|
Submission to the Consultations on the 2001 - 2002
Migration and Humanitarian Programs
April 4, 2001
The Director
Economic and Environment Section
Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs
PO Box 25
Belconnen ACT 2616
On behalf of the Australian Catholic Migrant and Refugee Office (ACMRO), I appreciate
the opportunity to participate in the consultation concerning the composition of the
Australian Migration Program for 2000/2001.
The issues of most concern for discussion in this submission are:
- the three year temporary protection visas for undocumented arrivals
- conditions at detention centres
- the linking of the on-shore and off-shore Humanitarian Programs (?)
- the importance of family reunion as a right
- the composition of the humanitarian program; this should reflect the needs of refugees
as advised by UNHCR
- well managed transitional stage for the IHSS
- slow processing of migration cases in some overseas posts
- adoption of a resolution made at the RCOA AGM (2000)- the migration program be
subject to review and reform
In recognition of Australia's international obligations, we welcome a migration system
that is protective for those genuinely seeking refuge in Australia. However, many members
of the Catholic Church are concerned for those people who come to Australia by boat and
seek refuge and who are, at least initially, treated harshly as law-breakers. Many find
the 'illegal boat people' 1 terminology
offensive, and prefer the term "irregular migrants" - a term which is used by
Pope John Paul and by other Vatican officials. Australians should be made aware of the
desperate situations that cause many people to enter Australia irregularly; they should
not be encouraged and supported through the popular media to be intolerant and lacking in
compassion towards people seeking refuge.
I repeat the comment made in ACMRO's submission in February this year, which expressed
a general concern for those people escaping from a life with no future. Increasingly they
find in host nations further disappointment due to a tightening of borders and asylum
conditions.
The Government has committed resources to keeping irregular migrants out of Australia.
But, compared to many other countries, the numbers which have come to Australia are not
great. The Government (and indeed the Parliament) should adopt a responsible approach
which addresses public misconception by being fair and informative. This approach should
stress Australia's international obligation of burden sharing.
ACMRO recognises that some of the people who arrive without documents have been
susceptible to exploitation. We believe that Australia should further develop bipartisan
workable solutions overseas with the UNHCR and NGOs.
ACMRO believes that Australia's Migration Program should be underpinned by moral and
ethical codes of conduct. We also believe that immigration is beneficial to the ongoing
development of Australia.
All people deserve to be treated with respect, love, understanding and care. These
basic human needs are universal and should provide a template in the development of a
reasonable migration program.
Pope John Paul speaks again of the phenomenon of migration in his message for 2000 2: "The Church hears the suffering cry of all who are
uprooted from their own land, of families forcefully separated, of those who, in the rapid
changes of our day, are unable to find a stable home anywhere ......she supports
them in their unhappiness". ACMRO is aware that economics, globalisation, and popular
public opinion influence Australia's planning for the migration program; it also urges
that human needs be considered as a defining principal for the development of the
Migration Program.
This argument is based on the accepted social norm of the importance of the 'unity
of the family' and of the need to redress the imbalance of global resources that
force "poorer populations" 3 into exile
"while the wealthy countries find they are prisoners of an insatiable craving to
concentrate the available resources in their own hands". Pope John Paul calls for
Governments to act responsibly by enabling the aims and desires for unity and peace to be
attainable.
Recently, the Vatican's permanent observer at the United Nations, Archbishop
Renato Martino, addressed the General Assembly.4 He
stated that the refugee problem is one of the most critical faced by the world today as
people continue to be forced from their homes. While some nations are wealthy, there are
22.3 million displaced people of whom 11.6 million are refugees and 4 million are
internally displaced people. 50 to 70 per cent are children, some of whom have only known
life as a refugee in a refugee camp. Archbishop Martino said that the Vatican
"encourages the development of a clearer system of responsibility for internally
displaced persons and welcomes the work of the upcoming 'World Conference Against
Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance'". He pointed
out the critical need to support the unity of refugee families as "experience has
shown that the family unit has a better chance of reintegrating in their home or
reintegrating in a new country than do individual refugees".
I implore the Government to draw on the goodwill in the Australian community to assist
greater numbers of displaced people. The following should be considered: collaboration
with business, private and community sectors (including religious organizations) to
provide work, education and living opportunities which would enable the settlement of
greater numbers of refugees commensurate with the need as advised by the UNHCR.
