|
|
Anglican Church of Australia
General Synod Refugee Working
Group
Statement for Federal and State
Parliamentarians
We, as Australian Anglicans, are part of the Anglican
Communion, a network of some 75 million people in over 165
countries, many of which are experiencing the conflicts and
situations throughout the world which cause people to be
refugees, displaced persons and asylum-seekers. We are also
part of ecumenical networks around the world, including the
World Council of Churches, the National Council of Churches
of Australia and their partners in development and relief
projects in many of the countries affected.
We are concerned about the way in which Australia is
treating a range of refugees, displaced persons and
asylum-seekers.
- Population Policy
Australia desperately needs an agreed Population Policy
(preferably bipartisan). Any discussion about migration
or the treatment of refugees and asylum-seekers proceeds
in something of a vacuum without the background of a
Population Policy. The National Population Summit of 2002
revealed the wide range of opinions prevailing in
Australia about demographic views and desirable outcomes.
The communiqué from the Summit said this:
'political parties and peak industry and community bodies
formally acknowledge the distinction between Population
Policy and Immigration Practice and recognize that
Immigration Practice should not operate in isolation but
within the broader context of achieving the strategic
objectives of Population Policy.'
We urge Australia's leaders to ensure that the
appropriate expert voices in demography are heard and
that agreement is reached upon the size of the population
which this continent is believed to be able to sustain.
At the moment the apparent diversity of opinions in this
area makes proper decision-making extremely
difficult.
- Our Falling Population
It is clear that Australia's population is in decline and
that without a significant increase in the birth rate and
greater controls and limits on the very large number of
abortions permitted each year, then the only source of
growth for Australia is migration.
For a number of years experts in the field, like Dr
Charles Price of Canberra, have been advocating an
increase of Australia's migrant increase to at least 120
000 persons each year. The present figure is approaching
this but the number of refugees and asylum-seekers whom
the government is prepared to admit is still only 12 000.
That should be increased in proportion to the increase of
the migration total.
This figure of 12 000 is now spread over 'offshore' and
'onshore' persons seeking residence. We believe this to
be a tragically inadequate way of responding to the size
of the world's problem.
- The Global Challenge
The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
estimates that there are about 20 million refugees in the
world today. This is the official figure. Many experts
believe that the true figure is probably double that. It
is clear that close to 50 million people are displaced
within and around their own countries.
The continuing tribal, racial, religious and political
conflicts around the world, many of which have economic
mainsprings, are resisting UN intervention and many
appear incapable of solution. Many human rights abuses
are the result.
These are perhaps the main causes of people becoming
refugees or displaced persons. The problem is one which
faces the entire global community and no country can be
without concern for the desperate plight of so many,
especially women and children who make up the vast
majority of these people. Their plight has been described
as the greatest moral problem facing the international
community today.
It is common ground that a record number of people are on
the move in today's world. Many are seeking better
lifestyles, employment and educational opportunities.
However, the majority are fleeing difficult situations
for survival and desperately trying to find a new, secure
and purposeful life free of persecution for themselves
and especially their children. Many are prepared to take
extraordinary risks and gamble their entire and very
limited resources to pay middlemen to assist them to
cross boundaries for this purpose.
- Australian Attitudes
Australia has had a highly commendable reputation in
the global community for its generosity. Migration
policies of a bipartisan nature have enabled this country
to be open to millions of displaced people and refugees
who have made enormous contributions to the growth and
life of this country and become exemplary citizens.
Australia's record since World War II has been good and
the churches have had a particularly valuable part to
play in the exercise especially through the National
Council of Churches.
We are concerned with talk in relation to recent
asylum-seekers as 'illegals' and 'queue jumpers'. Under
the international agreements, to which Australia is
party, any person may seek asylum in another country and
must be accorded it, at least until such time as their
claim for refugee status is adequately assessed. There is
no such thing as a 'queue' on a global basis, although
there may be queues in places where Australian
Immigration staff are present. There are many thousands
of desperate people marooned in foreign countries with no
hope of having claims to refugee status assessed by any
member of the Australian Immigration Department. We
believe many more overseas processing positions should be
created.
We believe that there should be a special category
amongst the refugee quota (which we believe should be
increased to 25 000 per annum) for those persons who come
to Australia by various means from a first country of
asylum where they cannot have their claims properly
processed.
