Jane Mcadam Australian Refugee Policies Analysis

A refugee is defined as a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war or persecution. Since the communist victory in Vietnam in 1975, Australia has become a desirable location for hundreds of thousands of refugees as a result of the pleasant lifestyle and an abundance of employment opportunities. The experiences of Indochinese refugees in the 1970’s and present day refugees contain both similar and contrasting elements. Refugees no longer flee from countries such as Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos instead they arrive to Australia from war-ravaged nations in the Middle East such as Iraq and Syria. Nevertheless, these countries are all victims of war and people continue to seek refuge as a consequence of conflict and fear

Sadly, that's the harsh reality for many asylum seekers, seeking refuge in Australia as they are arbitrarily detained. Good morning or afternoon. It has been a profound honour to be invited to address you about the eloquently breach of basic human rights asylum seeker face while being detained in our shores. Mandatory detention should be abolished as it causes indiscriminate health risk. Instead, the Australia government should allow asylum seekers to settle into the community. We should be viewing asylum seekers as a humanitarian issue instead of a political one.

During 2012-13 Australia’s Refugee and Humanitarian program increased from 13,750 to 20,000 places divided between offshore resettlement and onshore protection. It resulted in 87% rise in the number of offshore resettlement visas granted. The alternatives include indefinite mandatory detention and mandatory detention. Asylum seekers who arrive without prior valid visas usually have to go through mandatory detention. They usually stay in detention for an average of 450 days. Community placement are another alternative. Many asylum seekers from immigration detentions centers are released are placed on bridging visas so they can live in community. Although

Asylum seekers or refugees have fled their countries’ due to volatile circumstances such as war, or fear of prosecution. Upon arrival in Australia they are moved to detention centres. Detention centres hold people who have come without a visa, any non-national and all unauthorised boat arrivals (Australian Human Rights Commission, 2014). These centres hold refugees for indefinite periods and in poor conditions. They are used as a spectacle to represent illegality and a threat to Australian society (Marfleet, 2007, p672).

The mandatory detention policy in Australia is a legal requirement to detain non-citizens without a valid visa. It was first introduced in 1992 by the Australian Labour Party led by Paul Keating, as a response to the number of boat arrivals seeking asylum in Australia from the aftermath of the Vietnam War. In 1976 to 1981, the first wave of 2000 asylum seekers landed in Australia, where they were sympathetically allowed entrance, followed by a quick grant of a refugee visa status as they were assumed to be ‘genuine refugees’. However, continuous boats arrived been 1989 and 1994 which caused concern within the Australian public as there were issues of increased unemployment (Phillips, 2000).

My first point is about the Australian government and how they spend more money on giving refugees a place to live, than they do looking after Australians that are in need. In the last 2 years they have spent 1.2 billion dollars on offshore detention centres, Manus Island, Naura and Christmas Island. This money was spent on operating the centre, health care, welfare services, food supplies and the security around the facilities. The government is quick to spend all this money on asylum seekers, when there are tens of thousands of homeless, less fortunate and under-privileged people scattered all over Australia. These people struggle to pay bills, rent, get food on the table and even a roof to sleep under. Asylum seekers flee there county with very little, they arrive with clothes and few small items accompanying them, they expect the

The Papua New Guinea’s Supreme Court ruling that Australia’s detention of asylum seekers on Manus Island is illegal and that the centre must close has once again raised in Australian society the very divisive issue of asylum seekers and their treatment. Commentaries following the Supreme Court decision have portrayed Australia’s approach to asylum seekers as inhumane and uncaring. With continual political, humanitarian and media attention, the histrionics surrounding the issue are rife and many of the crucial facts as to Australia’s response to asylum seekers and the purpose for our offshore processing centres long forgotten. It’s time to restore a factual basis and balance to the discussion. Can Australians be proud of our

International law under the 1951 Refugee Convention, permits the right to seek asylum and allocates a responsibility to provide protection for those who lie under the definition of refugee. Since then policies have been modified and used to suit the interests of the government. In particular, the Border Protection Legislation Amendment Act 1999. Authorised the removal of undocumented ships in Australian territory and proclaimed that anyone aboard the ship can be forcibly returned and denied application of asylum. Other legislation, such as the Migration Legislation Amendment Act 1999 makes it illegal for a person to carry people who are not citizens without valid documentation. These policies allow the government to portray itself as strong on border protection and terrorism. This plays well to its core constituencies but is rightly lambasted by human rights organisations and civil liberty groups. Refugees are undocumented people fleeing from their country of origin, so there isn’t a variety of travel options to escape to safety. The policy disclaiming that ‘everyone who lands by boat doesn’t get to stay’ is ignorant to the concept of why people are forced to leave. It’s not a choice to be removed from your country, it's a matter of survival and safety. The core principle of the Refugee convention is that people are not forced to return to a country where they face the threat of persecution or danger.

The fact that Australia is denying these people entry in Australia is an abuse on human rights. It states clearly in the declaration of Human Rights, that australia has signed, that “Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.” these people are not “illegals” as the 71% labels them. Nations for example Canada and New Zealand have no problem taking refugees in less than 2 days. In fact they don’t see any problems with that. So the main question here is why is the australian government keeping these people in offshore processing centres for months and years, wit the people having no idea what the future hold for them. Is there a problem if these people are trying to seek help for their families?

Many refugees are not safe in bordering countries, and they must look further afield for protection. Sometimes they will need to take complex and dangerous routes in order to reach a country where they believe they will be safe and can start a new life. Australia has agreed to take in 13 500 refugees and other humanitarian entrants in

I write to you to express my concern on the Federal Government’s approach to asylum seekers. I believe current policies for the refugees are misrepresenting them for the following reasons.

Australia’s policies in regard to asylum seekers and refugee processing, are viewed as very controversial, and often inhumane by the international community (Lock, Quenault & Tomlinson 2002, p.37). To discuss this policy, I will apply an external analysis. In order to decide whether this policy is seen as good or bad, through a social, economic and human rights perspective.

Australia has adopted a relatively conservative policy towards asylum seekers and both the Labor and the Liberal party support policies designed to reduce the number of refugees brought into Australia. The issue of refugees within Australia is a controversial one, and has attracted a diverse range of opinions within the public.

Australia’s immigration department currently has immigration policies that let people live permanently in Australia on various grounds. Overseas visitors currently living in Australia under temporary visas can also apply for permanent residence. Those who enter Australia without authority (by boat or otherwise) or overstay their visas fall into the category of illegal migrants. Other countries fluctuate with the demand for refuge, while Australia has a set limit.

UNHCR has offices in over 100 countries, an annual budget of $1 billion, and, although it has its problems, allocates both legal protection and emergency relief. Its purposes are to care for refugees, make sure that the problem does not mushroom, that the world cares for these refuges, and that these refugees are settled as soon as possible in other countries and are able to get omit their lives. To date, UNHRC has helped 25 million people successfully restart their lives. (Kushner, 2005)