tag:theconversation.com,2011:/africa/topics/home-affairs-19116/articlesHome Affairs – The Conversation2024-03-26T05:12:39Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2266152024-03-26T05:12:39Z2024-03-26T05:12:39ZGovernment rushing through bill to crack down on ‘uncooperative’ non-citizens it is trying to remove<p>The government is seeking to rush legislation through parliament to crack down on non-citizens who refuse to cooperate with attempts to remove them. </p>
<p>The bill, introduced by Immigration Minister Andrew Giles just after noon on Tuesday, also allows a minister to designate a country as a “removal concern country” when it won’t cooperate with the return of its citizens. </p>
<p>This would mean that, apart from certain exceptions, nationals of that country who are outside Australia could not apply for a visa to come here. Exemptions would be for close family members of Australian citizens and permanent residents as well as applications for refugee and humanitarian visas. </p>
<p>Giles said: “This legislation sends a strong signal about the government’s expectations of cooperation with removal efforts, by non-citizens who are on a removal pathway, and by other countries where it is appropriate for them to accept their nationals on removal from Australia”.</p>
<p>The government wants the legislation, which has gone through the House of Representatives, passed by the Senate on Tuesday night, or Wednesday at the latest. Parliament adjourns on Wednesday until the budget on May 14.</p>
<p>The government allowed minimum opportunity for debate in the house. It said there were time factors requiring the legislation to be passed quickly.</p>
<p>The opposition demanded a brief Senate inquiry to be held late on Tuesday so it could question officials. The government agreed to it.</p>
<p>Crossbenchers were outraged at the lack of time to consider the bill. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1772459523342524488"}"></div></p>
<p>The government’s action is driven by a looming High Court hearing next month that, if it went against the Commonwealth, could prompt the release of another group of people from immigration detention. </p>
<p>The case is about an Iranian citizen who has been in immigration detention for a decade. He has refused to cooperate with efforts to send him back to Iran, saying he fears for his life. Iran won’t take back involuntary removals. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-government-is-fighting-a-new-high-court-case-on-immigration-detainees-whats-it-about-and-whats-at-stake-226120">The government is fighting a new High Court case on immigration detainees. What's it about and what's at stake?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The government believes it is more likely to win this case than an earlier High Court one, when its defeat led to the release of 152 people from immigration detention. But it wants to bolster its defences.</p>
<p>Giles said people who refused to cooperate with their removal would face penalties of a mandatory minimum sentence of one year in jail and a maximum of five years.</p>
<p>Giles told parliament: “Unfortunately, examples of non-cooperation with the government’s removal efforts have been going on for far too long. Against the expectations of the Australian community. And undermining the integrity of our migration laws.”</p>
<p>The measures “will make clear that a non-citizen who is on a removal pathway is expected to voluntarily leave Australia. And must cooperate with steps taken to arrange their lawful removal from Australia.</p>
<p>"The removal pathway direction provides a positive duty on the non‑citizen to cooperate with removal efforts,” Giles said.</p>
<p>An example of the cooperation required from those subject to removal is completing, signing and submitting an application for a passport or other foreign travel document to facilitate their removal.</p>
<p>“When this legislation is enacted, it will make clear that the parliament expects foreign countries to cooperate with Australia to facilitate the lawful removal of their citizens from Australia,” Giles said.</p>
<p>Briefing crossbenchers, Giles named Iran and Iraq as countries which did not take back involuntary returns but indicated there could be a number of others potentially affected by the legislation. Government sources other countries could be Zimbabwe and South Sudan.</p>
<p>He told parliament the legislation would apply to various categories of non-citizens who are on “removal pathways”. </p>
<p>He stressed: “these amendments are targeted at non-citizens who have come to the end of any visa application processes. </p>
<p>"These individuals may be unlawful non-citizens who have exhausted their visa processing options. And who are being held in immigration detention</p>
<p>"Or they may be in the community on a bridging visa that is issued for removal purposes.”</p>
<p>In a range of safeguards in the legislation, the minister may not give a direction </p>
<ul>
<li><p>“if the non-citizen has applied for a protection visa and the application is not yet finally determined</p></li>
<li><p>to take an action in relation to a country from which the individual is owed protection</p></li>
<li><p>directly to children under 18 (but can make a direction to that child’s parents to take certain actions)</p></li>
<li><p>to take actions related to making or withdrawing an Australian visa application, or in regards to court or tribunal proceedings.”</p></li>
</ul>
<p>Greens senator David Shoebridge accused Labor of “trying to outflank the Coalition to the right by coming up with new and novel ways to be cruel particularly to refugees and asylum seekers”.</p>
<p>The opposition spokesman on home affairs, James Paterson, said: “It feels like groundhog day. Another day, another rushed, patch up job from a panicked government when it comes to border protection, national security and community safety. </p>
<p>"This is now the fourth piece of legislation that the Albanese government has dropped on the opposition and the crossbench in the parliament and asked us to pass in as little as 36 hours to deal with the rolling crisis of immigration detention.”</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/226615/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The government is rushing legislation through parliament to crack down on unlawful immigrants. In a further reaction to the high court decision late last year.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2241552024-02-22T09:03:49Z2024-02-22T09:03:49ZGrattan on Friday: Unshackle immigration from Home Affairs and give it its own department<p>The arrival of a boat on the coast of north-western Australia last week predictably set off an opposition political feeding frenzy. Peter Dutton was quick to claim the Albanese government had “lost control” of the border. </p>
<p>But a boat (or even two – there was another landing late last year) does not an armada make. Australian authorities might need to lift their detection game – no doubt they are getting that message – but so far there is not evidence of a new wave of people smuggling. </p>
<p>Further arrivals would change the dynamics but, in the absence of that, the opposition needs to be careful of overreach, for a couple of reasons. </p>
<p>One is that it’s irresponsible, thinking of Australia’s national interest, to be in effect telling the people smugglers there are fresh opportunities for them. Signals are important: for example, there’s a suggestion last year’s release of the immigration detainees (in the wake of the High Court decision) fed into the people smugglers’ pitch. </p>
<p>Secondly, the border issue is unlikely to play as strongly with voters these days. Kos Samaras of the RedBridge Group, a political consultancy that does regular research, says: “The political heat that was associated with the politics of boat people in the early 2000s is all gone. I think that we’re dealing with a different generation of politics now, and Australians generally just don’t get all that worried or concerned about what sort of people will stumble onto our shores and walk into a town looking for food.”</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-antony-green-kos-samaras-and-tim-costello-on-dunkley-contest-223961">Politics with Michelle Grattan: Antony Green, Kos Samaras and Tim Costello on Dunkley contest</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>With eyes firmly on their pockets, people are likely to see excessive rhetoric about boats for what it is, a scare tactic. </p>
<p>The issue of boat arrivals should be distinguished from immigration, which is current in many people’s minds and related to debates around housing and cost of living.</p>
<p>Both issues, however, do take us to the question of the Home Affairs Department, a behemoth encompassing the Australia Border Force, immigration, citizenship and multiculturalism, and cyber security. ASIO sits in the Home Affairs portfolio too, although it is not responsible to the department secretary. The department is overseen by cabinet minister Clare O'Neil, with a junior minister, Andrew Giles, having responsibility for immigration, citizenship and multicultural affairs. </p>
<p>Put bluntly, the department has been a nest of trouble. There are very strong arguments for breaking it up. </p>
<p>The department has been scandal-ridden. A recent report by Dennis Richardson, former head of Foreign Affairs, Defence and ASIO, documented how it failed to do due diligence on contracts. The revelation of extraordinary texts by its former secretary, Mike Pezzullo, led to his dismissal last year. </p>
<p>The Home Affairs empire was trimmed when Labor took office. The Australian Federal Police and a couple of other crime-fighting agencies were moved to the Attorney-General’s portfolio. ASIO would fit more appropriately there too, but Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus lost that battle. </p>
<p>Pezzullo ran the Home Affairs Department with an iron rod and morale was at rock bottom. There are mixed views about whether his successor, Stephanie Foster, who had been the department’s associate secretary, is a strong enough leader for the demands of this very tough job. </p>
<p>A central problem is that the department’s component parts are a bad fit. There seems an overwhelming case for separating immigration, citizenship and multicultural affairs into their own department with cabinet status. </p>
<p>That way, immigration could be viewed essentially as an economic department and cast in more positive terms, to promote nation building. This was how it was seen in earlier times. </p>
<p>At present, immigration suffers from being in the more negative national security environment that dominates Home Affairs. </p>
<p>Former senior bureaucrat Paddy Gourley, an expert on the public service, has argued that “the grandest failure of Home Affairs and its leaders has been the diminution of immigration as a principal function of the federal government”.</p>
<p>A freestanding department would allow “a clear-eyed, high-priority concentration on immigration policy and service delivery free of the distractions and distortions to which it is vulnerable in Home Affairs”, Gourley wrote on <a href="https://insidestory.org.au/its-time-to-abandon-the-home-affairs-experiment/">Inside Story in November</a>.</p>
<p>Equally, multiculturalism requires a lot more attention, especially at the moment. </p>
<p>Multiculturalism has been a great success story of Australia’s immigration program, celebrating diversity while also promoting unity and commitment to common Australian values. </p>
<p>But the community frictions prompted by the Israel-Hamas conflict have highlighted that at times the tensions that lurk in a multicultural society can test its cohesion. Crises abroad can cause local divisions to flare dangerously. At present the Albanese government is seriously worried about community harmony. </p>
<p>The level of anti-Semitism we’re currently seeing in this country is deeply disturbing, striking fear into many Jewish Australians. Meanwhile, many in the Islamic community, with family or friends in Gaza, are traumatised, plus there’s been a rise in Islamophobia. And the regular pro-Palestinian demonstrations since the start of the current Middle East conflict have, on occasion, tested authorities. </p>
<p>Reacting to these challenges is not likely to get any easier. A separate immigration department could mean more bureaucratic attention and resources for engagement with the various multicultural communities. </p>
<p>On another front, prospective citizens are not receiving the attention they deserve. Peter Hughes, a one-time deputy secretary in immigration, has condemned “the outrageously long time it takes to process applications for Australian citizenship”.</p>
<p><a href="https://johnmenadue.com/reviving-australian-citizenship/">Writing for Pearls and Irritations</a> last month, Hughes said a person who’d met all the requirements, including the four-year residential qualifying period, could expect to wait up to 15 months for a decision and another six months for a conferral ceremony. Imagine the outcry if it took this long to get a passport for an overseas trip, Hughes added.</p>
<p>This week Anthony Albanese hosed down speculation that there could be an election this year. He intends to run full term – the election is due by May next year. </p>
<p>At some point the Prime Minister may consider freshening his team. This is not a prediction, but a reshuffle would provide the ideal opportunity to split the Home Affairs Department and rescue immigration from what often seems its also-ran bureaucratic status.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/224155/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Home Affairs’ department has been a nest of trouble. There are very strong arguments for breaking it up. With an election just a year out perhaps the Prime Minister may want to freshening his team?Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2185922023-11-27T00:38:35Z2023-11-27T00:38:35ZMike Pezzullo sacked after scathing findings accusing him of misusing his position<p>The government has sacked the secretary of the Home Affairs department, Mike Pezzullo, after an inquiry found he had breached the Public Service Code of Conduct.</p>
<p>The inquiry found he used his position for personal advantage, gossiped disrespectfully about ministers, broke confidentiality, failed to act apolitically, and didn’t disclose a conflict of interest. </p>
<p>In September, Nine Entertainment revealed a trove of texts Pezzullo sent to a Liberal insider, Scott Briggs, who was close to prime ministers Scott Morrison and Malcolm Turnbull. In the texts Pezzullo inserted himself into the political process, lobbying for his bureaucratic interests and his views. </p>
<p>A long-time public servant who served both sides of politics, Pezzullo also worked in the office of Kim Beazley when he was opposition leader. </p>
<p>A hawk on China policy and hard-line on national security issues, especially border protection, Pezzullo was a divisive figure in the bureaucracy. </p>
<p>While he was known for always being willing to express his views forthrightly, current and former senior colleagues were amazed at the overreach his texts represented, including his criticism of a then minister, Marise Payne, and of Julie Bishop when she put up her hand for leadership in 2018. </p>
<p>As soon as the texts were revealed, it was generally recognised in government and public service circles that Pezzullo would not survive. </p>