Fr John Murphy
Director
__________________________________________________
The following comments are made against the specific issues raised in the
'Discussion Paper"
Migration Program
What further steps do you think the Government could take in its immigration
arrangements to assist States and Territories to attract and retain migrants in regional
areas
Fund Migrant Resource Centres in regional areas to employ and provide adequate training
for regional workers to establish and/or enhance settlement opportunities in regional
areas.
Provide a comprehensive plan through national media campaigns to enable regional
communities and migrants to consider the benefits and possibilities of encouraging and
welcoming migrants to regional areas.
Provide for an infrastructure to assist migrants to make the transition into the
Australian and/or regional working environment.
Consider financial incentives for those willing to relocate to regional areas.
Highlight the benefits of a regional lifestyle by identifying the alternative to urban
living and the opportunities available such as education, employment, housing and other
services.
Provide mainstream services in regional areas with ongoing cross-cultural awareness
training to ensure that the services are accessible, appropriate and relevant to migrants.
How can the skill component of the Migration Program be better designed and
implemented?
The Migration Program needs to be flexible in terms of people's ability to apply
under a number of programs. There needs to be more flexibility particularly in the Skilled
and Family and Humanitarian programs to meet the variation of refugee/humanitarian
situations and circumstances. There needs also to be flexibility for those migrants who
apply under the Family Stream and who are skilled and experienced but are not recognised
in Australia. It should be possible for family stream migrants and humanitarian entrants
with skills and work/life experience to have their skills, qualifications and valuable
life experience recognised.
A key to developing the range and flow of skilled migrants under
state/territory/regional arrangements is not only to widen the selection base and origin
but also to put in place recognition mechanisms that are consistent with those now
prevailing in a global world. Review, update and flexibility would assuredly improve
opportunities for the skilled migrants as well as the nominator.
It is important that balance, not over-emphasis on skill, be the theme and delivery of
the Migration Program. Where skill stream migrants are concerned it is equally
important that their recognition be effected within the selection process. Recognition of
skills prior to arrival, together with acceptance in employment in their field of skill
would lessen many inhibiting problems. (?)
If Australia wishes to increase its share and place in international labour markets,
the portability of Australian skills invites reciprocity in recognition of other
countries' skills. If we claim Australia is receiving migrants from more than 100
source countries, then the challenge is to widen, not narrow, the base for those with
recognised skills. Appropriate support is necessary for all migrants irrespective of the
type of visa category. High rates of unemployment for migrants can be addressed by the
removal of employment and continuing education barriers and by recognising prior learning,
skills, experience, expertise, life-skills and qualifications.
Funding should be provided for specialist employment services to assist people in
making the transition into Australia's workplace and education system.
How do we meet the social objectives of immigration without placing a high burden on
Australia's health and welfare system?
The financial cost to government of both skilled and family reunion migrants is more
than compensated by the benefits each category provides including the cost
incurred by each adult and source country such as education and other services.(?)
Additionally family support is immeasurable in the benefits it brings not only in
maintaining a stable society but also in reducing problems, including financial, that
would normally be the responsibility of the government.
The government should therefore not only maintain its commitment to family migration
and family reunion but also more fairly and publicly express the real and lasting benefits
derived from this component.
If a migration program is to be non-discriminatory, migrants once accepted into
Australia are equally entitled to health and welfare services as are other members of
Australia.
Alternative methods to address a reduction in costs to the welfare budget should
consider the social factors that cause health and social problems e.g. detachment and
disenfranchisement from mainstream society. Initiatives should consider the social
benefits of family reunion to the human spirit; adequate provision of services to the
migrant community commensurate with the general population; recognition of migrants' skill
if they entered Australia other than through the skilled category; public campaigns to
address racism and discrimination issues; removal of barriers in the workplace and
educational institutions; implementation of innovative programs to support migrants with
expertise and skills which are not particularly specific to Australia; and programs to
assist with upgrading of appropriate skills, education and training programs.
The benefits of migration must be considered in its social context. The Government
could support migrants by delivering educational and awareness programs in schools,
workplace and community to reduce discrimination and racism and to highlight the benefits
of multiculturalism and what it encompasses for each member of Australian society, not
just those from ethnic backgrounds.
How can we ensure a fair contribution from migrants where costs are known to be high eg
those entering Australia under the parents' category?
