I'm not being coy, I don't know what the specific concerns are. I've been quite explicit about this.

Which means that you're taking as the neutral stance to not have a concern with arbitrary detention of asylum seekers. You have implicitly taken a position on who has the burden of justifying themselves. Do you see how people can take issue with that since it violates international law concerning the rights of asylum seekers?

I'm not taking a neutral stance. I don't understand the issue and I'm asking for clarification on one of the points. I'm not passing judgment on either position nor am I asking anyone to "justify themselves". What a bizarre accusation...