<p>The government stood him aside, on full salary, while the inquiry was done by Lynelle Briggs, a former public service commissioner. </p>
<p>Prime Minister Anthony Albanese on Monday said Pezzullo’s termination had been recommended by the Secretary of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Glyn Davis, and the Public Service Commissioner, Gordon de Brouwer. This followed a recommendation from Briggs that he be sacked. </p>
<p>Pezzullo had fully co-operated with the Briggs’ inquiry, Albanese said. He said the present acting head of Home Affairs, Stephanie Foster, would continue to act in the position until a permanent appointment was made. </p>
<p>In a statement the Public Service Commission said
Briggs found Pezzullo breached the public service code least 14 times in relation to five overarching allegations. Pezzullo </p>
<ul>
<li><p>used his duty, power, status or authority to seek to gain a benefit or advantage for himself</p></li>
<li><p>engaged in gossip and disrespectful critique of ministers and public servants</p></li>
<li><p>failed to maintain confidentiality of sensitive government information</p></li>
<li><p>failed to act apolitically in his employment</p></li>
<li><p>failed to disclose a conflict of interest.</p></li>
</ul>
<h2>UPDATE TUESDAY: Foster new head of Home Affairs</h2>
<p>The Prime Minister has announced Stephanie Foster will become the new Secretary of the Department of Home Affairs. He said her public serrvice career included being acting Secretary and Associate Secretary of Home Affairs, and Deputy Secretary of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/218592/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>An inquiry found the Home Affairs secretary used his position for personal advantage, gossiped disrespectfully about ministers, broke confidentiality and didn’t disclose a conflict of interest.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2150612023-10-05T05:11:41Z2023-10-05T05:11:41ZWhy the government’s plan to overhaul the asylum system is a smart use of resources – and might just work<p>Immigration Minister Andrew Giles today <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/oct/05/labor-to-prioritise-new-asylum-seeker-claims-as-part-of-160m-package-to-tackle-backlog">announced</a> significant changes aimed at restoring the integrity of Australia’s refugee protection system. </p>
<p>The key focus is on reducing the significant backlogs in the processing and reviewing of protection visa applications once people apply for asylum in Australia. </p>
<p>The aim is to ensure people who fear persecution or other serious rights abuses can be granted protection quickly. This will, <a href="https://minister.homeaffairs.gov.au/AndrewGiles/Pages/restoring-integrity-protection-system.aspx">Giles</a> says, allow them to “rebuild their lives with certainty and stability”.</p>
<p>According to Giles, “Australians are rightly proud of our country’s generous refugee program”. But there is no denying the current onshore protection system is broken. </p>
<p>The focus of successive governments in recent years has been on blocking and punishing asylum seekers who attempt to reach Australia by boat. This has distracted both the public – and the government – from the serious systemic issues slowing down access to protection here in Australia.</p>
<h2>A decade for a final decision</h2>
<p>The onshore protection system covers people who arrive in Australia on a valid visa – such as a tourist or student visa – and then apply for asylum. </p>
<p>Some people have valid protection claims, some don’t. A key problem is that processing times for these claims have been ballooning in recent years. On average, it <a href="https://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/refugee-council-welcomes-investment-in-protection-visa-reform/">now takes around</a> 2.4 years for an initial decision on a protection claim to be made by the Department of Home Affairs. If the application is denied, it takes another 3.6 years to seek a merits review of the claim at the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. And if it’s denied again, there’s an additional 5.1 years for judicial review by the courts. </p>
<p>As a result, some people have had to wait as long as 11 years for a final decision. Such delays have a <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/00207640231159297#:%7E:text=The%20mental%20distress%20of%20asylum,ongoing%20uncertainty%20of%20legal%20status.">devastating impact</a> on people with genuine asylum claims, who are forced to live in limbo and uncertainty for lengthy periods of time.</p>
<p>On the flipside, these delays have also been “motivating bad actors” to take advantage of the system by lodging increasing numbers of “non-genuine applications for protection”, according to the <a href="https://theconversation.com/visa-exploitation-review-urges-tougher-penalties-and-a-ban-on-temporary-migrants-in-sex-work-would-this-solve-the-problem-214953">Nixon report</a>, a review into the exploitation of Australia’s visa system by Victoria’s former police chief commissioner, Christine Nixon, which was released this week.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/visa-exploitation-review-urges-tougher-penalties-and-a-ban-on-temporary-migrants-in-sex-work-would-this-solve-the-problem-214953">Visa exploitation review urges tougher penalties and a ban on temporary migrants in sex work. Would this solve the problem?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>The proposed changes</h2>
<p>In this context, we welcome the A$160 million investment announced by the government today to implement a faster and fairer onshore protection system. This will increase the decision-making capacity across the whole asylum system. The funding includes:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>$54 million for the initial processing of claims by Home Affairs</p></li>
<li><p>$58 million for the appointment of ten additional members to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, the body that reviews claims that have been rejected </p></li>
<li><p>and ten additional judges to the Federal Circuit and Family Court. </p></li>
</ul>
<p>Another $48 million will be provided for legal assistance to support people through the complex asylum application process – something we have <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/01/scrapping-legal-aid-for-refugees-will-cost-australia-more-than-it-saves">long called for</a>.</p>
<p>There is a wealth of evidence demonstrating legal assistance increases the fairness and efficiency of the asylum process. Research by the <a href="https://www.kaldorcentre.unsw.edu.au/kaldor-centre-data-lab">Kaldor Centre Data Lab</a> found asylum applicants with legal representation are, on average, <a href="https://www.kaldorcentre.unsw.edu.au/breaking-down-data-what-numbers-tell-us-about-asylum-claims-aat">five times more likely</a> to succeed on a merits review than applicants who represent themselves. They are also <a href="https://www.unswlawjournal.unsw.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Issue-453-05-Ghezelbesh-et-al.pdf">six times more likely</a> to succeed at the judicial review stage. </p>
<p>There is a wealth of similar research from other countries, including <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/capa.12503">Canada</a>, <a href="https://library.fes.de/pdf-files/bueros/budapest/15098.pdf">Switzerland</a> and the <a href="https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=9502&context=penn_law_review">United States</a>, showing legal representation makes the entire system more efficient.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-refugees-succeed-in-visa-reviews-new-research-reveals-the-factors-that-matter-131763">How refugees succeed in visa reviews: new research reveals the factors that matter</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This is because refugee lawyers provide a very important “triage” service in the process. Their specialised understanding of the law – as well as the social and political conditions from which asylum seekers have fled – means they only take on cases they feel have merit. In this way, lawyers help reduce the number of unmeritorious claims reaching tribunals and courts.</p>
<p>Refugee lawyers also help asylum seekers prepare their statements coherently and systematically. They identify relevant evidence and legal principles, which assists decision-makers to focus on the key aspects of the claim. </p>
<p>When an asylum seeker is unrepresented, decision-makers have to spend much more time ensuring the applicant understands the process and possible outcomes. They also want to ensure the person feels they have had a fair hearing. Overall, this is an inefficient use of public resources.</p>
<h2>Smarter use of resources</h2>
<p>These reforms represent a significant departure from Australia’s previous attempts to increase the efficiency of Australia’s asylum processes. Over the past three decades, successive governments have instead limited the rights of people seeking asylum – including by cutting funding for legal support. </p>
<p>Our <a href="https://kaldorcentre.unsw.edu.au/sites/kaldorcentre.unsw.edu.au/files/Submission_Administrative_Review_Reform.pdf">research</a> has made clear these efforts have almost always backfired, leading to more appeals and longer delays. </p>
<p>The most egregious example is the so-called “fast-track” procedure for processing the claims of certain asylum seekers who arrive by boat. Not only is the procedure unfair, but (contrary to its name) it has also been <a href="https://kaldorcentre.unsw.edu.au/sites/kaldorcentre.unsw.edu.au/files/Submission_Administrative_Review_Reform.pdf">excruciatingly slow</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-temporary-visa-system-is-unfair-expensive-impractical-and-inconsistent-heres-how-the-new-government-could-fix-it-185870">Australia's temporary visa system is unfair, expensive, impractical and inconsistent. Here's how the new government could fix it</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Now, to help speed up the asylum process more broadly, the government is implementing a new approach called “real-time priority processing” of protection visa applications at Home Affairs. This will involve a “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/oct/05/labor-to-prioritise-new-asylum-seeker-claims-as-part-of-160m-package-to-tackle-backlog">last in, first out</a>” approach that prioritises new asylum applications for rapid processing. </p>
<p>The rationale is this will de-incentivise unmeritorious applications and abuse of the asylum system.</p>
<p>While this makes sense as an interim measure as the government works through its significant backlogs, we still need a wider discussion on different approaches to prioritising claims. We need to ensure government resources are being used most efficiently and in the best interests of people seeking asylum. </p>
<p>There are potential lessons Australia can draw on from overseas. <a href="https://irb.gc.ca/en/information-sheets/Pages/less-complex-claims.aspx">Canada</a>, for example, prioritises and fast tracks applications that have a high likelihood of success. <a href="https://www.sem.admin.ch/sem/en/home/asyl/asylverfahren.html#:%7E:text=Under%2520the%2520revised%2520Asylum%2520Act,version%2520of%2520the%2520Asylum%2520Act.">Switzerland</a> accelerates cases with both high and low chances of success. Only complex cases requiring further investigation take longer to resolve. </p>
<p>To ensure fairness, Switzerland also provides universal access to government-funded legal representation. We need to spend more time examining these models to see what we can learn and adopt in Australia. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.kaldorconference.com/">Kaldor Centre</a> is continuing this process by hosting a conference in Sydney next month which will discuss how we can ensure fairness for people seeking protection in the decade ahead. However, the central focus of the announcement this week on increasing the quality and capacity of Australia’s asylum system is a welcome first step in the right direction.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/215061/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Daniel Ghezelbash receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the NSW Government. He is a member of the management committee of Refugee Advice and Casework Services and a Special Counsel at the National Justice Project.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jane McAdam receives funding from the Australian Research Council.</span></em></p>Eleven years is far too long for a final decision on asylum claims. The government’s vision is for a new system that will be both faster and fairer.Daniel Ghezelbash, Associate Professor and Deputy Director, Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law, UNSW Law & Justice, UNSW Sydney, UNSW SydneyJane McAdam, Scientia Professor and Director of the Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2106312023-07-31T05:23:10Z2023-07-31T05:23:10ZParents may wait up to 40 years to join family in Australia. Is a visa lottery the answer?<p>“Providing an opportunity for people to apply for a visa that will probably never come seems both cruel and unnecessary”. </p>
<p>This was the view of an <a href="https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/reports-and-pubs/files/review-migration-system-final-report.pdf">expert panel</a>, commissioned by Home Affairs Minister Clare O'Neil, on Australia’s dysfunctional parent migration system. Parents wanting to migrate to Australia to join their children face extreme delays, even if they can afford a contributory visa, which costs almost $50,000 per person. </p>
<p><a href="https://scanloninstitute.org.au/sites/default/files/2023-07/FINAL%20Scanlon%20Foundation%20Research%20Institute%20Report%20%20NARRATIVE%2011%20%28002%29-compressed.pdf">My report</a> for the Scanlon Foundation Research Institute, published today, finds the backlog of applications for permanent parent visas is approaching 140,000 and has tripled in a decade. Wait times for a contributory visa are at least 12 years, or at least 30 years for a cheaper visa.</p>
<p>How can we fix this? Whichever way the government turns, it faces unpalatable policy choices with unwanted electoral consequences.</p>
<h2>The parent visa conundrum</h2>
<p>The parent visa pipeline includes 86,000 applications for so-called “<a href="https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/visas/getting-a-visa/visa-listing/contributory-parent-143">contributory</a>” visas, and 51,000 for “<a href="https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/visas/getting-a-visa/visa-listing/parent-103">non-contributory</a>” visas.</p>
<p>These are first- and second-class migration options, with price tags to match.</p>
<p>The $47,955 per person charge for a contributory visa is justified on the basis that these first-class parents “contribute” to the cost of the public services they will access as they age. But the Productivity Commission <a href="https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/migrant-intake/report/migrant-intake-report-overview.pdf">argues</a> the revenue raised is “a fraction of the fiscal costs” that parents will impose, especially by drawing on health services.</p>
