Desperate enough to come to Australia

For example: has the option been explored of negotiating, and subsequently legislating for, processing of refugee claims by the UN refugee agency? It may be possible to negotiate settlement of West Papuans in third countries, in return for Australia increasing its contribution to the UN costs, and increasing the number of UN determined refugees it takes from other countries, from where there are less immediate conflicts with our national interests.

There are some difficult negotiations to be had, but there is time for these negotiations, as the only urgency appears to be to appease Indonesian sentiment in return for granting asylum to some of its citizens. The rushed approach of the immigration department, not a body with a high reputation for clear thinking, is to push any future boat-arriving asylum seekers - generally around 90 per cent of whom have in the past been found to meet even a stringent, DIMA-examined refugee definition - to detention in holding camps under poor conditions, until they are later let into Australia after some years.

While the Immigration Minister might argue that past reform agreements with government MPs only concerned detention conditions within Australia, it is hoped that this sophistry will not prevent MPs insisting, before moving further away from our refugee convention and human rights treaty commitments, that:

• a full range of alternatives be canvassed;
• there is negotiation with other governments and UNHCR officials for alternatives; and
• there is input from non-government organisations or refugee experts in the design of alternatives.