The increasingly harsh asylum seeker policy of the Opposition has come as no surprise. In competing for votes, the government and the Opposition are rivals for policies aimed at electoral protection rather than sound public policy based on compassion.

Measures designed to convince the unwary public that deterrence is a valued goal, fail in both intent and in matters of justice and human rights. By announcing its decision to reverse some of the more positive reforms of the Rudd government, we are seeing in Tony Abbott a resolve to send a message to asylum seekers and people smugglers that is based on irrationality and deception.

The policies have been formulated with an unforgiveable harshness of heart. The Opposition undoubtedly has access to evidence that the Howard government policies had serious outcomes for both asylum seeker wellbeing and for the reputation of the nation. By continuing to refer to asylum seekers as illegal entrants, there is reinforcement of an ideological claim that it is illegitimate to seek asylum on our shores. As the Refugee Council of Australia points out, it is not a crime to enter Australia without a visa for the purpose of seeking asylum.

Among the most serious of the announced policy scourges is the proposal to re-introduce the cruel and inhumane Temporary Protection Visa (TPV) that was in place from 1999 to 2008. The TPV, by discarding the fundamental rights owed to refugees, sends a signal that they are not worthy of our full protection. Studies have shown that people in this situation were cast as second rate refugees and faced insecurity about their futures. Poor mental health outcomes arising from prolonged detention were exacerbated by ongoing uncertainty. The prohibition of family reunion was perhaps the utmost form of suffering, with men separated from their wives and children for extended periods of time while they remained in visa limbo. In re-introducing this policy I am convinced that Opposition immigration spokesperson Scott Morrison has never sat, as I and other advocates have done, with people who grieved for the children they were unable to hug during the years of enforced separation.

The Opposition is turning a blind eye to the prospect that the deterrence objective may have the opposite effect, and that women and children are likely to take boat journeys to Australia as the only means of family reunion available to them. The loss of the lives of 142 women and 146 children on the SIEV X vessel in 2001 should have been a wake-up call about the perils of this visa, but deterrence determination persisted. It should be mandatory for all politicians to visit the SIEV X memorial in Canberra as a reminder of this tragedy.

The work for benefits notion is another in the litany of flawed policy directions. This provision serves little purpose other than to demonise asylum seekers by portraying them as aspiring welfare recipients. This is far from the truth as stories abound of how refugees contribute productively to Australian society when given the opportunity to work and to be self-sufficient. Research on TPVs demonstrates that employers were reluctant to hire people with uncertain visas and this had a detrimental effect on TPV holders, creating not only feelings of worthlessness but the lack of capacity to support themselves and their families in Australia or abroad.

We are yet to hear the Opposition announce where it intends to seek new offshore solutions. If the Coalition gains political power, it will be seen internationally as a human rights pariah through this further betrayal of our human rights responsibilities. The cost alone of offshore processing is an illogical response to boat arrivals. Author Susan Metcalfe who has considerable experience of previous offshore processing on Nauru, reminds us that the Pacific Solution was replete with stories of mental illness, dependence on medication and acts of self harm and hunger strikes arising from despair.

Surely the Opposition has heard the stories of desperate people fleeing persecution. If it has not, then there are many lawyers, mental health professionals and human rights advocates who can provide details. People fleeing harsh regimes will not be scared away by political posturing.

It is a credit to those who care about our shared humanity that the proposed changes are now under the intense scrutiny of refugee advocates and dissenters within Abbott's own party. It is these human rights champions who will prosper when future generations look back on the travesty of justice occurring in our name.

Linda Briskman holds the Dr Haruhisa Handa Chair of Human Rights Education at Curtin University.