<p>The charge is better understood as a premium paid in return for “quicker” processing. Initially, this worked. When the Howard government first introduced contributory visas in 2003, well-off families were able to swiftly settle parents in Australia, usually within two years. But program numbers were capped from the start, and demand rapidly outstripped supply.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/540068/original/file-20230731-235681-z38cp9.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/540068/original/file-20230731-235681-z38cp9.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/540068/original/file-20230731-235681-z38cp9.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/540068/original/file-20230731-235681-z38cp9.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=398&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/540068/original/file-20230731-235681-z38cp9.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=500&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/540068/original/file-20230731-235681-z38cp9.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=500&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/540068/original/file-20230731-235681-z38cp9.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=500&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Data to 2021-22 is from Home Affairs and its predecessor departments via annual reports on the migration program and the serial publication Population Flows: Immigration Aspects. Data for 2022-23 is to 30 May 2023, all other data is for 30 June</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In 2022-23, the Albanese government almost doubled the quota from 3,600 to 7,000 places.</p>
<p>Yet even with this higher cap, Home Affairs advises that a new application “may take <em>at least 12 years</em> to process” (their emphasis). The expert migration panel thought this an underestimate – its March <a href="https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/reports-and-pubs/files/review-migration-system-final-report.pdf">report</a> put the wait time at 15 years.</p>
<p>The cheaper, non-contributory visa has a far lower cap – just 1,500 places last financial year – and so the wait for a visa is even longer. Home Affairs advises that a new application “may take at least 29 years to process”. Again, the expert panel reckons this is optimistic. It estimates processing time at more than 40 years.</p>
<p>Such waiting times are ludicrous.</p>
<p>Parents are generally at least 60 years old when they apply. About 60% of parent migrants are women and often want to settle in Australia while they’re still fit and healthy, so they can enjoy time with young grandchildren and support their Australian children as they build careers.</p>
<p>Alternatively, parents may be recently widowed, isolated or in need of care themselves.</p>
<p>In either scenario, even the shortest wait time of 12 years defeats the purpose of the visa.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1651390616058892288"}"></div></p>
<h2>Can we fix it?</h2>
<p>The panel recommended the government shift to a ballot system as <a href="https://www.immigration.govt.nz/about-us/media-centre/news-notifications/parent-resident-visa-restarts">New Zealand</a> is now doing now, and as <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/lottery-parents-grandparents-immigration-1.4086527">Canada</a> did in 2015.</p>
<p>In Canada, for a limited time each year, families can lodge an expression of interest to <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/immigrate-canada/family-sponsorship/sponsor-parents-grandparents.html">sponsor</a> a parent or grandparent to migrate to Canada. Immigration authorities then pull enough names from the hat to fill the annual intake quota. Once an application is accepted, the processing time for a visa is about 2.5 years, and costs are modest.</p>
<p>In 2022, Canada <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/immigrate-canada/family-sponsorship/sponsor-parents-grandparents/tell-us-you-want-sponsor-parent-grandparent.html">offered</a> about 23,000 places from a pool of about 155,000 expressions of interest, meaning the odds of a winning ticket were about one in seven.</p>
<p>Is a lottery preferable to a queue? A ballot would be a fairer system than the two-tiered approach Australia operates, which provides a fast lane for the wealthy and a slow lane for everyone else (even though that “fast” lane is now clogged too).</p>
<p>The expert panel argued a ballot could eliminate massive application backlogs because the number of applicants chosen from the lottery would align with the number of available visa places. This obscures the fact that there are likely to be tens of thousands of families that enter the draw and fail to win.</p>
<p>Those families will try again the following year, and again in the years after that, but their chances of success will decline as ever more new hopefuls throw names into the hat. </p>
<p>These families may not be stuck in a queue, but they’re stuck in a disordered heap hoping to get lucky. Their situation wouldn’t be so different from the “cruel and unnecessary” plight of those families currently waiting for a visa that may never arrive. They would also be condemned to living with a mixture of hope, anxiety and uncertainty, unable to plan for the future.</p>
<p>In the outline of its <a href="https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/programs-subsite/files/migration-strategy-outline.pdf">migration strategy</a>, the Albanese government focused on skilled migration, and promised reform of the family program “will be considered separately”.</p>
<p>The current system is failing, but there are no easy answers for the government. </p>
<p>It could abolish permanent parent migration altogether, and upset overseas-born Australians, many of whom vote in key marginal seats.</p>
<p>Or it could attempt to <a href="https://ozvisa4parents.au/">clear the backlog</a> by increasing the cap on permanent parent migration by about 20,000 places annually. Amid an intractable housing crisis and unprecedented pressure on Australia’s health- and aged-care systems, this would hand the Coalition an emotive “big Australia” campaign stick to beat it with at the next election.</p>
<p>A ballot might look like a neat way of avoiding these two extremes, but it fails the key test of clarity. The slim chance of winning the visa lottery will leave families banking on dreams, rather than adjusting to the realities of their situation and fully settling in Australia.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/210631/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Mares received funding from The Scanlon Foundation Research Institute to complete the research on which this article is based. He is an honourary fellow with the Centre for Policy Development, an independent policy institute.</span></em></p>Parents wanting to migrate to Australia to join their children face ludicrous delays, and if opting for a paid contributory visa, exorbitant fees.Peter Mares, Adjunct senior research fellow at Monash University's School of Media Film and Journalism, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1995042023-03-01T19:06:16Z2023-03-01T19:06:16ZAmid a worsening refugee crisis, public support is high in both Australia and NZ to accept more Rohingya<p><a href="https://www.unocha.org/rohingya-refugee-crisis">Nearly one million</a> stateless Rohingya people who fled brutal ethnic cleansing in Myanmar have been languishing in extremely congested refugee camps in Bangladesh for the past five and a half years.</p>
<p>While the United States recently announced a <a href="https://www.state.gov/resettlement-initiative-for-vulnerable-rohingya-refugees-in-bangladesh/">resettlement program</a> for Rohingya refugees and the UK <a href="https://minorityrights.org/programmes/library/trends/trends2018/united-kingdom/">resettled around 300 Rohingya from the camps prior to 2020</a> under a now-defunct scheme, this hasn’t caused even a dent in the number of people living in the world’s largest refugee camp. </p>
<p>No other countries have accepted refugee applications from the camps, but the Bangladeshi Foreign Minister AK Abdul Momen <a href="https://www.thedailystar.net/backpage/news/rohingyas-bangladesh-us-may-consider-taking-good-number-them-2090053">has expressed optimism</a> that a good number of Rohingya may eventually be resettled by the US and others.</p>
<p>Since 2008, Australia has <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/the-worlds-biggest-refugee-camp-is-at-breaking-point-what-is-australia-doing-to-help/z0d554j6x">granted visas</a> to just 470 Rohingya under its special humanitarian program – a very small number considering the extreme need. </p>
<p>All of these refugees were accepted into the program from Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia and other countries in the region. This creates a perverse incentive for Rohingya from the Bangladesh camps to get on rickety boats and make the dangerous sea journey to those countries. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/512346/original/file-20230227-850-yb9but.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/512346/original/file-20230227-850-yb9but.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/512346/original/file-20230227-850-yb9but.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/512346/original/file-20230227-850-yb9but.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/512346/original/file-20230227-850-yb9but.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/512346/original/file-20230227-850-yb9but.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/512346/original/file-20230227-850-yb9but.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Rohingya people rest on a beach in Aceh province, Indonesia, after arriving by boat in February.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Riska Munawarah</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>UN figures show a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2023/jan/18/rohingya-fleeing-bangladesh-boat-soars-human-smugglers">more than 360% surge</a> in the number of Rohingya who boarded boats to try to get to Malaysia and Indonesia last year, with 3,500 making the journey, compared to just 700 in 2021.</p>
<p>In early February, Momen <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-02-10/bangladesh-calls-for-australia-to-take-more-rohingyas-myanmar/101958390">called on</a> Australia to do more to resettle the Rohingya stranded in his country.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Australia is relatively more resourceful, so I think it’s high time Australia come forward and resettle some more of those distressed people. […] Australia has the capacity, it has the resources — there’s only a need for a political mindset. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>According to our new research, there is public support for this to happen. In surveys conducted last year, a majority of Australians and New Zealanders said they have positive views about the Rohingya and support the resettlement of more Rohingya refugees in their countries. </p>
<h2>Increasingly dire conditions</h2>
<p>The UN high commissioner for human rights has called the violence the Rohingya suffered at the hands of the Myanmar military a “<a href="https://news.un.org/en/story/2017/09/564622-un-human-rights-chief-points-textbook-example-ethnic-cleansing-myanmar">textbook example of ethnic cleansing</a>”. And a major UN investigation confirmed the mass killings and rapes were committed with “<a href="https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/myanmar-ffm/index">genocidal intent</a>”. </p>
<p>There is clearly no hope of the Rohingya returning to their homes for the foreseeable future. A <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/myanmar-military-coup-2021-100095">military coup</a> in Myanmar two years ago brought to power the very army that perpetrated the crimes against the Rohingya.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-why-the-un-has-found-myanmars-military-committed-genocide-against-the-rohingya-102251">Explainer: why the UN has found Myanmar’s military committed genocide against the Rohingya</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>And they have a <a href="https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/04/04/bangladesh-new-restrictions-rohingya-camps#:%7E:text=New%20restrictions%20have%20also%20been,schools%2C%20affecting%20about%2060%2C000%20students.">very limited future</a> in Bangladesh, where the authorities have recently been restricting their livelihoods, movement and access to education.</p>
<p>A UN humanitarian appeal to support the Rohingya refugees <a href="https://fts.unocha.org/appeals/1082/summary">received</a> only half the funding required in 2022, leaving many needs unmet and Bangladesh to <a href="https://thediplomat.com/2023/02/does-anyone-want-to-solve-the-rohingya-crisis/">shoulder much of the burden</a>. </p>
<p>The situation became so dire last November, the UN Central Emergency Response Fund had to <a href="https://bangladesh.un.org/en/209192-cerf-allocates-9-million-rohingya-refugee-response-bangladesh#:%7E:text=As%2520of%252031%2520August%25202022,Teknaf%2520Upazilas%2520of%2520the%2520Cox's">release</a> US$9 million (A$13.4 million) in emergency funding just to make sure the refugees had enough food, water and sanitation items.</p>
<p>So, in the absence of a repatriation plan, can the world be persuaded to accept more refugees?</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1625821225174827008"}"></div></p>
<h2>What our research found</h2>
<p>Our research shows a majority of the public would support this in Australia and New Zealand. </p>
<p>We recently reviewed data from a large-scale online survey as part of the <a href="https://sinofon.cz/surveys">Sinophone Borderlands project</a> investigating global attitudes towards China and other issues. The survey collected responses from over 1,200 people in 56 different countries between 2020 and 2022 – more than 80,000 altogether. Several questions asked about the Rohingya people specifically. </p>
<p>When asked how positively or negatively respondents felt about the Rohingya people on a scale of zero to 100, the average Australian response was 53.6, while in New Zealand it was 60.8. </p>
<p>There was minimal variation by gender or when comparing urban versus rural, but we saw more positive responses among those who were educated, younger and satisfied with their country’s political situation and/or their own economic wellbeing.</p>
<p>When asked specifically about their level of support for the resettlement of displaced Rohingya in their country, responses were actually more positive. </p>
<p>Asked to represent their support on a scale of one (definitely no) to seven (definitely yes), the average (mean) response in Australia was 4.20 and in New Zealand it was 4.54. Again, there was minimal variation by gender, but more highly educated respondents were more positive.</p>
<hr>
<p><iframe id="nNSvO" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/nNSvO/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<hr>
<p>Interestingly, we didn’t notice much variation when it came to political party, either. Unsurprisingly, those on the left responded with higher levels of support for Rohingya resettlement in both countries. However, the average level of support was still more positive than negative for voters of all main parties.</p>
<hr>
<p><iframe id="x1Edy" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/x1Edy/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<hr>
<hr>
<p><iframe id="M3OgH" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/M3OgH/2/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<hr>
<h2>What Australia and New Zealand are doing</h2>
