We want more control: Nauru

NAURU will demand more control over Australia-bound asylum-seekers than it had under the Howard government's Pacific Solution

NAURU will demand more control over Australia-bound asylum-seekers than it had under the Howard government's Pacific Solution, entrenching the physical and legal isolation they will face when transfers recommence.

Nauru Foreign Minister Kieren Keke said local authorities had "pretty much handed over" to Australia the original detention centres, operated between 2001 and 2008 before Labor dismantled offshore processing, but he said it would not happen again.

A scoping team of defence and government personnel arrived on Nauru last night, and terms could be worked out over the weekend to allow asylum-seekers to be kept in the island state within weeks, possibly in tent accommodation.

"We are much clearer this time around how we want the arrangement structured," Dr Keke told The Weekend Australian in an interview from Nauru.

"I think back in 2001 the land wasn't ceded as such to Australia -- it was pretty much handed over to their full control.

"That's something we are looking at doing differently this time. We are happy to host the centre, but we want it really to be much more under Nauruan control."

RAAF engineers yesterday inspected the ramshackle, termite-ridden huts that housed asylum-seekers on Papua New Guinea's Manus Island, before the reconnaissance team flew to Nauru, nearly 3000km northeast of Cairns. News Limited photographer Gary Ramage said the conditions were "unliveable".

On Nauru, two camps known as State House and Topside in the rocky interior operated during the Howard era.

About 43 per cent of asylum-seekers detained under the Pacific Solution were ultimately settled in Australia, but it often took years, driving another third to give up and return home.

Dr Keke said Nauru had reached in-principle agreement with the International Organisation for Migration to manage the detention program. But unlike the arrangement with the Howard government, this would not be a "fee-for-hosting" deal.

Dr Keke said Nauru had received upfront payments of between $10 million and $20m to join the then Pacific Solution, and further financial and logistical support once the camps were running. This was "quite a different approach to what we're looking at now", he said.

"Unlike the 2001 arrangement, when it really was fee-for-hosting, this is more being done on the basis of the close relationship we have with Australia and . . . in recognition of the assistance we have received from Australia over many years.

"What our expectation of Australia is that they will cover the cost of establishing the centre, operating the centre and any sort of direct costs we need to incur because of hosting the centre. But other than that, we're expecting the ongoing development assistance program will remain and that the further economic benefits to Nauru are by the activity that's generated by having the centre."

Dr Keke said Australia's hopes to have a temporary detention camp within a month were realistic. It would cater for 150 people at Topside, initially in tents.

The Nauruan government expected locals would be employed as guards, and local police would provide back-up security with support from the Australian Federal Police. Dr Keke did not foresee a role for the Australian military.