> There is no easy solution to deal with the fleet of boats carrying asylum
> seekers to Australia. If they are admitted to Christmas Island and the
> passengers are successful in their claims to enter the country, the number
of
> boats and the number of passengers will only increase.

> There is no end of people prepared to take their chance of getting into
> Australia by boat. And there is an ample supply of smugglers happy to take
their
> money and arrange the voyage.

> The Rudd Government has learnt what the Howard government learnt. The
volume of
> the traffic is in direct proportion to the chances of successful entry.
There
> will always be more people seeking entry than places available. The only
way to
> cut the traffic is to make it clear that the sea route is no short cut to
> residence in Australia.

> Critics of the Howard government complained that its policy was too harsh,
> inhumane and brutal. If only the government were more welcoming, they
suggested,
> the whole problem could be managed. The claims were of course nonsense -
the
> kind of claims only people with no responsibility for the outcome could
make
> from their comfortable vantage points.

> If the government were more welcoming, more people would set out on the
boat
> journey - and put their lives at risk in the process.

> The most humane way to assist asylum seekers make claims in Australia
would be
> to use Qantas to airlift claimants from Sri Lanka or Iraq or Afghanistan
direct
> to Christmas Island. That way no one would have to board a boat and
everyone
> would get their asylum claim dealt with in an Australian territory.

> But I have never heard anyone argue for this. It is almost as if the
refugee
> advocates believe there should be a little bit of hardship in the
process - the
> risk of a long voyage on a rickety boat - but not too much. Not as much as
> detention and assessment in Indonesia or Nauru.

> If an airlift is out of the question, the next best thing to do is to stop
the
> sea trade and insist all claims for refugee status be made offshore, with
> humanitarian visas granted to those who have observed the rules and waited
for
> lawful entry. They can then fly into the country subject to the same rules
as
> apply to all other lawful arrivals.

> To run a system like that it is necessary to show that by destroying your
> papers, concealing your identity, paying a smuggler to enter Australia,
you will
> not be any more successful - in fact less successful - than those that
have
> turned up at an Australian embassy or a UN agency and lodged their claim
for
> asylum outside Australia.

> Closing the sea trade means closing the chances of success by boarding a
boat in
> Indonesia, Sri Lanka or anywhere else.

> Closing the sea trade will also protect many lives. A boat has now sunk
> somewhere off the Cocos Islands killing some of those on board. No one in
> Australia is to blame - not the navy, not the Government. The people to
blame
> are the smugglers who took the money and supplied the boat which has sunk.

> It is possible that many other boats have sunk in the Indian Ocean on
voyages to
> Australia. We do not know. But the probability is that the more that set
out,
> the more fatalities there will likely be.

> We do know that in October 2001 a boat - given the name SIEV X - sank
killing
> more than 350 people. No one knows for sure but it was probably in
Indonesian
> waters at the time. There was an enormous effort to blame the Howard
government
> for that event. The playwright Hannie Rayson even wrote a play designed to
show
> how ministers in that government had connived in the tragic deaths. This
> unfortunate loss of life was taken as a great opportunity to vilify the
Coalition.

> It will be interesting to see whether the playwrights and journalists go
to the
> same lengths to impugn the motives of the Rudd Government and blame
ministers in
> this government for the most recent deaths off the Cocos Islands. I doubt
they
> will - nor should they. It was a foul slur then, and it would be a foul
slur now
> to suggest that any Australian minister would connive in such a tragedy.

> No Australian minister would welcome having to deal with this issue. There
is no
> easy or soft solution. The public has an instinctive understanding of
that. The
> object must be to dissuade people from attempting to reach Australia by
> unauthorised boats. To do so the Government must be firm and clear - clear
> enough for those contemplating a journey to understand it and clear enough
to
> those who would transport them to understand it. Ambiguity in policy on
this
> issue will be very dangerous.

> --
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ipvdBnU8F8
>   - KRudd at his finest.

> "The Labour Party is corrupt beyond redemption!"
>   - Labour hasbeen Mark Latham in a moment of honest clarity.

> "This is the recession we had to have!"
>   - Paul Keating explaining why he gave Australia another Labour
recession.

> "Silly old bugger!"
>   - Well known ACTU pisspot and sometime Labour prime minister Bob Hawke
> responding to a pensioner who dared ask for more.

> "By 1990, no child will live in poverty"
>   - Bob Hawke again, desperate to win another election.

> "A billion trees ..."
>   - Borke, pissed as a newt again.

> "Well may we say 'God save the Queen' because nothing will save the
governor
> general!"
>   - Egotistical shithead and pompous fuckwit E.G. Whitlam whining about
his
> appointee for Governor General John Kerr.

> "SHUT THE FUCK UP YOU DUMB CUNT!"
>   - FlangesBum on learning the truth about Labour's economic capabilities.

> "I don't care what you fuckers think!"
>   - KRudd the KRude at his finest again.

> "We'll just change it all when we get in."
>   - Garrett the carrott