<p>Australia’s response to the Rohingya crisis has been to provide humanitarian aid, but it has resisted <a href="https://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/myanmar-burma/2/">calls to resettle</a> any of the Rohingya from the camps.</p>
<p>When we contacted the Home Affairs department about this, a spokesperson responded by saying the government is “committed to generous and flexible humanitarian and settlement programs that meets Australia’s international protection obligations”.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The UNHCR and the international community continue to work on creating conditions for a safe return of Rohingya people to Myanmar. Australia’s response continues to focus on humanitarian aid to Bangladesh and Myanmar.</p>
<p>Any persons, including Rohingya, who believe they meet the requirements for a humanitarian visa and wish to seek Australia’s assistance can make an application.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Indeed, Australia has been generous in its humanitarian response to the Rohingya. It was the <a href="https://reporting.unhcr.org/bangladesh-funding-2022">second-largest country donor</a> in 2022, giving about $A20.4 million (plus another $A16.7 million from private donors in Australia). </p>
<p>New Zealand’s response has been largely the same, committing about NZ$1 million (A$918,000) last year, but offering no refugee resettlement places specifically from the camps. </p>
<p>Our research suggests there is solid support for policy changes in both Australia and New Zealand, including among even conservative voters in both countries. </p>
<p>On the basis of this data, we strongly urge the Australian and New Zealand governments to reconsider their refugee intake policies and create a special Rohingya category to resettle refugees from Bangladesh.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/generous-aid-to-ukraine-is-diverting-resources-away-from-other-refugee-crises-around-the-world-190961">Generous aid to Ukraine is diverting resources away from other refugee crises around the world</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/199504/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kristina Kironska's research was supported by the European Regional Development Fund – Project “Sinophone Borderlands – Interaction at the Edges” CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16_019/0000791. Besides the Palacky University Olomouc she is affiliated with the Central European Institute of Asian Studies (CEIAS) and with Amnesty International Slovakia. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anthony Ware does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Both countries have accepted very few Rohingya refugees to date, but new research suggests most Australians and New Zealanders are willing to resettle more.Anthony Ware, Associate Professor in International & Community Development, Deakin UniversityKristina Kironska, Assistant Professor, Palacky University OlomoucLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1997512023-02-12T15:17:05Z2023-02-12T15:17:05ZBoat arrivals on temporary protection visas have access to permanent residency<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/509586/original/file-20230212-713-psllou.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">original</span> </figcaption></figure><p>Thousands of boat arrivals whose futures have been in limbo for a decade or more will be able to apply from Monday to be permanent Australian residents.</p>
<p>The Minister for Home Affairs, Clare O'Neil and the Immigration Minister, Andrew Giles, have announced about 19,000 people on Temporary Protection Visas and Safe Haven Enterprise Visas will be eligible to apply. </p>
<p>The announcement fulfils a Labor election commitment. The decision only applies to people who entered Australia before Operation Sovereign Borders and who hold or have applied for a TPV or SHEV before Tuesday. </p>
<p>SHEV is a variation of a temporary protection visa. It has to be renewed every five years, compared to every three for a TPV. It was introduced some years ago to encourage people to go to regional areas. While in theory it gave a road to permanency, only one SHEV-holder has achieved that.</p>
<p>The ministers said just over 2500 people have had their TPVs or SHEVs refused or cancelled, and they will be expected to leave Australia. </p>
<p>The TPV/SHEV applications of more than 5000 people are in a review process which will continue.</p>
<p>The Home Affairs department will invite people on visas that are about to expire to apply for permanency, while other people will be able to apply online from late next month. Once a permanent visa is granted, the person will immediately become eligible for all social security payments, the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), and higher education assistance, as well as continuing to have access to Medicare. </p>
<p>They will be eligible for citizenship when they meet the requirements and to sponsor family members under the migration program’s family stream. </p>
<p>Giles said: “There are thousands of TPV and SHEV holders in the community that have endured ten years of uncertainty due to the policies of the previous Liberal government.</p>
<p>"TPV and SHEV holders work, pay taxes, start businesses, employ Australians and build lives in our communities – often in rural and regional areas. Without permanent visas however, they’ve been unable to get a loan to buy a house, build their businesses or pursue further education. It makes no sense – economically or socially – to keep them in limbo.”</p>
<p>The government is anxious that the granting of permanency to this group is not taken by people smugglers as a signal to test its resolve on border protection. </p>
<p>O'Neil said: “Let me be crystal clear – if you try to enter Australia without a valid visa you will be turned back or returned to your port of origin. There is zero chance of settling in Australia under Operation Sovereign Borders. </p>
<p>"The Australian Defence Force are patrolling our waters to intercept and return any boats that try to enter.”</p>
<p>Last week the government had parliament urgently renew the designation of Nauru as a centre for detaining unauthorised arrivals. The designation had inadvertently been allowed to lapse.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/199751/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Home Affairs and Immigration Ministers Clare O'Neil and Andrew Giles have announced that people on TPV and SHEV Visas will be eligible to applyMichelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1888082022-08-16T03:49:49Z2022-08-16T03:49:49ZScott Morrison made himself treasurer days before the 2021 budget<p>Former Prime Minister Scott Morrison installed himself in five portfolios – including treasury – just days before the May 2021 budget. </p>
<p>Anthony Albanese gave details of his predecessor’s extraordinary actions at a Tuesday morning news conference. The prime minister said he had sought advice from the solicitor-general on the legality of what had happened, which he would receive on Monday.</p>
<p>“I am seeking further advice as to the use of these extraordinary powers by Scott Morrison.” </p>
<p>Morrison became health minister on March 14 2020, finance minister on March 30, 2020, home affairs minister and treasurer on May 6 2021, and minister for industry, science, energy and resources on April 15 2021. </p>
<p>Josh Frydenberg, who was treasurer and deputy Liberal leader, didn’t know Morrison had moved into his portfolio. He delivered the 2021 budget on May 11.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1559352224697819136"}"></div></p>
<h2>Liberal frontbencher calls for Morrison’s resignation from Parliament</h2>
<p>Karen Andrews, who was home affairs minister, said she had not known of the pairing arrangement and called for Morrison to resign from parliament. </p>
<p>“I had absolutely no knowledge and was not told by the PM, PMO nor the department secretary. This undermines the integrity of government,” she told The Australian. </p>
<p>Departmental secretary Mike Pezzullo did not know of the arrangement. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1559362830876282880"}"></div></p>
<p>Opposition leader Peter Dutton refused to back Andrews’ call for Morrison’s resignation. </p>
<p>Morrison, who refused to comment on Monday, went on 2GB to defend himself on Tuesday morning. </p>
<p>“They were very unconventional times,” he said. Ministers, including Dutton, had gone down with COVID. “We had Boris Johnson, who almost died one night, I remember that night very vividly. I was very concerned he wouldn’t be with us in the morning.”</p>
<p>Speaking before Albanese’s news conference, Morrison was asked whether he had assumed any control of any other portfolios beyond health, finance and resources (those initially revealed). </p>
<p>“Not to my recollection,” he said. “I’m pursuing that, but not to my recollection. There were a number that were considered at the time for safeguard reasons. But I don’t recall any others being actioned.”</p>
<p>He said he had apologised to Mathias Cormann, now secretary-general of the OECD, for not informing him of the arrangement. “I thought that had been done through offices to be honest, […] that was an oversight.”</p>
<p>Morrison admitted that becoming resources minister had nothing to do with the pandemic. He and resources minister Keith Pitt had opposing views on the PEP11 gas exploration off the NSW coast, with Morrison determined to veto it for political reasons. The decision-making power rested with the resources minister. </p>
<p>“If I wished to be the decision maker, then I had to take the steps that I took. And then I had to follow a very meticulous process in informing myself about the issue, taking briefs on the issue, and then making a decision in accordance with all the legal requirements, which I did. </p>
<p>"And when I put myself in a position to take that decision, I informed Keith at that point. And then as a result, I went forward and made that decision.”</p>
<p>Albanese sought to spread blame to Morrison’s colleagues. </p>
<p>“What has occurred here is also a flow-on, I believe, from the fact that Mr Morrison’s colleagues sat back and watched power be centralised within the Morrison government. They ticked off on the arrangements that had Scott Morrison as the only member of a cabinet committee.”</p>
<p>Dutton said Albanese’s seeking advice from the solicitor-general was appropriate. </p>
<p>“It’s time for cool heads to prevail,” Dutton told a news conference. “The
Prime Minister has come out of his holidays swinging. Obviously this is an issue that will get his teeth into.” But Australian families were dealing with bigger issues, Dutton said. </p>
<h2>Morrison’s Facebook explanation</h2>
<p>Morrison has posted a long Facebook explanation of his actions. Extracts are below: </p>
<p>“As Prime Minister I considered it necessary to put in place safeguards, redundancies and contingencies to ensure the continuity and effective operation of Government during this crisis period, which extended for the full period of my term. </p>
<p>"I took the precaution of being given authority to administer various departments of state should the need arise due to incapacity of a Minister or in the national interest. This was done in relation to departments where Ministers were vested with specific powers under their legislation that were not subject to oversight by Cabinet, including significant financial authorities.</p>
<p>"Given the significant nature of many of these powers I considered this to be a prudent and responsible action as Prime Minister.</p>
<p>"It is not uncommon for multiple Ministers to be sworn to administer the same Department. However, given that such additional Ministers were in a more junior position in the relevant Departments, and would not be familiar with all the details of the pandemic response, I considered it appropriate that the redundancy be put in place at a higher level within the Government and not at a more junior level. </p>
<p>"The major Department for which this was considered was the Health Department, given the extensive powers afforded to the Minister by the Biosecurity Act. </p>
<p>"As an added administrative precaution, as a ‘belts and braces’ approach, the Departments of Treasury and Home Affairs were added some time after in May 2021. </p>
<p>"As events demonstrated with the resurgence of COVID-19 in the second half of 2021, we could never take certainty for granted. In hindsight these arrangements were unnecessary and until seeking advice from the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet today, I had not recollected these arrangements having been put in place. There was a lot going on at the time.</p>
<p>"Thankfully it was not necessary for me to trigger use of any of these powers. In the event that I would have to use such powers I would have done so disclosing the authority by which I was making such decisions. The authority was pre approved to ensure there would be no delay in being able to make decisions or take actions should the need arise. </p>
<p>"The crisis was a highly dynamic environment and it was important to plan ahead and take what precautions could lawfully be put in place to ensure I could act, as Prime Minister, if needed.</p>
<p>It is important to note that throughout this time Ministers in all Departments, where I was provided with authority to act, exercised full control of their Departments and portfolios without intervention. Ministerial briefs were not copied to me as Prime Minister in a co-Minister capacity, as this was not the nature of the arrangement. These arrangements were there as a ‘break glass in case of emergency’ safeguard. </p>
<p>"The use of the powers by a Prime Minister to exercise authority to administer Departments has clearly caused concern. I regret this, but acted in good faith in a crisis.</p>
<p>"I used such powers on one occasion only. I did not seek to interfere with Ministers in the conduct of their portfolio as there were no circumstances that warranted their use, except in the case of the Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources [when he vetoed offshore gas exploration off the NSW coast].</p>
<p>"I have endeavoured to set out the context and reasoning for the decisions I took as Prime Minister in a highly unusual time. I did so in good faith, seeking to exercise my responsibilities as Prime Minister which exceeded those of any other member of the Government, or Parliament. For any offence to my colleagues I apologise.”</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/188808/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Former Prime Minister Scott Morrison installed himself in five portfolios – including treasury – just days before the May 2021 budget.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1841912022-05-31T12:52:15Z2022-05-31T12:52:15ZView from The Hill: Record 10 women in Albanese cabinet, and surprise move for Plibersek to environment<p>Anthony Albanese has switched Tanya Plibersek from education to environment and promoted Clare O'Neil into the plum home affairs ministry in a 23-member cabinet that contains a record 10 women. </p>
<p>There are 13 women in the ministry overall, and 19 across the total frontbench (including assistant ministers), which has seen a more extensive shakeup of Labor’s team than Albanese flagged before the election. </p>
