If it were not already obvious that
any similarity between the Government's approach to asylum seekers and the
recommendations of the Houston Panel is entirely coincidental, the op-ed by
Paris Aristotle published in the Tuesday edition of The Age should put the matter beyond doubt.
While I don’t like the Houston Panel’s
solution, it is much better than the approach the Government has taken since
the Panel reported; whereas the Panel was at pains to emphasise the integrated
nature of its recommendations, the Government has simply picked up the nasty
bits, proceeded with indecent haste to fling people in the direction of Nauru,
and done little if anything about the main body of the recommendations.
The key paragraphs of Aristotle’s
piece are:
The panel presented an
integrated package of 22 recommendations knowing it would take time to
implement them and have the desired effect. The report's most important
components were measures to establish an effective regional processing and
protection framework that would build a safer system. Increasing the
humanitarian program to 20,000 places immediately and to 27,000 over the next
five years, adding 4000 places to the family migration stream and $70 million
dollars to improve regional processing underpins these measures.
However, there were also strong
measures designed, not to punish, but to discourage people risking their lives
while a better system is created. They included reintroducing processing on
Nauru and Manus Island; building on and implementing the ''Malaysia
Arrangement'' and increased co-operation with Indonesia.
To mitigate the associated risks
the panel recommended safeguards. They include no arbitrary detention,
appropriate accommodation, legal assistance and merits review, an oversight
group and services such as health, mental health, education and vocational
training. To date not all of these measures have been implemented, particularly
in terms of appropriate accommodation and the processing of claims. They are
designed to ensure processes comply with our convention obligations. Both
Australia and Nauru are signatories to the convention and therefore should
implement these measures without delay.
On the Minister for Immigration’s draconian announcement last week he says:
The announcements last week to disallow asylum seekers work rights and
timely access to family reunion, even after they have been found to be a
refugee, were not recommendations of the panel. The minister on Monday
clarified that these measures were not associated with the panel
recommendations. I welcome his commitment to work further on this with community
groups and his advisory committee in the coming months.
The measures are highly problematic because they are a punitive form of
deterrence in response to a specific and new phenomenon in people smuggling
from Sri Lanka that the government believes is for economic reasons as opposed
refugee protection. This is best established by properly and quickly processing
their claims. Those that are refugees should be protected and those who are not
can be returned.
He also has some news
for the Coalition:
The coalition's proposal to slash the humanitarian quota back to 13,750
places and reintroduce temporary protection visas also makes little sense.
These measures offer little in terms of a longer-term regional response.
Read Paris
Aristotle’s article in full here.