It is worth reiterating the points highlighted in favour of family reunion in the
community consultations. Migration of close family members enables family relationships
that are the foundation and strength of Australian society. If restrictive measures
continue to be applied relating both to selection and post arrival settlement, migration
will continue to be undermined and diminished to the detriment of our society.
Family reunion should not be determined solely by economic criteria, but should be
recognised as a fundamental and important factor for family cohesion and social stability.
Consideration should be given to means-testing the family stream for those families who
are financially capable of contributing to their migration and costs, but ensuring that
those families who are not financially resourced will have equal access to the family
stream component. This means-testing could also apply to the migration of parents.
Meeting the social objectives of immigration is not achieved by in-discriminatively
burdening migrants with onerous health/welfare costs especially in relation to parents.
The government should not only be fair and just but should also give public recognition to
the benefits that migrants have on Australia. The migrant parent category needs to be
considered in its social context of how parents benefit society. Migrant parents should
not be made an under-class as compared with native-born parents.
Consideration should be given not just to the cost component for parents and aged
dependent relatives, but also to acknowledging the positive impact of other family members
such as spouses and children and their positive contributions to the economy.
What are the appropriate levels and mix of immigration in the context of the dynamics
of Australia's population (ie fertility), aging, social and economic environmental
and international considerations). If these were insignificantly different to the current
levels and mix how would the changes be achieved? What would be the implications?
Population Context
Given the dynamics of Australia's population, the appropriate levels and mix of
immigration should be more flexible and long range. The intake level should be
incrementally adjusted annually according to the need. This would allow for an effective
five year planning process. This would meet the requirement (?) of
Australia reaching a population of 25 million with an agreed timeframe.
Australia has a moral and social responsibility to enhance its population with
immigrants, including those who are refugees and displaced as well those seeking reunion
with families and relatives already here.
Achieving this in a planned and manageable way does suggest a proper balance between
economic, social and, environmental and humanitarian objectives. Programs established
merely on economic values are self defeating and destructive in their impact upon the
person, society and the nation.
A non-discriminatory immigration policy globally applied, requires the provision of
adequate resources in selection and settlement. Avoiding or not providing such resources
could be construed as discriminatory.
Migration criteria established to meet Australia's national interest and needs
should be consistent with, and indeed reflect, the values expressed not only in law but
also in the love and aspirations exhibited by the community and society.
Australia needs more not less immigration, a notion well supported in the previous
community consultations with the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs.
Australia has adequate resources in the growth of which developed technology is
substantially helping. These, together with more effective preservation of the environment
and other assets, identify why Australia cannot but benefit from the continuing intake of
people from other lands. While the level is a matter for government in consultation with
the community, the community's views should be seriously heeded in regard to composition
and criteria.
Components listed as contributing to population growth include temporary residents and
New Zealanders (principally skilled and entrepreneurial). At issue is whether arrivals
entering for more than a twelve-month period, should also be counted in the migration
program numbers. Should those arrivals staying longer than twelve months together
with Humanitarian Program entrants(?) be considered as Settlers. This
would provide a more accurate account of annual net overseas migration.
Balancing the economic, social, environmental and international considerations.
Australia's human rights and humanitarian record has being challenged
internationally in response to detention practices. Fundamental to the problem of asylum
seekers are the reasons and causes of refugee-causing situations that force people to seek
asylum in Australia. Therefore, as mentioned in the introduction, we need to be mindful
that persons seeking refuge should not be treated as "illegals", which implies
criminality.
In the context of providing a balance to economic, social, environmental and
international considerations, the following points provide alternatives to the current
system.
Australia, in consultation and agreement with UNHCR member countries, should:
- share the burden of growing numbers of refugees languishing in camps by accepting
refugees with skills from countries with high numbers of refugees to meet Australia's
targeted areas for the skilled employment categories.
- collaborate to fund and support an upgrading of skills training programs.
- approach business to consider -in agreement with DIMA requirements - the
possibility of employing humanitarian entrants under the Employer Nomination Scheme and
Business Skills category.
- Expand the points test to enable humanitarian entrants the same opportunity as migrants,
allowing them to be contributing and economic members of Australian society. The benefits
would eventually provide a balance for both economic concerns and humanitarian
responsibilities.
