Tink, you've separately said that you like the idea of big populations.
Do you have faith that state and federal governments will adequately supply the infrastructure to support a population which is more than double what we have now? You know, those things that are causing us worry at present like not enough water, gridlocked traffic in our cities, dysfunctional public transport, inadequate and increasingly dysfunctional health system, etc?
Obviously allowing the current 78 people to come into Australia isn't going to make any difference to anything in a purely practical sense. But what is concerning some people is the question of establishing this as a precedent, whereupon asylum seekers the world over will see Australia as an easy access new home.
So are you OK with that? Do you want to see unlimited access for anyone at all into Australia? Where will all these people be accommodated (a) while they are being checked, and then (b) while they are learning English, trying to find work etc? Are you happy for us to pay considerably more tax to fund all this, plus the building of the additional infrastructure?
Don't you think just allowing anyone who dictates that they will only disembark a ship if it's into Australia, nowhere else, even just for processing, is a bit unfair to those people who have been waiting for years in a refugee camp somewhere, having applied to come to Australia in the conventional way?
I'm all for assisting genuine refugees to come to Australia and giving them every possible assistance. But I'm uncomfortable when people - in any area of life - try to circumvent a system that others in good faith have followed.