Niki Savva sums it up well - both politics and principle say Tony Abbott must block the Gillard Government's latest boat people scheme:
IF Tony Abbott truly believes that Julia Gillard's Malaysia Solution will not work as a deterrent, that it is morally questionable, that human rights are not guaranteed and that proposed amendments to the Migration Act to enshrine offshore processing on Nauru are unnecessary, then he has no choice but to vigorously oppose any legislation that gives life to the live-people trade.
He could vote for the government's amendments only if he were convinced - and he is not - that it was the only way to guarantee offshore processing as the key deterrent mechanism he would require as prime minister to stop the boats.
Abbott's critics claim he would be a hypocrite if he voted against the amendments. In fact, he would be a hypocrite if he voted for them. Any one of the issues he has nominated is ample justification, this time at least, to just say no.
It's hard to believe how desperate, craven and hypocritical the Gillard Government has been in trying to fix its Malaysian deal - now rejected definitively by Abbott:
Labor MPs were visibly deflated and there is likely to be another outburst by the Left faction in caucus today after Ms Gillard amended her offer to Mr Abbott in a last-ditch attempt to gain his support.
The government needs to override the August 31 High Court decision which ruled unlawful the Malaysia plan which would have swapped 800 asylum seekers for 4000 extra refugees.
A draft amendment to the Migration Act, presented to Mr Abbott on Friday, removed from the act all reference to the human rights protections that were to be guaranteed to people returned to a third country.
The opposition refused to accept the changes and there was an outcry from the Left over the removal of the guaranteed protections.
When Mr Abbott met Ms Gillard in her office yesterday, she presented him with an amended proposal. The public interest test became a more broad "national interest" test but some human rights guarantees were inserted.
These were that the third country had to process the refugee claims of those sent there, and that the third country could not send those people back to their homeland if they faced persecution or death.
But the proposed amendments stipulated these conditions were not legally binding so the opposition refused them, too.