The following specifically address problems associated with protracted processing
times. There should be:
- More open and accountable processing times by visa category by post, including
priorities which reflect the nature of the category such as Women at Risk; Aged Parents
and immediate family members of humanitarian applicants;
- Clear and precise processing regimes. From the start, applicants should be given
accurate visa application information in order to comply with visa eligibility
requirements. This should be done initially as a matter of course rather than through
sequential processes which can be a covert means for controlling program outcomes;
- Genuinely responsive inquiry facilities which allow rather than inhibit access by the
public;
- An improved standard of service in relation to written enquiries that provides
appropriate, adequate, and relevant details in a non-obstructive and helpful manner; and
- An improved telecommunications system that enables a reasonable response to telephone
enquiries.
__________________________________________________
Humanitarian Program
For a full analysis of the Humanitarian Program refer to the submission made by the
National Council of Churches.5
The following are additional comments to the NCCA submission:
How could we better select those in greatest relative need of resettlement?
The recognition of the difficulty in determining those in greatest need is accepted.
DIMA processing posts need to work more closely with UNHCR and other international
agencies such as the International Catholic Migration Commission (ICMC) in order to
administer a program that is more flexible and better able to respond to the changing
location of refugee generating areas/zones.
Overseas selection processes and on-arrival settlement services could well be enhanced
and more effectively identify humanitarian entrants' needs if more weight were given
to community organizations' concerns. These organizations possess particular
experience both in Australia and overseas when dealing with migrants in need. Volunteers
have historically been the life-line for migrant and humanitarian entrants. There would be
great benefit for DIMA to recognise the potential for partnership arrangements, for
example in programs such as regional relocation.
Improvement is required to increase access to processing posts for refugees along with
an overall speeding up of applications once they are received.
How could we more effectively identify and select Women at Risk for resettlement in
Australia? Could this be done more effectively in cooperation with non-government
organizations off-shore.
Non-government organizations, including church-based, have the capacity at
international and national level to cooperate through shared information and arrangements
in areas of common interest and concern. Special categories as "Women at Risk"
have proven the benefits of cooperation, which should be used more widely and effectively.
The government should accord high priority to the processing of cases from regions
where people are residing at risk or are in dire need.
Countries of first asylum need continuing assistance and support through aid and
related measures in coping with refugee outflows from neighbouring countries.
To address the problems and barriers many women face in accessing protection, health
and associated services within the region could collaborate to establish mechanisms for
identification and information sharing about the program.
There should be a person with expertise in each Australian Embassy with responsibility
for the processing of applications for women at risk. This person should be familiar with
the local situation and have an understanding of social and cultural circumstances and
factors that cause women to be at risk.
In recognition of the problems and barriers faced by women in travel and the lodgement
of applications, special consideration should be given to make the process relevant, well
known and more accessible to women at risk.
Should existing legislation be strengthened to ensure that proposers comply with the
proposal of support for the SHP applicant that are provided with the SHP application?
No. It should be recognised and accepted that people's lives change and that the
proposal is not necessarily reflective of a proposer's resettlement potential. Proposers
should be aware of how to access the variety of support services available.
Should existing legislation be amended to ensure a more equitable level of access to
those who choose to enter Australia unlawfully? (or those who have no choice but to enter
Australia unlawfully)
Temporary Protection Visas (TPVs).
The notes cite the humanitarian program as being global and non-discriminatory. In
practice the selection criteria for off-shore places appear different from those for
on-shore places. In regard to the latter there is a difference in treatment in Australia
for those on a temporary visa (eg visitor) compared with those who arrive in an irregular
way (often without any documentation). Successful PV applicants within the last group
receive only temporary protection visas with limited welfare benefits and are denied full
access to English language training and sponsorship opportunities. As a result, community
organizations with limited resources are challenged to provide services that should be the
responsibility of the government. We strongly support the suggestion to review the refugee
convention and other international human rights instruments, which Australia has ratified.
Unauthorised arrivals found to warrant Australia's protection should be granted
permanent protection visas and settlement services in accord with those who initially
enter lawfully.
Church agencies have had a significant role in providing support to refugees granted
TPVs. Those agencies, along with the Bishops' Committee for Migrants and Refugees6 have expressed their concern at the Government's
response to people arriving in Australia irregularly who subsequently seek protection
visas. They have also expressed their concern with the methods of detention and with the
limiting conditions of the temporary protection visas. ACMRO has concern with the
rationale behind the TPVs when an asylum seeker is deemed to have refugee status and is
then provided with only temporary protection.