<p>Announcing his line-up on Tuesday night, Albanese declared Labor would hold the NSW regional seat of Gilmore – which the Liberals had hoped to win with former NSW minister Andrew Constance – giving his government 77 seats in the House of Representatives. This is one more than the 76 required for a majority. </p>
<p>“What this means is that the Coalition failed to take a single seat from the Australian Labor Party at the election,” Albanese said.</p>
<p>Earlier, at the first meeting of the new caucus, Albanese set his troops’ sights on a second term with a bigger majority.</p>
<p>In the campaign Albanese suggested most of his shadow ministers would have the same portfolio in government. </p>
<p>Asked why the changes are more substantial he pointed to the election loss of two frontbenchers, Kristina Keneally, who was shadow for home affairs, and Terri Butler, the shadow environment minister. </p>
<p>But he has taken the opportunity to go further.</p>
<p>Plibersek’s move to environment and water is a surprise, and there will be some disappointment in the education sector, where she was respected by stakeholders. </p>
<p>She has lost responsibility for women, which has recently increased in importance and prominence as a policy area. This goes to the finance minister, Katy Gallagher, adding to the heavy load she will carry as a key minister in budget preparation. </p>
<p>The fact Albanese did not have Plibersek, who is popular with the public, campaigning with him much was widely commented upon in the run-up to the election. </p>
<p>Labor sources said Plibersek had not wanted or asked to be moved. But she said on Facebook on Tuesday night she was “delighted” to be appointed a cabinet minister with responsibility for the environment and water and “I look forward to the challenge”.</p>
<p>Jason Clare, who received extensive praise for his performance as a campaign spokesman, has been given education. </p>
<p>As anticipated, Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles takes defence. He was defence spokesman for a substantial time in opposition but moved to national reconstruction to boost Labor’s pre-election firepower. </p>
<p>Brendan O'Connor, shadow defence minister before the election, becomes minister for skills and training.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/labor-likely-to-get-a-friendly-senate-and-secures-house-of-representatives-majority-183931">Labor likely to get a friendly Senate and secures House of Representatives majority</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>A number of senior ministers continue in their opposition areas. Chris Bowen is minister for climate change and energy. Mark Butler has health and aged care. Tony Burke adds employment to workplace relations and the arts, which he held in opposition. </p>
<p>Mark Dreyfus will be attorney-general, a position he held in the last Labor government, and now has the urgent task of preparing the blueprint for the national integrity commission Labor has promised to legislate by year’s end. </p>
<p>Bill Shorten also has continuity, becoming minister for the NDIS as well as minister for government services. Catherine King remains in infrastructure and Michelle Rowland in communications.</p>
<p>Don Farrell, who had to make way for Keneally’s ambition to be Labor’s deputy senate leader, has regained that position and becomes trade minister. He retains special minister of state.</p>
<p>Amanda Rishworth takes on social services. Julie Collins, who struggled in agriculture in opposition, will have housing, homelessness and small business. </p>
<p>Linda Burney is minister for Indigenous Australians, with Patrick
Dodson, who will not be on the frontbench, appointed special envoy for reconciliation and the implementation of the Uluru Statement from the Heart. </p>
<p>Albanese stressed this was a priority for his government, particularly its plan for a constitutional referendum to enshrine a Voice to Parliament.</p>
<p>O'Neil and Murray Watt fill the cabinet vacancies left by Keneally and Butler. </p>
<p>O'Neil, from Victoria, has been shadow for senior Australians and aged care services in the outer shadow ministry in opposition. Her promotion to the sprawling home affairs portfolio will see her in the inner circle of national security ministers. </p>
<p>Watt, who was high profile during the floods, becomes minister for agriculture, fisheries and forestry. He continues in emergency management, after being opposition spokesman. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/albanese-appoints-former-university-of-melbourne-vice-chancellor-glyn-davis-to-head-pmandc-184059">Albanese appoints former University of Melbourne vice-chancellor Glyn Davis to head PM&C</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Three women join the outer ministry. </p>
<p>Kristy McBain, who won the vital Eden-Monaro byelection during the last term, has regional development, local government and territories. Anne Aly, from Western Australia, becomes minister for early childhood education and minister for youth. Anika Wells, from Queensland, becomes minister for aged care and minister for sport. </p>
<p>Under Labor’s system the factions choose who is in the ministry, which is ratified by caucus, and the prime minister allocates the portfolios.</p>
<p>Albanese said the new parliament would sit in the last fortnight in July. </p>
<p>Several ministers, including Foreign Minister Penny Wong, Treasurer Jim Chalmers, Gallagher and Marles were sworn in last week. The full ministry will be sworn in Wednesday morning. </p>
<p>Albanese told the caucus meeting he wanted to “grow” the numbers in the government at the next election. </p>
<p>“If we can keep our discipline, implement the program which is there, there is no reason why we can’t continue to be even more successful,” he said. </p>
<p>He told his news conference the government was determined “to not waste a single day in office”.</p>
<p>On the promotion of Kristy McBain ahead of people who had been in caucus longer, Albanese recalled he had personally approached her to run for the by-election. “If we hadn’t have won that seat of Eden-Monaro, politics might have been a bit different,” he said. </p>
<p>Asked about the move of Plibersek he highlighted the Murray Darling Basis plan. “It’s very important that that actually get delivered. Tanya is someone who can get things done. She’s an experienced former minister as well as a former shadow minister.” </p>
<p>Noting that many of his ministers had served in the previous Labor government, Albanese said his was “the most experienced incoming Labor government in our history since federation”.</p>
<p><iframe id="tc-infographic-712" class="tc-infographic" height="400px" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/infographics/712/21c55f291d411c0960f8bbd066b7b0a8e10322e3/site/index.html" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/184191/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Anthony Albanese has switched Tanya Plibersek from education to environment and promoted Clare O'Neil into the plum home affairs ministry in a 23-member cabinet that contains a record 10 women.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1753192022-02-15T18:50:03Z2022-02-15T18:50:03ZWith Australia reopening its borders to tourists, why are thousands of refugees still waiting for entry?<p>More than five months after Taliban forces overran Kabul, Immigration Minister Alex Hawke made a long-awaited <a href="https://minister.homeaffairs.gov.au/AlexHawke/Pages/commitment-to-afghanistan-increased.aspx">announcement</a> in January to resettle Afghan refugees. Over the next four years, Australia will offer 10,000 places to Afghans in humanitarian need and another 5,000 visas to Afghans reuniting with family in Australia. </p>
<p>The news came as a Senate committee released a “<a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/australia-opens-more-places-for-afghan-refugees-after-scathing-report-20220121-p59q5t.html">damning consensus report</a>” that called Australia’s approach to the evacuation of Afghans last year “<a href="https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/committees/reportsen/024789/toc_pdf/Australia%e2%80%99sengagementinAfghanistaninterimreport.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">short-sighted</a>”, “confused” and “dishonourable”.</p>
<p>The Senate committee urged the Australian government to “play a global leadership role” in resettling those displaced from Afghanistan. But just 15,000 visas fall far short of this task, particularly as these places will come out of Australia’s existing refugee and migration quotas, reducing space for others in need.</p>
<p>The Refugee Council of Australia called the announcement “<a href="https://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/australias_afghan_resettlement_response_a_bitter_disappointment/">hopelessly inadequate</a>”. It pointed out that a large proportion of the pledged 10,000 humanitarian places could be taken up by Afghans who were evacuated to Australia last year, leaving just <a href="https://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/15000-Afghan-visas-220214-002.pdf">4,500 spots</a> for those overseas. </p>
<p>Meanwhile, <a href="https://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/15000-Afghan-visas-220214-002.pdf">150,000</a> Afghans have submitted <a href="https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/committees/estimate/25615/toc_pdf/Legal%20and%20Constitutional%20Affairs%20Legislation%20Committee_2022_02_14.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf#search=%22committees/estimate/25615/0000%22">applications</a> for refugee and humanitarian visas to Australia since Kabul fell.</p>
<p>Members of the Afghan community met with Hawke this week to urge him to recognise Australia’s “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/15/stroke-of-a-pen-coalition-urged-to-accept-afghan-refugees-in-addition-to-existing-intake">moral obligation</a>” to the people of Afghanistan, calling for at least <a href="https://www.actionforafghanistan.com.au/media-releases/crnpxpmdh10f3rayuda6lms55h9rgb">20,000 more</a> humanitarian resettlement places.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1493141688222552064"}"></div></p>
<h2>With borders closed, thousands are stuck in limbo</h2>
<p>The COVID-19 pandemic has severely diminished Australia’s modest contribution to global refugee resettlement needs. </p>
<p>In 2019-20, Australia was planning to welcome up to <a href="https://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/refugee-program-smallest-in-45-years-while-migration-program-quota-filled/">18,750</a> people in humanitarian need, but this number was slashed to some <a href="https://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/2021-22-Budget-summary.pdf">13,750</a> annual places for 2020–25. </p>
<p>This is a tiny proportion of the more than <a href="https://www.unhcr.org/en-au/news/press/2021/6/60d32ba44/un-refugee-agency-releases-2022-resettlement-needs.html">1.4 million</a> displaced people identified by the UN refugee agency as being in need of resettlement <a href="https://reliefweb.int/report/world/unhcr-projected-global-resettlement-needs-2021">each year</a>. </p>
<p>Crucially, Australia’s program was suspended in March 2020 due to the pandemic. This left around <a href="https://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/lifting_of_travel_restrictions_welcome_news/">9,500 refugees</a> waiting in limbo for borders to re-open almost two years later. There were only extremely <a href="https://www.asyluminsight.com/garnier">limited</a> exceptions for refugees to be resettled in the interim. </p>
<p>In contrast, after a short suspension early in the pandemic, the United States, Canada and some European countries resumed their resettlement programs in 2020, welcoming more than <a href="https://www.unhcr.org/60b638e37/unhcr-global-trends-2020">30,000 refugees</a>. These countries then welcomed the bulk of the more than <a href="https://rsq.unhcr.org/en/#9gCe">39,000</a> refugees resettled in 2021. </p>
<p>In December 2021, Australia reopened its borders to <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/australia-reopens-borders-non-citizens-despite-omicron-worries-2021-12-14/">vaccinated skilled migrants and international students</a> and began to welcome refugees who had been waiting for resettlement. Home Affairs did not respond to a request by The Conversation, however, for the numbers of refugees resettled since December 15, or when the program would ramp up. </p>
<p>Two months on, it is clear the government has been slow to develop COVID-safe processes that would allow for a larger-scale refugee intake. </p>
<p>Many refugees awaiting resettlement are stuck in countries that have <a href="https://oxfamilibrary.openrepository.com/bitstream/handle/10546/621312/bp-peoples-vaccine-refugees-301121-en.pdf;jsessionid=DF68589F089FE159FF8DE095E5BA6B86?sequence=4">low COVID vaccination rates</a>. Some may also have received vaccines that have not been approved in Australia. </p>
<p>However, the government requires humanitarian entrants be fully vaccinated before arriving. The Refugee Council of Australia is <a href="https://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Facilitating-RHP-arrivals-in-2022.pdf">calling</a> for Canberra to create space in quarantine facilities to facilitate the entry of refugees who do not meet the vaccination requirements.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/we-cant-compare-australias-intake-of-afghan-refugees-with-the-post-vietnam-war-era-heres-why-166408">We can't compare Australia’s intake of Afghan refugees with the post-Vietnam War era. Here's why</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>The US and Canada are doing better</h2>
<p>Even though Australia has announced 15,000 visas for Afghan nationals over the next four years, its contribution is still well behind that of Canada and the US.</p>
<p>The Canadian government made a pledge of 40,000 places for Afghan refugees after the fall of Kabul. Delays in processing have meant only about <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-canada-should-be-preparing-to-help-young-afghan-refugees-174273">6,500</a> have been granted entry so far. But these places are in addition to Canada’s existing annual resettlement program (unlike Australia). </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1493343198571216896"}"></div></p>
<p>Since mid-2021, the Biden administration has admitted more than <a href="https://www.state.gov/afghanistan-relocation-and-resettlement-update/">74,000</a> Afghan nationals, many of whom now need to apply to stay in the United States permanently. </p>
<p>And for 2022, President Joe Biden has pledged to provide permanent resettlement to up to 125,000 refugees from around the world, although progress has been <a href="https://refugeerights.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/USRAP-Recs-Report-FINAL.pdf">delayed</a> somewhat as authorities work to speed up the entry of Afghan refugees.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/american-religious-groups-have-a-history-of-resettling-refugees-including-afghans-166628">American religious groups have a history of resettling refugees – including Afghans</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>With the Taliban once again allowing chartered evacuation flights to Qatar, the US plans to <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/02/04/afghan-refugees/">expedite</a> its system of interviews, security and health checks, and visa processing for those fleeing Afghanistan.</p>
<h2>No clear path for Afghans already here, either</h2>
