you can't hide  :D The same that happened back in 2007 THEY GOT SENT TO AUSTRALIA IN 2007. EVERY LAST FVCKIN' ONE!! What a USELESS policy THAT is! YOUR LOT demands we spend megabucks running a detention centre in Nauru to keep them there for a few years just to bring them here? WE MAY AS WELL STOP DICKING AROUND AND JUST ACCEPT THEM HERE IN THE FIRST PLACE YOU MORON!

Now we have 20,000+ that we don't know what to do with

And Gillard's let through "alleged" people smugglers as well

Maqqa wrote on Jun 26^th, 2012 at 4:04pm:

Now we have 20,000+ that we don't know what to do with And Gillard's let through "alleged" people smugglers as well

And your planned policy prevents this... how?

How many flew in during the Howard years and how many of Julias reffos are found to be illegal?

Quote:

Labor has complained that detention of boat arrivals on Nauru and Manus by the Howard government had wasted around $300 million since 2001 and had tarnished Australia's international human rights reputation. The new Government is reviewing private contracts covering administration of both detention facilities. In February, 83 Sri Lankans were intercepted in a leaking boat off northern Australia. Under the previous government it was determined that 74 of them were genuine refugees, but as a disincentive to others third resettlement countries would be sought.

From 2001-2007 it cost the LIBs $300M and Labor was complaining that it costed too much and damaging our international reputation

From 2008-2012 Labor have cost Australia well over $4B and 32,000+ illegals and they think there's no damage to our international reputation

What had the 81 in 2007 done illegally?

Seeking asylum is not illegal

Maqqa wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 10:48pm:

Quote: Labor has complained that detention of boat arrivals on Nauru and Manus by the Howard government had wasted around $300 million since 2001 and had tarnished Australia's international human rights reputation. The new Government is reviewing private contracts covering administration of both detention facilities. In February, 83 Sri Lankans were intercepted in a leaking boat off northern Australia. Under the previous government it was determined that 74 of them were genuine refugees, but as a disincentive to others third resettlement countries would be sought. From 2001-2007 it cost the LIBs $300M and Labor was complaining that it costed too much and damaging our international reputation From 2008-2012 Labor have cost Australia well over $4B and 32,000+ illegals and they think there's no damage to our international reputation

What had the 32,000 done that was illegal?

Seeking asylum is not illegal.

You have been listening to too much Andrew Bolt, haven't you!

rabbitoh07 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 11:51pm:

Maqqa wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 10:48pm: Quote: Labor has complained that detention of boat arrivals on Nauru and Manus by the Howard government had wasted around $300 million since 2001 and had tarnished Australia's international human rights reputation. The new Government is reviewing private contracts covering administration of both detention facilities. In February, 83 Sri Lankans were intercepted in a leaking boat off northern Australia. Under the previous government it was determined that 74 of them were genuine refugees, but as a disincentive to others third resettlement countries would be sought. From 2001-2007 it cost the LIBs $300M and Labor was complaining that it costed too much and damaging our international reputation From 2008-2012 Labor have cost Australia well over $4B and 32,000+ illegals and they think there's no damage to our international reputation What had the 32,000 done that was illegal? Seeking asylum is not illegal. You have been listening to too much Andrew Bolt, haven't you!

Where have I ever said seeking or putting in an asylum application was illegal?

the 32,000 have entered Australia illegally therefore is subject to deportation

the 32,000 have a legal right to delay deportation by lodging an asylum application - this is only a stay of deportation

therefore they are still illegals

Maqqa wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 11:52pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 11:51pm: Maqqa wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 10:48pm: Quote: Labor has complained that detention of boat arrivals on Nauru and Manus by the Howard government had wasted around $300 million since 2001 and had tarnished Australia's international human rights reputation. The new Government is reviewing private contracts covering administration of both detention facilities. In February, 83 Sri Lankans were intercepted in a leaking boat off northern Australia. Under the previous government it was determined that 74 of them were genuine refugees, but as a disincentive to others third resettlement countries would be sought. From 2001-2007 it cost the LIBs $300M and Labor was complaining that it costed too much and damaging our international reputation From 2008-2012 Labor have cost Australia well over $4B and 32,000+ illegals and they think there's no damage to our international reputation What had the 32,000 done that was illegal? Seeking asylum is not illegal. You have been listening to too much Andrew Bolt, haven't you! Where have I ever said seeking or putting in an asylum application was illegal? the 32,000 have entered Australia illegally therefore is subject to deportation the 32,000 have a legal right to delay deportation by lodging an asylum application - this is only a stay of deportation therefore they are still illegals

No.  32,000 did not enter Australia illegally.

