For what? Australia is already well known for it's illegal immigrants policy (realy hard line) so what's new about that? It's still better than shooting.
Australia's draconian immigration policy towards Asians (nothing like as hard a line if you happen to be white) is a completely different can of worms that isn't relevant here, but suffice to say, past misdeeds do not lessen or excuse current ones in any way shape or form.
And cold blooded murder is a pretty low bar to set to decide what's acceptable behaviour.
If you cannot see what is so fundamentally wrong about paying criminals and offering zero humanitarian assistance to refugees and instead just telling the traffickers to take those poor people 'anywhere else but here', then no amount of explaining can enlighten you.
I would just ask you look into all those mass graves they are finding in Thailand to see what kind of fate such actions might be condemning those poor people to.
We only heard about this because those traffickers took their passengers back. What happens to the next boat who didn't pack enough supplies for a return journey with so many passengers? Or a captain and crew who didn't want to deal with passengers wanting a refund?
Putting asside the moral bankruptcy at play here, its just a stupid policy.
The entire concept of law and order and policing and enforcement is centred on punishing bad behaviour as a means of discouragement. Rewarding criminals will not, surprise of surprises, lead to a reduction in criminals and crimes. It will almost certainly do the opposit.