<p>Not only has the Australian government been slow to process Afghans fleeing their homeland, it has also not made it easier for those already in Australia to stay permanently. </p>
<p>This includes around <a href="https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/committees/reportsen/024789/toc_pdf/Australia%E2%80%99sengagementinAfghanistaninterimreport.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">5,000</a> Afghans living on <a href="https://temporary.kaldorcentre.net/">temporary visas</a> for the last decade. The visa conditions <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/refugees-from-afghanistan-rally-at-parliament-house-to-demand-permanent-residency/d01ff219-7b05-4258-b2ba-50116da1108d">prevent</a> individuals from bringing their family members to safety in Australia. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/we-studied-afghan-refugees-for-3-years-to-find-out-what-life-is-like-for-them-in-australia-166498">We studied Afghan refugees for 3 years to find out what life is like for them in Australia</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The Afghanistan-Australian Advocacy Network has also <a href="https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/committees/reportsen/024789/toc_pdf/Australia%E2%80%99sengagementinAfghanistaninterimreport.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">called</a> for the government to review its eight-year ban on the resettlement of Afghan refugees from Indonesia. Several thousand people are stuck there without work, education or health care, waiting for a chance at resettlement elsewhere.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, <a href="https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/committees/reportsen/024789/toc_pdf/Australia%E2%80%99sengagementinAfghanistaninterimreport.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">around 25 Afghan refugees</a> remain in limbo on Nauru or in Papua New Guinea, while others are detained in <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-01-13/refugee-escaped-taliban-detention-nauru-park-hotel-mental-toll/100689994">hotels</a> in Australia.</p>
<p></p>
<p>The Senate committee’s call for Australia to be a global leader in refugee protection has been issued many times in recent years - by representatives of the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/jun/03/australias-reputation-as-humanitarian-world-leader-has-deteriorated">US</a>, the <a href="https://www.unhcr.org/597217484.html">UN refugee agency</a> and civil society groups. </p>
<p>Such leadership can have real impact. Ahmad Shuja Jamal, a special advisor at the Refugee Council of Australia, <a href="https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;db=COMMITTEES;id=committees%2Fcommsen%2F25399%2F0004;query=Id%3A%22committees%2Fcommsen%2F25399%2F0000%22">told</a> the Senate committee Australia could use its influence to encourage neighbouring Pakistan to allow Afghan refugees to enter and wait for resettlement safely. This diplomacy can “literally save lives”, he said.</p>
<p>Instead, Australia’s response during the pandemic reveals a country quick to close its borders and drag its feet. This ignores the <a href="https://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/15000-Afghan-visas-220214-002.pdf">strong</a> community support for the admission of Afghan refugees and Australia’s “<a href="https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/committees/reportsen/024789/toc_pdf/Australia%E2%80%99sengagementinAfghanistaninterimreport.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">international standing</a>”
as a country with a well-established resettlement program. </p>
<p>Should Australia wish to stake a credible claim to leadership in helping refugees, a much greater contribution to the protection of those fleeing Afghanistan is a crucial place to start.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/175319/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Claire Higgins receives funding from the Australian Research Council. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Regina Jefferies does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Refugees have waited in limbo for almost two years for Australia’s borders to reopen. So, why hasn’t Australia done more to ramp up its resettlement program, like Canada and the US?Claire Higgins, Senior Research Fellow, Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law, UNSW SydneyRegina Jefferies, Affiliate, Andrew and Renata Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1747732022-01-13T02:17:13Z2022-01-13T02:17:13ZWhy one man with ‘god-like’ powers decides if Novak Djokovic can stay or go<p>After Novak Djokovic’s visa was <a href="https://fedcourt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/95058/Order-Djokovic-v-Minister-MLG35-of-2022_10-January-2022-003.pdf">restored</a> by a Federal Court judge this week, the ultimate decision of whether he could stay in Australia rested with one person: Immigration Minister Alex Hawke.</p>
<p>The personal powers of the immigration minister to grant or cancel visas are so broad and powerful, they’ve been described as “<a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/i-should-not-play-god-evans-20080220-gds1tt.html">god-like</a>” by none other than a former immigration minister himself, Chris Evans. </p>
<p>A 2017 <a href="https://libertyvictoria.org.au/sites/default/files/LibertyVictoriaRAP_report_PlayingGodTheImmigrationMinistersUnrestrainedPower20170504_0.pdf">report</a> by the Liberty Victoria Rights Advocacy Project noted the immigration minister is granted more personal discretion than any other minister by an “overwhelming margin”. </p>
<p>This is not a new concern, either. In 1989, the then-immigration minister, Robert Ray, tried to amend the <a href="https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ma1958118/s133c.html">Migration Act</a> to remove ministerial discretion from all immigration matters, <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Former_Committees/minmig/report/c02">saying</a> </p>
<blockquote>
<p>The wide discretionary powers conferred by the Migration Act have long been a source of public criticism. Decision-making guidelines are perceived to be obscure, arbitrarily changed and applied, and subject to day-to-day political intervention in individual cases. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>The move was blocked, however, and the minister’s extremely broad powers have remained ever since. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1480489865934348290"}"></div></p>
<h2>Ministerial powers have only grown stronger</h2>
<p>Wide-ranging discretionary powers have been part of Australia’s immigration system since the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C1901A00017">Immigration Restriction Act</a> was passed in 1901 and the subsequent Migration Act came into effect in 1958. Both of these laws gave wide discretion to the minister to grant or refuse visas. </p>
<p>After the failed attempt to remove these powers in 1989, legislative reforms brought in a new system for the granting, refusal and cancellation of visas. </p>
<p>However, some statutory discretion remained with the minister to allow flexibility to intervene when it was in the “<a href="http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ma1958118/s351.html">public interest</a>”. This kind of intervention was intended for compassionate or humane reasons.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/novak-djokovics-path-to-legal-vindication-was-long-and-convoluted-it-may-also-be-fleeting-174603">Novak Djokovic's path to legal vindication was long and convoluted. It may also be fleeting</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>And since 1989, the Migration Act has actually been amended several times to increase the personal power of the minister. </p>
<p>These powers are non-compellable (meaning the minister cannot be required by a court to exercise them). And if exercised correctly, the minister’s decisions are, in effect, unable to be reviewed by the courts. </p>
<p>This means, it will be very difficult for Djokovic’s lawyers to review Hawke’s decision if his visa is cancelled again.</p>
<h2>Controversial uses of power in the past</h2>
<p>Not surprisingly, the Djokovic visa case is not the first time the minister’s decisions have courted controversy. In fact, there have been a number of parliamentary inquiries related to the use of these powers over the years. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Legal_and_Constitutional_Affairs/AuPairs">Most recently</a>, then-Immigration Minister Peter Dutton intervened to grant visas to two au pairs in 2015 who arrived on tourist visas and were facing deportation at the airport. A Senate committee <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-19/senate-committee-recommends-upper-house-consider-censuring-dutt/10283244">recommended</a> censuring Dutton after the inquiry found he misled parliament.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1478940977662361600"}"></div></p>
<p>In 2004, an <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Former_Committees/minmig/index">inquiry</a> was held after then-Immigration Minister Philip Ruddock was involved in a so-called “cash for visas” scandal. Ruddock was accused of using his ministerial powers to grant visas to people represented by a travel agent who had donated money to the Liberal Party. He was eventually cleared of any criminal wrongdoing in the affair.</p>
<p>Concerns were raised in both inquiries about the use of such ministerial powers and the lack of adequate accountability mechanisms, which creates “both the possibility and perception of corruption”. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/peter-duttons-decisions-on-the-au-pairs-are-legal-but-there-are-other-considerations-102414">Peter Dutton's decisions on the au pairs are legal - but there are other considerations</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Asylum seekers and ministerial intervention</h2>
<p>These ministerial powers have also been scrutinised when it comes to the plight of the refugees and asylum seekers who have been in various forms of detention since arriving by boat nearly a decade ago. Some of these people were held in the same Melbourne hotel where Djokovic was initially detained last week. </p>
<p>The Home Affairs Department has released data showing how many times the minister has <a href="https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/foi/files/2021/fa-210501180-document-released.PDF">used his power</a> under <a href="http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ma1958118/s195a.html">section 195A of the Migration Act</a> to release people from detention on temporary bridging visas. However, statistics are not available showing how many times refugees are granted more permanent visas by ministerial decree.</p>
<p>A parliamentary inquiry in 2018 <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Legal_and_Constitutional_Affairs/AuPairs/Report/c02">heard evidence</a> that cases of “obvious merit” involving asylum seekers were “given little consideration” for ministerial interventions.</p>
<p>Perhaps the most prominent case in Australia in recent years has involved a <a href="https://theconversation.com/biloela-family-to-be-released-into-community-detention-what-happens-now-162661">Sri Lankan Tamil family</a> who had been living in the town of Biloela, Queensland, until their visas expired in 2018. </p>
<p>The family then spent two years in detention under threat of removal before Hawke, facing considerable public pressure, finally <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-06-15/tamil-family-murugappan-christmas-island/100215160">used his powers</a> to allow them to move into community detention last year. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/biloela-family-to-be-released-into-community-detention-what-happens-now-162661">Biloela family to be released into community detention - what happens now?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Their lives remain in limbo, however, as they are currently in community detention in Perth with <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/renewed-calls-for-minister-to-intervene-in-biloela-family-case-following-djokovic-revelation/5f78f005-f824-4551-9fe9-27778d604f02">no certainty</a> they’ll be able to stay in Australia permanently. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1480863374128795648"}"></div></p>
<p>Asylum seekers should not be reliant on the minister to exercise unreviewable personal discretion in cases like this. As former Immigration Minister Ian MacPhee <a href="https://libertyvictoria.org.au/sites/default/files/LibertyVictoriaRAP_report_PlayingGodTheImmigrationMinistersUnrestrainedPower20170504_0.pdf">recently put it</a>, </p>
<blockquote>
<p>The sheer breadth of the minister’s discretionary power ensures that unfair decisions will be made in haste and rarely subject to objective review. The law and its practice is now unjust. It is un-Australian.</p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p><em>Correction: an earlier version of this article said ministerial intervention was used in the case of a British family whose application for permanent residency was refused. This was incorrect and has been removed.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/174773/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mary Anne Kenny has previous received funding from the Australian Research Council and sitting fees from the Department of Home Affairs.</span></em></p>The personal powers of the immigration minister to grant or cancel visas are extremely broad and powerful. And this isn’t the first time they’ve courted controversy.Mary Anne Kenny, Associate Professor, School of Law, Murdoch UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1746982022-01-11T09:27:01Z2022-01-11T09:27:01ZMorrison government investigating whether Djokovic made erroneous travel declaration<p>The Morrison government is now investigating the possible inaccuracy of Novak Djokovic’s travel declaration, as Serbia continues its pressure on Australia over the treatment of the tennis star.</p>
<p>Serbian Prime Minister Ana Brnabić told Scott Morrison in a call on Tuesday morning Australian time that Djokovic’s rights should be respected. </p>
<p>Brnabić, who sought the call, asked Morrison to do all in his power to ensure Djokovic would have humane and dignified treatment in Australia, according to a report from a Serbian news agency. </p>
<p>A readout from Morrison’s office described the call as “constructive”. </p>
<p>“The PM explained our non-discriminatory border policy and its role in protecting Australia during the COVID-19 pandemic,” the readout said.</p>
<p>“They both agreed to stay in contact on the issue, and to further strengthening the bilateral relationship.” </p>
<p>Djokovic’s visa was restored in a federal circuit court win on Monday, when the Commonwealth admitted Border Force had not afforded him procedural fairness last week when his visa was cancelled. </p>
<p>The cancellation was on the grounds he had not met the criteria for a medical exemption from vaccination. </p>
<h2>Attention turns to the word ‘no’</h2>
<p>But now official attention has also turned to his travel declaration.
The declaration asks arrivals, “Have you travelled, or will you travel, in the 14 days prior to your flight to Australia?” His form said no.</p>
<p>Djokovic, who lives in Spain, left from there for Australia on January 4, transiting through Dubai. Social media had him in Belgrade on December 25.