We believe that there are good grounds for instituting
a category for people coming from situations of extreme
poverty, just as there is a category for women at risk.
For a number of years the Australian government (through
AusAID) has had a particular commitment to the
elimination of poverty in the global community.
Australia's commitment to people suffering from such
situations needs to be maintained. The fact that the
UN does not include poverty in its criteria for
assessment of refugee status does not prevent Australia
determining this as a criterion for resettlement.
- Foreign Aid
We believe the Australian community (as tax payers) has
an obligation to provide special development grants to
areas where the causes of conflict and war might be
ameliorated and the numbers of refugees and displaced
persons significantly diminished. Some work of this kind
has been done in Afghanistan but other areas (eg Sudan)
desperately need such an approach.
- Government Leadership
The Australian government needs to be mindful of our
special place in the global community and to have the
courage to give leadership in reminding Australian
citizens of their privileged situation. Only a few
countries have a marginally better lifestyle and
opportunities than Australia. Our generosity in accepting
the needy from overseas was greatly to our credit until
the last decade.
Other national communities are not slow in reminding
Australia of how the generosity of our response has been
so severely curtailed. Any Australian who has travelled
in recent years has been met with severe criticism about
the harshness of the current Australian government's
approach. It is true that some European countries (facing
large numbers of people who wish to enter the country)
have done something to emulate the strictness of
Australia's approach but there are many who remain very
much more generous than are we.
We believe the government needs to restore its concern
and emphasis upon family reunion for those in the refugee
and special humanitarian categories. Much more money
should be made available to subsidise airfares for family
members who are stranded in their countries of origin or
a country of first asylum. Why does the government only
assist one third of those arriving for resettlement with
adequate support services?
With so much government criticism of 'boat people' and
other asylum-seekers, we are disturbed at the inequity of
the way in which visa overstayers and asylum-seekers
who have come legitimately (especially by air) are
treated.
- Detention Issues
Any asylum-seeker must be prepared to be the object
of serious scrutiny and their claims for refugee status
be formerly assessed. Every country has the right to
protect its borders and its existing population against
those who have criminal records, major health problems
which may be communicable, or who are simply seeking a
better lifestyle.
We recognise that it is appropriate to detain
asylum-seekers for a limited period but Australia's track
record in relation to asylum-seekers has now become an
international scandal and a disgrace to our reputation as
a country strongly respectful of human rights and
dignity. Many European countries, eg Great Britain, keep
very few asylum-seekers in detention beyond the first few
weeks, although there are sad signs of a hardening of
attitudes there. There is a desperate need for a
rethinking of our current policies and practice. The
recent criticisms by UNHCR clearly call for a new
approach. People spend far too long in detention.
A particular concern is the traumatic effect of detention
upon children who are likely to come from an existing
traumatised background.
- Visas
a. Bridging Visas
Some people cannot work and have access to few community
supports. We are appalled to hear that in some cases
substantial financial bonds are now being required for
the issue of a bridging visa. We implore the government
to seek consistency and equity in this area.
b. Temporary Protection Visas
We have something of the same concerns in relation to
TPV holders. So many of them have been unceremoniously
'dumped' in capital cities with a pittance in hand and no
support group to look after them. The burden of care of
these people has fallen most exclusively on a range of
non-government organisations, including the churches. We
believe the government has been mean-minded about its
draconian controls of those who seek to help these people
and especially threatened reduction or elimination of
government funding for those who give them help.
We continue to be appalled at the conditions imposed on
Temporary Protection Visa holders and the inequitable way
in which these people (having been granted refugee
status) are denied a range of social security benefits in
our community.
There is an emerging crisis in relation to all TPV
holders as many of them approach and have reached the
three-year point at which the visa ceases to be operative
and where their applications must be reprocessed. Why do
people whose refugee status has already been established
need to be reprocessed?
The other major concern has been the inordinate length of
time taken by the current department to process
applications, together with the harsh and cruel refusal
to give information about the processing of their
applications. This does us as a nation no credit.
In terms of detention we are particularly concerned about
the plight of children and cannot understand why more
children have not been released into the community at
large. If there are concerns about absconding why not
place them in a group of chosen schools which they must
attend?