If they did - you would be able to quote for us the law which the broke, or the law which made seeking asylum illegal

Don't tell lies little boy.  You will be caught every time.

rabbitoh07 wrote on Feb 20^th, 2013 at 11:57pm:

No.  32,000 did not enter Australia illegally. If they did - you would be able to quote for us the law which the broke, or the law which made seeking asylum illegal Don't tell lies little boy.  You will be caught every time.

The law they broke would be the Migration Act 1958

Once again - get it through your thick head - I have never said it was illegal to seek or put in an application for asylum

Maqqa wrote on Feb 21^st, 2013 at 12:20am:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 11:57pm: No.  32,000 did not enter Australia illegally. If they did - you would be able to quote for us the law which the broke, or the law which made seeking asylum illegal Don't tell lies little boy.  You will be caught every time. The law they broke would be the Migration Act 1958 Once again - get it through your thick head - I have never said it was illegal to seek or put in an application for asylum

Which section of the Migration Act 1958 ?

Show us liar.

You called them illegals liar.

Show us which section of the Migration Act 1958 makes seeking asylum illegal liar.

Show us which law they broke that makes them "illegals" liar.

Read section 14 of the Act liar.

rabbitoh07 wrote on Feb 21^st, 2013 at 12:22am:

Maqqa wrote on Feb 21st, 2013 at 12:20am: rabbitoh07 wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 11:57pm: No.  32,000 did not enter Australia illegally. If they did - you would be able to quote for us the law which the broke, or the law which made seeking asylum illegal Don't tell lies little boy.  You will be caught every time. The law they broke would be the Migration Act 1958 Once again - get it through your thick head - I have never said it was illegal to seek or put in an application for asylum Which section of the Migration Act 1958 ? Show us liar. You called them illegals liar. Show us which section of the Migration Act 1958 makes seeking asylum illegal liar. Show us which law they broke that makes them "illegals" liar.

Section 4 subsection 4

Once again - I have never said seeking asylum was illegal

Maqqa wrote on Feb 21^st, 2013 at 12:24am:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Feb 21st, 2013 at 12:22am: Maqqa wrote on Feb 21st, 2013 at 12:20am: rabbitoh07 wrote on Feb 20th, 2013 at 11:57pm: No.  32,000 did not enter Australia illegally. If they did - you would be able to quote for us the law which the broke, or the law which made seeking asylum illegal Don't tell lies little boy.  You will be caught every time. The law they broke would be the Migration Act 1958 Once again - get it through your thick head - I have never said it was illegal to seek or put in an application for asylum Which section of the Migration Act 1958 ? Show us liar. You called them illegals liar. Show us which section of the Migration Act 1958 makes seeking asylum illegal liar. Show us which law they broke that makes them "illegals" liar. Section 4 subsection 4 Once again - I have never said seeking asylum was illegal

Section 4 subsection 4
(4)  To advance its object, this Act provides for the removal or deportation from Australia of non-citizens whose presence in Australia is not permitted by this Act.

How does that make seeking asylum legal liar?

You called them "illegals" liar.

What law did they break liar?

I suggest you read Section 14 of the Act liar.

What is "illegal" about being an 'unlawful non-citizen liar'?

Can you tell us  liar?

What law is broken by being an "unlawful non-citizen" liar?

Quote the section for us liar.

Where did I ever said it was illegal to submit an asylum application

Maqqa wrote on Feb 21^st, 2013 at 12:35am:

Where did I ever said it was illegal to submit an asylum application

What have asylum seekers done that was illegal liar?

You keep calling them illegals liar.

Why?

What law have they broken liar?

rabbitoh07 wrote on Feb 21^st, 2013 at 12:44am:

Maqqa wrote on Feb 21st, 2013 at 12:35am: Where did I ever said it was illegal to submit an asylum application What have asylum seekers done that was illegal liar? You keep calling them illegals liar. Why? What law have they broken liar?

where did I call them "illegal liar"??

Gist wrote on Jun 26^th, 2012 at 3:36pm:

Maqqa wrote on Jun 26th, 2012 at 3:31pm: Gist wrote on Jun 26th, 2012 at 3:17pm: Never mind the PS numbnut. We're talking about today, not when your grandad was at school. TODAY. TODAY the Noalition demands that all asylum seekers be sent to Nauru for processing. No exceptions. My question to all you righties is - what happens to them once they are processed? PS. You can run but you can't hide  :D The same that happened back in 2007 THEY GOT SENT TO AUSTRALIA IN 2007. EVERY LAST FVCKIN' ONE!! What a USELESS policy THAT is! YOUR LOT demands we spend megabucks running a detention centre in Nauru to keep them there for a few years just to bring them here? WE MAY AS WELL STOP DICKING AROUND AND JUST ACCEPT THEM HERE IN THE FIRST PLACE YOU MORON!

Not even close! I think the true number is closer to one-third, with the rest gong to NZ and other countries if their claims for asylum were accepted.