Border Force is looking into whether the information in the declaration was inaccurate. </p>
<p>Immigration Minister Alex Hawke is currently considering whether to use his discretion to cancel Djokovic’s visa again.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/novak-djokovics-path-to-legal-vindication-was-long-and-convoluted-it-may-also-be-fleeting-174603">Novak Djokovic's path to legal vindication was long and convoluted. It may also be fleeting</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The government concedes Border Force blundered on procedural fairness but it still contends Djokovic has not met the vaccination exemption criteria. </p>
<p>Hawke’s spokesman on Tuesday said the visa issue was “ongoing”. </p>
<p>The minister is considering a brief that contains material from both the Home Affairs department and Djokovic. </p>
<p>Meanwhile, despite the uncertainty about his prospects of playing in it, after his days of enforced confinement Djokovic is now back on court preparing for the Australian Open.</p>
<p>After Monday’s result, he posted on social media that “despite all that has happened, I want to stay and try to compete” at the Australian Open.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1480529173789696001"}"></div></p>
<p>“I remain focused on that. I flew here to play at one of the most important events we have in front of the amazing fans,” he said.</p>
<p>There are mixed views in the government on whether it should cancel Djokovic’s visa again.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/vaccinated-or-not-novak-djokovic-should-be-able-to-play-173060">Vaccinated or not, Novak Djokovic should be able to play</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Liberal backbencher and former professional tennis player John Alexander said that after the court outcome it would be a mistake for Hawke to use his ministerial power to deport Djokovic. </p>
<p>Alexander pointed the finger at Border Force, telling the ABC that “the person who processed Novak possibly made an error, late at night”.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/174698/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Asked whether he had travelled, or would travel, in the 14 days prior to his flight to Australia, Djokovic’s form said no.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1746042022-01-10T11:25:03Z2022-01-10T11:25:03ZView from The Hill: Morrison government considering whether to cancel Djokovic’s visa – again<p>A sense of proportion is a very useful quality in politics. In the case of Novak Djokovic, the Morrison government has lost that sense entirely.</p>
<p>Late Monday in the Federal Circuit Court, Judge Anthony Kelly quashed last week’s cancellation of the tennis star’s visa, done on his arrival in Australia to play in the Australian Open.</p>
<p>The judge read a minute, agreed to by both sides, which said Djokovic wasn’t given sufficient opportunity to respond at the border (the saga went through the early hours, when he couldn’t contact people).</p>
<p>With Djokovic’s court win, the government immediately faced an invidious choice – accept its humiliation or launch a fresh, hairy-chested offensive.</p>
<p>Immigration Minister Alex Hawke has the power to move, under his ministerial discretion, to cancel the now-restored visa. </p>
<p>On Monday night, a spokesman for Hawke said “the minister is currently considering the matter and the process remains ongoing”.</p>
<p>Surely, it would have been better for the government to just cut its losses at once. The speaker of Serbia’s parliament, Ivica Dacic, made some sense in saying “the process should have ended when the court ruled”.</p>
<p>Most Australians – in a highly vaccinated population – would struggle with the tennis star’s resistance to the jab. It seems perverse and irresponsible. Many would say he should not have been allowed to get on a plane to come to Australia, whether or not he had met the (unclear) technicalities of the medical exemption criteria. </p>
<p>All fair enough. But the government shenanigans after he was granted a visa and arrived at Melbourne airport blew the matter into a diplomatic incident, and the theatre of the absurd. </p>
<p>Some commentators argue the government calculated that throwing Djokovic out would be a political distraction from the horrors of the escalating Omicron crisis. </p>
<p>But really? Would people struggling with illness, the search for tests, and the disruption to employment and businesses, have their attention so readily diverted? Certainly not for more than an instant.</p>
<p>Looked at rationally, it is near impossible to understand why the government chose to get itself into this mess. Or why it left things hanging after the court decision.</p>
<p>It would be a stretch to argue Djokovic is a danger to public health. Earlier in the pandemic, the unvaccinated player might have been a COVID risk – that is, when we had more or less “suppressed” the virus. That’s hardly the case now, when the latest COVID wave is spreading – and being allowed by the authorities to spread – like wildfire.</p>
<p>The government may have wanted to use a tall poppy to reinforce that “tough-borders” message – you don’t get in if you don’t follow “the rules”, as Prime Minister Scott Morrison said. </p>
<p>But the evidence given in Monday’s court case indicated Djokovic arrived thinking he had followed the rules. And it turns out the government got its comeuppance from the court for not abiding by procedural rules. </p>
<p>Kelly declared during the hearing, “The point I’m somewhat agitated about is what more could this man have done” to comply with the rules. Anyway, it defies common sense to believe Djokovic would have undertaken the trip unless he thought things were in order. </p>
<p>The federal and Victorian governments, Tennis Australia, Border Force and Djokovic himself all share responsibility for this inglorious episode, which has been laced with confusion. </p>
<p>Assuming Djokovic arrived on a sincere misapprehension, the sensible course would have been for the government to have found a way through rather than resorting to its heavy handedness at the border. This has made Australia look like hicksville, and been bad for the reputation of the Australian Open. </p>
<p>Serbia mightn’t be France, but its president can also pack a punch when national pride is at stake. </p>
<p>Turning Serbia’s national hero into Australia’s national villain has been harder than the government thought. It’s become an own goal for the government’s latest “operation sovereign borders” chapter.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/174604/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Turning Serbia’s national hero into Australia’s national villain has been harder than the government thought. It’s an own goal for the latest “operation sovereign borders” chapter.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1689412021-10-03T19:00:07Z2021-10-03T19:00:07ZMultibillion-dollar strategy with no end in sight: Australia’s ‘enduring’ offshore processing deal with Nauru<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/424138/original/file-20211001-13-1e0vw0w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=366%2C12%2C3645%2C2249&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Late last month, Home Affairs Minister Karen Andrews and the president of Nauru, Lionel Aingimea, quietly <a href="https://minister.homeaffairs.gov.au/KarenAndrews/Pages/maritime-people-smuggling.aspx">announced</a> they had signed a new agreement to establish an “enduring form” of offshore processing for asylum seekers taken to the Pacific island.</p>
<p>The text of the new agreement has not been made public. This is unsurprising. </p>
<p>All the publicly available information indicates Australia’s offshore processing strategy is an ongoing human rights — not to mention financial — <a href="https://www.unhcr.org/en-au/news/press/2021/7/60f558274/unhcr-statement-on-8-years-of-offshore-asylum-policy.html">disaster</a>. </p>
<p>The deliberate opaqueness is intended to make it difficult to hold the government to account for these human and other costs. This is, of course, all the more reason to subject the new deal with Nauru to intense scrutiny.</p>
<h2>Policies 20 years in the making</h2>
<p>In order to fully understand the new deal — and the ramifications of it — it is necessary to briefly recount 20 years of history. </p>
<p>In late August 2001, the Howard government impulsively refused to allow asylum seekers <a href="https://www.nma.gov.au/defining-moments/resources/tampa-affair">rescued at sea by the Tampa freighter</a> to disembark on Australian soil. This began policy-making on the run and led to the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Solution#:%7E:text=The%20Pacific%20Solution%20is%20the,land%20on%20the%20Australian%20mainland.">Pacific Solution Mark I</a>. </p>
<p>The governments of Nauru and Papua New Guinea were persuaded to enter into agreements allowing people attempting to reach Australia by boat to be detained in facilities on their territory while their protection claims were considered by Australian officials. </p>
<p>By the 2007 election, boat arrivals to Australia had dwindled substantially.</p>
<p>In February 2008, the newly elected Labor government closed down the facilities in Nauru and PNG. Within a year, boat arrivals had increased dramatically, causing the government to rethink its policy. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/424144/original/file-20211001-15-4u7zxu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/424144/original/file-20211001-15-4u7zxu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424144/original/file-20211001-15-4u7zxu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424144/original/file-20211001-15-4u7zxu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424144/original/file-20211001-15-4u7zxu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424144/original/file-20211001-15-4u7zxu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424144/original/file-20211001-15-4u7zxu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Sri Lankan migrants bound for Australia after they were intercepted by the Indonesian navy in 2009.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Irwin Fedriansyah/AP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>After a <a href="http://press-files.anu.edu.au/downloads/press/n7824/pdf/ch09.pdf">couple of false starts</a>, it signed new deals with Nauru and PNG in late 2012. An expert panel had <a href="https://www.kaldorcentre.unsw.edu.au/sites/kaldorcentre.unsw.edu.au/files/expert-panel-report.pdf">described</a> the new arrangements as a “necessary circuit breaker to the current surge in irregular migration to Australia”. </p>
<p>This was the <a href="http://www.refugeeaction.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Pacific-Solution-II-fact-sheet.pdf">Pacific Solution Mark II</a>. In contrast to the first iteration, it provided for boat arrivals taken to Nauru and PNG to have protection claims considered under the laws and procedures of the host country. </p>
<p>Moreover, the processing facilities were supposedly run by the host countries, though in reality, the Australian government outsourced this to private companies.</p>
<p>Despite the new arrangements, the boat arrivals continued. And on July 19, 2013, the Rudd government took a hardline stance, <a href="https://webarchive.nla.gov.au/awa/20130730234007/http:/pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/79983/20130731-0937/www.pm.gov.au/press-office/transcript-joint-press-conference-2.html">announcing</a> any boat arrivals after that date would have “have no chance of being settled in Australia as refugees”. </p>
<h2>New draconian changes to the system</h2>
<p>The <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloadestimatesquestions/EstimatesQuestion-CommitteeId6-EstimatesRoundId11-PortfolioId20-QuestionNumber545">1,056</a> individuals who had been transferred to Nauru or PNG before July 19, 2013 were brought to Australia to be processed. </p>
<p>PNG <a href="https://www.dfat.gov.au/geo/papua-new-guinea/memorandum-of-understanding-between-the-government-of-the-independent-state-of-papua-new-guinea-and-the-government-of-austr">agreed</a> that asylum seekers arriving after this date could resettle there, if they were recognised as refugees.</p>
<p>Nauru made a more equivocal <a href="https://www.dfat.gov.au/geo/nauru/memorandum-of-understanding-between-the-republic-of-nauru-and-the-commonwealth-of-australia-relating-to-the-transfer-to-and">commitment</a> and has thus far only granted 20-year visas to those it recognises as refugees.</p>
<p>The Coalition then won the September 2013 federal election and implemented the military-led Operation Sovereign Borders policy. This involves turning back boat arrivals to transit countries (like Indonesia), or to their countries of origin. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/foi/files/2021/fa-210100105-fa210100899-document-released-pt1.PDF">cumulative count</a> of interceptions since then stands at 38 boats carrying 873 people. The most recent interception was in January 2020. </p>
<p>It should be noted these figures do not include the large number of interceptions undertaken at Australia’s request by transit countries and countries of origin. </p>
<p>What this means is the mere existence of the offshore processing system — even in the more draconian form in place after July 2013 — has not deterred people from attempting to reach Australia by boat. </p>
<p>Rather, the attempts have continued, but the interception activities of Australia and other countries have prevented them from succeeding.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1443712420891947010"}"></div></p>
<h2>No new asylum seekers in Nauru or PNG since 2014</h2>
<p>Australia acknowledges it has obligations under the <a href="http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/dfat/treaties/1954/5.html">UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees</a> — and other human rights treaties — to refrain from returning people to places where they face the risk of serious harm. </p>
<p>As a result, those intercepted at sea are given <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloadestimatesquestions/EstimatesQuestion-CommitteeId6-EstimatesRoundId10-PortfolioId20-QuestionNumber311">on-water screening interviews</a> for the purpose of identifying those with <em>prima facie</em> protection claims. </p>
<p>Those individuals are supposed to be taken to Nauru or PNG instead of being turned back or handed back. <a href="https://www.asyluminsight.com/savitri-taylor#.YVUDX5pBwtI">Concerningly</a>, of the 873 people intercepted since 2013, only two have passed these screenings: both in 2014. </p>
<p>This means no asylum seekers have been taken to either Nauru or PNG since 2014. Since then, Australia has spent years trying to find resettlement options in third countries for recognised refugees in Nauru and PNG, such as in <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloadestimatesquestions/EstimatesQuestion-CommitteeId6-EstimatesRoundId4-PortfolioId20-QuestionNumber152">Cambodia</a> and <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloadestimatesquestions/EstimatesQuestion-CommitteeId6-EstimatesRoundId11-PortfolioId20-QuestionNumber549">the US</a>.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloadestimatesquestions/EstimatesQuestion-CommitteeId6-EstimatesRoundId11-PortfolioId20-QuestionNumber544">As of April 30</a>, 131 asylum seekers were still in PNG and 109 were in Nauru. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-the-medevac-repeal-and-what-it-means-for-asylum-seekers-on-manus-island-and-nauru-128118">Explainer: the medevac repeal and what it means for asylum seekers on Manus Island and Nauru</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>A boon to the Nauruan government</h2>