We commend the Minister on his initiative in releasing
some women and children into the community in the
township of Woomera. We understand that this has worked
well, although it has meant that some children have been
removed from their fathers pro tem.
- A Choice of People
The Prime Minister has said consistently that 'we
will decide who comes to this country'. That is an
appropriate response to those who seek residence but
there is an equally appropriate responsibility for the
government to seek ways in which it may make a
significant contribution to the amelioration of the
enormous amount of tragedy and suffering experienced by
so many innocent people in the world today.
One interesting suggestion is that the government might
specifically decide to do something about inviting people
who could contribute to the amelioration of Australia's
increasing problem of environmental degradation. This
might mean targeting persons who have come from an
agricultural background and who have thereby experienced
similar conditions and would be available on a contract
basis (somewhat like the Snowy Mountains Authority
Scheme) and in which, for a period of years, they could
work in remote areas in remediation of the environment,
on work for which we have the money but not the labour
force. They could be provided with education and first
class health facilities, English language classes and a
range of facilities which would enable them to fit easily
into the Australian community once they have completed
their commitment. This appears to be a win win
situation.
Last year, the Minister announced that he would bring in
12,000 skilled migrants. Why could not some skilled
asylum-seekers be looked at in that category?
(One member of the General Synod Refugee Working Group
has strong reservations about manipulation of refugees
and asylum-seekers to fit Australian economic needs).
- Processing
We are concerned about the way applications are
processed both in Australia and overseas. There seem to
be different systems in different states of the
commonwealth, eg in Queensland it appears that no
applicant is able to obtain an interview, every
application has to be on paper.
We are concerned about the justice of such long times of
processing and urge the Federal government to make
increased sums of money available to employ further
trained staff personnel to do this processing both at
home and overseas.
- Claimant's Rights
We are concerned about the way in which the
government has been progressively cutting back on the
'rights' of applicants. The draconian legislation which
has been enacted progressively over the last few years
has severely limited the human rights of asylum-seekers
to appeal. Imposing time limits which are, in many cases,
harsh, preventing class actions and in general making it
significantly more difficult for applicants to succeed in
the process. The recent comments of the High Court
express some of our concerns.
- Community Education
We are concerned that the present Federal government
has allowed a campaign of vilification of strangers and
foreigners, especially asylum-seekers, to take place
through the media. This program has been clearly
engendered by the government. It has done nothing to
prevent the inflammatory talk promoted by the media. It
has raised new evidence of racism and various kinds of
intolerance within the Australian community. This adverse
impression affects migrants as well as asylum-seekers and
other refugees. We urge the government to be much more
proactive in developing programs of community education
about the benefits of migration, the richness which the
arrival of non-caucasian and non-anglo-celtic persons has
contributed to the multi-cultural nation we experience
today.
- Encouragement for Community Groups and
Volunteers
Much has been said in the International Year of the
Volunteer about the importance of their contribution to
the life of the nation. At present government policies
are making it increasingly difficult for volunteers to
make the extraordinarily valuable contribution to the
resettlement of refugees and asylum-seekers which has
been possible in recent decades. In particular there are
no longer any hostels available for the accommodation of
people arriving at first instance. There are no financial
supports available to NGO's to cope with often very
expensive and difficult situations. This does not serve
the best interests of our community or its present and
future members. It is our understanding that the
government provides reasonable resources for only one
third of those who are resettled and only minute
resources for the others.
- Specific Models of Successful Activity
The government needs to recognise the remarkable
contribution of organisations like the House of Welcome
in Sydney. This has been without government support and
has provided housing, English classes, employment
assistance, legal and medical support, computer classes,
holiday respite and financial help for those on bridging
visas, through the NSW Ecumenical Council.
There has been a vast amount of work done by voluntary
agencies (including the churches) in Perth, Adelaide and
Brisbane helping TPV holders to survive.
Anglicare throughout the country is in the forefront of
this work.
Conclusion
We believe that there are many areas in which Australia
can learn from the experience of governments overseas and
that there are many areas in which it is perfectly obvious
that great improvements in policy and practice are
required.
We hope that some of these suggestions constitute a
valuable contribution to debate and to the government and
opposition in moving ahead into a better era.
The Most Rev'd Ian George AO
Chair
General Synod Refugee Working Group
|
|
Download this
statement as a pdf file.
|
