This week, the secretary for the Department of Immigration and Citizenship, Andrew Metcalfe, presented to the joint select parliamentary committee on Australia’s detention network. In his opening remarks, among other things, he asked of the committee to consider how we could better manage the reception of asylum seekers, a phrase not commonly used in Australia, but more common in the European Union (EU). Within this context, the EU acknowledges the need for mandatory processing as opposed to mandatory detention, whereby asylum seekers do not need to be detained for long periods, if at all, to have their claims processed. Metcalfe’s comments open a window of opportunity for considering how Australia may better manage those arriving on our shores.
There are currently no mainstream alternatives to detention for unauthorised arrivals operating in Australia. The expansion of community detention, while welcomed by many asylum seekers and advocates and that has demonstrated a more humane way of receiving asylum applicants, still remains a part of the mandatory detention framework.
While we have recently observed the government’s commitment not to detain unaccompanied minors and children in closed detention facilities, it is an active decision by a government that is not compelled, through legislation, to provide alternatives to detention in a community setting. Utilising a model established by the Howard government in 2005, the expansion of community detention facilitates, with ministerial approval, appropriate care arrangements for vulnerable individuals in a detention environment to be cared for in the community.
Yet, little known to Australians is that more than 8000 asylum seekers already live in the community and the sky hasn’t fallen in. Furthermore, a number of these 8000 have been living in Australia for years waiting for their protection application to be determined. The only difference between these asylum seekers and those in detention is that they arrived by air, not sea. Community-based care arrangements are not only more compassionate but cheaper and more effective. Well and healthy people transition into settling and contributing to Australia faster and more effectively. In addition, those who will be refused and must return to their country of origin are better able to deal with this reality when they have not been detained for long periods of time. Not only do they return to their country of origin healthier, but Australia saves thousands of dollars in having them lived in the community and then returned voluntarily, rather than detained and removed forcibly with escorts at extraordinary cost.
On a recent research trip to the UK, I was confronted by the detrimental effects of a lack of legislation in Australia relating to the reception and care of asylum seekers. In an interview with a senior UK border agency official, I asked why the UK does not mandatorily detain asylum seekers but rather provides community-based housing, support services and financial aid to the majority of the 25,000 asylum seekers applying each year. Without hesitation, he responded by saying “It’s a human rights issue. Besides we couldn’t possibly afford to detain them all.” His response was refreshing and distressing as I realised domestic legislation in the UK requires the government to provide community-based care arrangements for low-, or no-risk, asylum seekers. There is no debate on the issue, unlike in Australia.
The sad reality is that Australia has the awful “luxury” of debating the treatment we will apply to asylum seekers who reach our shores because we do not have the domestic legislative environment that reflects the UN Refugee Convention and protects the basic rights of care for asylum seekers. In the meantime, human beings suffer in long-term detention despite being statistically likely to be refugees, with the detention population reflecting a current success rate of 70%.
Minister Chris Bowen must be congratulated for making the decision to care appropriately for children, their families and unaccompanied minors in the community, a program that has now assessed 1765 people as eligible for community care. However, it is not the only model that could be utilised to manage the reception of asylum seekers better and to achieve more effective outcomes whether it be settlement or return. The expansion of community detention is only one piece of a bigger picture for appropriately managing asylum arrivals in Australia and should be celebrated for its logic and compassion. Yet the next steps should be to find agreement on appropriate community-based care arrangements through a short-term visa system, not only for children but for those suffering in long-term detention. We’ve been doing it for years and is not out of the realm of possibility.
Let’s then legislate these arrangements and stop the ugly debate on how much suffering for asylum seekers in detention is too much.
*Caz Coleman is a member of the Council for Immigration Services and Status Resolution (CISSR), advising the federal Minister for Immigration. Opinions expressed are her own.
It is so obvious what the solution to the problem of Boat People is….Let them know that the people who arrive by AIR are the ones who are treated humanely. Whereas the ones who arrive by boat are treated worse than the most abused dog in Australia. That should stop the boat people smugglers 🙂
However, look at the figures 24,000 in the UK taken care of treated humanely and compassionately – and we- a rich and huge country -complain, kick and scream, turn into cruel and abusive, inhuman Neanderthals, forgetting that to the Indigenous people of this land…..WE ARE ALL BOAT PEOPLE.
@Lady: THink I suggested before setting up a charity that dispenses airline tickets to would-be boat people. It probably wouldn’t work, but I’d love to contribute to it if it ever got off the ground.
Asylum seekers … reception or detention?
Step1: Let the unconscionable headline seeking media as well as the well known unscrupulous political players apply self-censorship and cease to exploit asylum seeker issues.
Step2: Once out of the public limelight the government should then embark on closing all “detention” centres and instead provide “processing” facilities on the mainland for health, security and identity check purposes.
Do we have the maturity and the will to do it?
Over to you……….
Do these asylum seekers that arrive by air, similarly land without any passports or other forms of identification, with no record of their departure and origin, and without any sort of visa ?
May the once great Labor party which gave Australia immigration concentration camps in 1992 now find its real self again and have the guts and principle to rescind the legislation that requires public servants to rob asylum seekers of the very freedom they seek.
Indefinite detention for no chargable offence is an obscenity in a democratic society and we have seen both major parties use it knowing full well that it damages human beings including children. Enough is enough. Ten years of human rights abuses in the name of national security and border control? Billions of dollars spent on hurting people who are usually confirmed to be refugees really fleeing persecution and death? Crazy and cruel and so very unnecessary.
What is wrong with our elected representatives that they let this happen? A few more MPs need to join the liberal Liberals and Anna Burke and Melissa Parke in taking a stand for universal human rights.
Congratulations to Andrew Metcalfe for putting the issues where they belong – in the hands of the lawmakers. Open those detention centre gates and restore freedom of movement and some human dignity to the desperate asylum seekers who must be given the benefit of the doubt, given our track record of boat arrivals being “real refugees”. They will not abscond, because only the Minister can grant them what they risked all for … a permanent residence visa to live in peace and safety and commence a new life.