Practical issues affecting people with TPVs:
People with TPVs do not have access to the full range of support services available to
other refugees. They have a high level of mobility and no processes are established to
ensure that they are linked with the necessary health services and sources.
The refugee experience: the impact of detention in Australia; ongoing separation from
family; barriers and isolation from the general community and then an uncertain future
with the granting of the TPV - all these factors contribute to existing or new emotional
or mental health problems.
Allowing holders of TPVs to access work places them in a vulnerable situation, as they
do not have entitlements to AMEP classes and therefore they are without English language
and may be susceptible to exploitation by unscrupulous employers.
Lack of information for service providers concerning people with TPVs has resulted in
their encountering barriers, hostility and ignorance about their situation.
Recommendation
That people with TPVs be granted access and entitlement to the full range of support
services as are other humanitarian recipients.
Detention
ACMRO supports:
Adoption of the concept of an alternative detention method to the current practice.
Implementation of the recommendations of the Senate report into the Refugee and
Humanitarian Program "A Sanctuary Under Review".
In the meantime, many Catholic Church agencies have requested that the following
recommendations be made concerning the current regime of detention:
Improvements to speed up the processing of applications for detainees and that the
methods are transparent and made known to the detainees.
Provision of a secure environment and a less prison like environment.
Adequate members of allied health professionals be employed to assist people to make the
transition and cope with detention conditions and to have appropriate support to treat
torture and trauma, grief and loss, and dislocation.
ACM members to receive cross-cultural training along with information about UNHCR and
its programs and the reasons why people seek refuge i.e the problems in those refugee
source countries. Minimise potential conflicts and tensions between staff members and
detainees with adequate supervision of trained members.
Should the Government accord higher priority to the processing of cases from regions
where people do not avail themselves of illegal means to enter Australia?
Refer to comments made in the NCCA submission.
Recent changes to the way the Humanitarian Program is managed and the introduction of a
temporary safe haven visa class enable Australia to respond more flexibly and rapidly to
emerging humanitarian crisis. What are the other ways the program's responsiveness
could be enhanced further?
Refer to comments made in the NCCA submission.
How can overseas selection processes and on-arrival settlement services better identify
humanitarian entrant's needs?
Refer to comments made in the NCCA submission.
Explain legal and civic responsibilities, Australia's administrative system and
processes and available support services. Extend the availability of settlement
information other than internet access.
How can more humanitarian entrants be encouraged to settle in regional areas of
Australia and how can they be best supported by local communities?
Some regional areas may not be appropriate for settlement. There is a need to ensure
that specialised services such as torture/trauma counselling are available. Some Church
agencies have advised that humanitarian entrants who have attempted to settle in regional
areas have relocated to city areas due to isolation and the desire to be in closer contact
with other members of their community, and also for educational and employment related
opportunities.
Employ regional workers to support existing CRSS groups and to work with mainstream
services and to enhance access to services.
DIMA should undertake a project to research the factors that either enable or prevent
successful settlement for humanitarian entrants in regional areas.
See comments also made for migrants in regional areas .
What role should IHSS specific services fulfil in relation to other settlement and
mainstream services available to migrants and longer-term humanitarian entrants?
Many Church agencies have registered their concern with the lack of clearly defined
arrangements, processes and management with the critical change-over from the former to
the current IHSS model. Many agencies have been de-motivated to be part of the new
structure.
Refer to comments made in the NCCA submission.
How can volunteers be supported to support entrants?
Provide support and training for agencies employing volunteers.
Consider funding those agencies or MRCs to employ a volunteer coordinator to train,
resource and support volunteers. Volunteer coordinators could be located in regional
areas' community or neighbourhood centres to support:
Cross cultural training;
Information on services, systems and processes;
Access to a working space, telecommunications and administrative support;
Identification and legitimacy to advocate on behalf of entrants; and
Reimbursement for costs incurred in supporting entrants.
__________________________________________________
1.Media Release, Australian Catholic Bishops Conference, 16 April 1997.
2.Message fro a World Migration Day 'I was a stranger and you welcomed
me, Vatican, 21 November 1999.
3.Ibid.
4.Catholic News, 'Vatican wants wealthy nations to welcome refugees',
Catholic News, 9 November 200.
5.National Council of Churches in Australia, Submission to the Consultations on the
2001-2002 Humanitarian Program.
6.Media Release 'Justice and Equity amiss in the Federal Government's treatment of holders
of Temporary Protection Visas, 17 May 2000
|
