Have you seen the new government ad?

[Waratah]

Off-shore processing that doesn't include it - where the asylum seekers can live in the community, not in detention, in PNG or Malaysia, or Indonesia, or wherever, while we process their claims. We have legal obligations to process their claims, and to grant asylum to refugees. We have regional resettlement programs in place for bringing in people from camps, and we should extend that same program to Indonesia, Malaysia, PNG. It is deplorable that we hold genuine refugees in detention for 2-3 years before granting asylum.

Still will not stop the boats if people know they will be able to come to Australia anyway.Not a better solution people still dying. Please do your research, we do take in people from Indonesian detention centres. Stop making shit up.

No, but it reduces the cost dramatically, and allows that money to be freed up to be used by other targeted programs that can be made to benefit people more.

So we agree that your "better solution" is not a better solution. Could you provide the costing of both situations. Love to see how it is dramatically cost less. We have all seen how liberal party will destort the truth with costings

I don't believe so. I believe it will act as a deterrent. I will also point out to you that while most boats come from Indonesian ports, not all of them do, and every single one of them carries genuine refugees on board. The refugee convention, which you can read here prohibits us from settling people permanently against their will in a country like PNG in a variety of situations. For instance Article 33 Paragraph 1:

• No Contracting State shall expel or return (“refouler”) a refugee in any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his race, religion, nationality, member-ship of a particular social group or political opinion.

And what about Article 31 Paraghraph 1:

• The Contracting States shall not impose penalties, on account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees who, coming directly from a territory where their life or freedom was threatened in the sense of article 1, enter or are present in their territory without authorization, provided they present themselves without delay to the authorities and show good cause for their illegal entry or presence.

Just those two paragraphs alone should show you that this "solution" is in clear violation of international law. And you should know how I feel about violating international laws - I've said many times what my opinion on the USA and their history of torture is.

First off if they are not coming to Australia they are not queue jumping, so you can say what you believe all you like still will not change that fact. It is not a clear violation of international laws. I think you are reading something that is not there.

That's a matter for Indonesian policy.

The same policy you want to implement in PNG? Make up your mind.

Indonesia doesn't have to accept it. We're well within legal rights to return fishing boats to the ports they left from. We're well within legal rights to close our ports too. Turning boats back to port sends a clear message, and it is one thing that can be done.

So you totally ignore my statement about what has happened in the past. No point in having people in the community as you want if they are dead.