<p>Australia has spent <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloadestimatesquestions/EstimatesQuestion-CommitteeId6-EstimatesRoundId11-PortfolioId20-QuestionNumber427">billions</a> on Pacific Solution Mark II with no end in sight.</p>
<p>As well as underwriting all the infrastructure and operational costs of the processing facilities, Australia made it worthwhile for Nauru and PNG to participate in the arrangements. </p>
<p>For one thing, it promised to ensure spillover benefits for the local economies by, for example, requiring contractors to hire local staff. In fact, in 2019–20, the processing facility in Nauru employed <a href="https://devpolicy.org/nauru-riches-to-rags-to-riches-20210412/">15% of the country’s entire workforce</a>.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1360001314172727297"}"></div></p>
<p>And from the beginning, Nauru has <a href="http://www.paclii.org/nr/legis/sub_leg/ia2014ir2014385.pdf">required</a> every transferee to hold a regional processing centre visa. This is a temporary visa which must be renewed every three months by the Australian government. </p>
<p>The visa fee each time is A$3,000, so that’s A$12,000 per transferee per year that Australia is required to pay the Nauruan government. </p>
<p>Where a transferee is found to be a person in need of protection, that visa <a href="http://www.paclii.org/nr/legis/sub_leg/ia2014irn4o2014511/">converts automatically</a> into a temporary settlement visa, which must be renewed every six months. The temporary settlement visa fee is A$3,000 per month — again paid by the Australian government. </p>
<p>In 2019-20, direct and indirect revenue from the processing facility made up <a href="https://devpolicy.org/nauru-riches-to-rags-to-riches-20210412/">58% of total Nauruan government revenue</a>. It is no wonder Nauru is on board with making an “enduring form” of offshore processing available to Australia.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/cruel-costly-and-ineffective-australias-offshore-processing-asylum-seeker-policy-turns-9-166014">Cruel, costly and ineffective: Australia's offshore processing asylum seeker policy turns 9</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>‘Not to use it, but to be willing to use it’</h2>
<p>In 2016, the PNG Supreme Court <a href="http://www.paclii.org/pg/cases/PGSC/2016/13.pdf">ruled</a> the detention of asylum seekers in the offshore processing facility was unconstitutional. Australia and PNG then <a href="https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/committees/estimate/3a32f9b8-b53d-4251-a739-7e12e1fc506e/toc_pdf/Legal%20and%20Constitutional%20Affairs%20Legislation%20Committee_2017_10_23_5658_Official.pdf;fileType=application/pdf#search=%22committees/estimate/3a32f9b8-b53d-4251-a739-7e12e1fc506e/0001%22">agreed</a> to close the PNG facility in late 2017 and residents were moved to alternative accommodation. Australia is <a href="https://uploads.guim.co.uk/2017/10/29/Media_Release-Minister_Thomas_on_Closure_of_Manus_RPC.pdf">underwriting the costs</a>.</p>
<p>Australia decided, however, to maintain a processing facility in Nauru. Senator Jim Molan <a href="https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:%22committees/estimate/2c68087e-f913-401c-88da-f76e4cc7f2fc/0002%22">asked</a> Home Affairs Secretary Michael Pezzullo about this in Senate Estimates in February 2018, saying:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>So it’s more appropriate to say that we are not maintaining Nauru as an offshore processing centre; we are maintaining a relationship with the Nauru government.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Pezzullo responded,</p>
<blockquote>
<p>the whole purpose is, as you would well recall, in fact not to have to use those facilities. But, as in all deterrents, you need to have an asset that is credible so that you are deterring future eventualities. So the whole point of it is actually not to use it but to be willing to use it. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>This is how we ended up where we are now, with a new deal with the Nauru government for an “enduring” — that is indefinitely maintained — offshore processing capability, at great cost to the Australian people.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/could-the-biden-administration-pressure-australia-to-adopt-more-humane-refugee-policies-153718">Could the Biden administration pressure Australia to adopt more humane refugee policies?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Little has been made public about this new arrangement. We do know in December 2020, the incoming minister for immigration, Alex Hawke, was <a href="https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/foi/files/2021/fa-210100105-fa210100899-document-released-pt1.PDF">told</a> the government was undertaking “a major procurement” for “enduring capability services”. </p>
<p>We also know a <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloadestimatesquestions/EstimatesQuestion-CommitteeId6-EstimatesRoundId11-PortfolioId20-QuestionNumber423">budget of A$731.2 million</a> has been appropriated for regional processing in 2021-22. </p>
<p>Of this, $187 million is for service provider fees and host government costs in PNG. Almost all of the remainder goes to Nauru, to ensure that, beyond hosting its current population of 109 transferees, it “stands ready to receive new arrivals”.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/168941/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Savitri Taylor receives funding from the Australian Research Council.
She is a member of the Committee of Management of Refugee Legal.
She is a member of the Kim for Canberra Party.
The views expressed in this article are her own.</span></em></p>Nauru is receiving hundreds of millions of dollars from Australia annually to house 109 asylum seekers. The real purpose, though, is to ‘stand ready to receive new arrivals’.Savitri Taylor, Associate Professor, Law School, La Trobe UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1661012021-08-23T01:23:54Z2021-08-23T01:23:54ZHow many people in immigration detention have been vaccinated? Home Affairs won’t tell us<p>When the federal government first announced Australia’s COVID vaccination program in January, the eligibility criteria indicated refugees and asylum seekers, as well as certain other non-citizens, would not be able to access free vaccines.</p>
<p>Days later, Health Minister Greg Hunt <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/language/english/i-am-relieved-government-announces-all-visa-holders-will-get-covid-19-vaccine-free-of-cost">clarified</a> all visa holders, including refugees and asylums seekers, would be eligible. The initial announcement, however, was revealing.</p>
<p>Although refugees and asylum seekers are, in fact, eligible to be vaccinated for COVID, the government <a href="https://www.hrlc.org.au/news/2021/8/2/morrison-government-must-act-urgently-to-avoid-covid-catastrophe-in-immigration-detention">has not ensured or prioritised</a> vaccination for those held in crowded detention centres.</p>
<p>A coalition of refugee law and advocacy organisations <a href="https://www.hrlc.org.au/news/2021/8/2/morrison-government-must-act-urgently-to-avoid-covid-catastrophe-in-immigration-detention">asserted</a> earlier this month the government had yet to even make vaccines available to detainees. They added:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>This has created an incomprehensible situation where people who would be vaccinated if they were released into the community, are instead trapped in a high-risk environment unable to access a potentially life-saving vaccine. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>When asked by The Conversation last week how many people in detention had received vaccinations, the Department of Home Affairs declined to release any data. Instead, a departmental spokesperson said Home Affairs: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>continues to liaise with the Department of Health on the rollout of vaccinations for detainees. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>It also said the rollout timeline “will depend on supply of the vaccine”, consistent with the Department of Health’s strategy nationally.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/for-refugees-in-australia-life-during-covid-lockdowns-recalls-the-trauma-of-war-and-persecution-165884">For refugees in Australia, life during COVID lockdowns recalls the trauma of war and persecution</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Villawood Detention Centre at particular risk</h2>
<p>The government’s apparent failure to include immigration detainees in the first phases of the vaccine rollout demonstrates, once again, how it is prioritising border policies over public health and safety.</p>
<p>As the Delta outbreak in NSW worsens, this is particularly dangerous for those being held in Villawood Detention Centre. The facility is located in Canterbury-Bankstown, which is a “<a href="https://www.nsw.gov.au/covid-19/rules/affected-area">local government area of concern</a>” and currently has one of the <a href="https://www.health.nsw.gov.au/Infectious/covid-19/Pages/stats-local.aspx">highest</a> rates of confirmed COVID cases of any LGA in the state.</p>
<p>Approximately <a href="https://www.hrlc.org.au/news/2021/8/2/morrison-government-must-act-urgently-to-avoid-covid-catastrophe-in-immigration-detention">500 people</a> are currently detained in Villawood Detention Centre — the largest, in terms of population, in the country. Across Australia, around <a href="https://www.hrlc.org.au/news/2021/8/2/morrison-government-must-act-urgently-to-avoid-covid-catastrophe-in-immigration-detention">1,486 people</a> in total are being held in immigration detention, including “<a href="https://theconversation.com/hotels-are-no-luxury-place-to-detain-people-seeking-asylum-in-australia-134544">alternative places of detention</a>”, such as hotels.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1422476730275491841"}"></div></p>
<p>Last week, nearly two dozen detainees at Villawood were <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-08-18/detainees-from-sydney-covid-19-hotspot-fly-to-western-australia/100387032">reportedly awakened</a> in the middle of the night and put on a plane bound for a detention centre in Western Australia. The reason for the detainee transfer is not clear; Australian Border Force would not comment on the operation. </p>
<p>In September 2020, Home Affairs itself <a href="https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/asylum-seekers-and-refugees/publications/management-covid-19-risks-immigration-detention">said</a> 247 people in closed immigration detention were assessed as particularly vulnerable to COVID.</p>
<p>Home Affairs said in its statement to The Conversation that no detainee has so far contracted COVID in the immigration detention network.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/people-are-crying-and-begging-the-human-cost-of-forced-relocations-in-immigration-detention-132193">'People are crying and begging': the human cost of forced relocations in immigration detention</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Immigration detention centres are porous places</h2>
<p>COVID thrives in confined spaces, which makes people incarcerated in prisons and immigration detention among the most at-risk populations in terms of infection. </p>
<p>Like prisons, immigration detention centres are also porous places. Guards and other workers constantly move in and out of these facilities and into the community. This creates a risk of infection for people in detention, the staff and for the broader community. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1417627884089380868"}"></div></p>
<p>Guards and other detention workers are also often casually employed. This means they do not have sick leave and other entitlements to facilitate full compliance with testing and isolation measures. Instead, those in NSW must rely on the goverment’s emergency payments if they need a COVID test or to self-isolate. </p>
<p>Home Affairs and ABF have also <a href="https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/politics/2021/07/17/covid-19-and-immigration-detention/162644400012071">not released</a> details of vaccination levels among detention centre staff nationwide. </p>
<p>Following COVID outbreaks in <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-08-17/sydney-news-silverwater-jail-inmates-covid/100380902">Silverwater</a> and <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-08-13/bathurst-jail-concerns-after-covid-exposure/100371298">Bathurst</a> jails this month, <a href="https://twitter.com/_pcthug/status/1427524711236308993?s=20">advocates and experts</a> have renewed calls to immediately release prisoners before the situation becomes catastrophic. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/human-rights-commissioner-calls-for-immigration-detainees-release-over-coronavirus-infection-fears/e76e94a1-1b56-4b8a-a164-f6f5f89df648">Similar calls</a> were made in relation to immigration detention as soon as the virus broke out over 18 months ago. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1427524711236308993"}"></div></p>
<h2>What the government should be doing</h2>
<p>Under <a href="https://docstore.ohchr.org/SelfServices/FilesHandler.ashx?enc=4slQ6QSmlBEDzFEovLCuW1AVC1NkPsgUedPlF1vfPMJ2c7ey6PAz2qaojTzDJmC0y%2B9t%2BsAtGDNzdEqA6SuP2r0w%2F6sVBGTpvTSCbiOr4XVFTqhQY65auTFbQRPWNDxL">international law</a>, nations have an obligation to ensure the right of access to “health facilities, goods and services” on a non-discriminatory basis. This includes access to vaccinations. </p>
<p>In March, international and regional human rights groups <a href="https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=26860&LangID=E">urged</a> governments to guarantee all migrants access to COVID vaccines on an equal basis with their citizens and regardless of nationality or migration status. </p>
<p>There is genuine concern, however that refugees in Australia will <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-05-23/can-refugees-asylums-seekers-in-australia-get-the-covid-vaccine/100135134">fall through the cracks</a>. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/with-billions-more-allocated-to-immigration-detention-its-another-bleak-year-for-refugees-160783">With billions more allocated to immigration detention, it's another bleak year for refugees</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Public health campaigns have not specifically targeted or engaged with those in immigration detention as part of the limited <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/ministers/the-hon-greg-hunt-mp/media/covid-19-vaccine-campaign-to-support-culturally-and-linguistically-diverse-audiences">$1.3 million in federal government funding</a> specifically earmarked for messaging to so-called “diverse” communities. </p>
<p>Earlier this month, an ABC report <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-08-12/covid-19-information-weeks-out-of-date/100369794">revealed</a> the government’s own translated vaccination information was almost eight weeks out of date. </p>
<p>The government should immediately respond to the danger of COVID infection in all sites of incarceration, including immigration detention. </p>
<p>This would involve the urgent release of refugees, asylum seekers and other non-citizens from detention as <a href="https://idcoalition.org/publication/covid-19-impacts-on-immigration-detention-global-responses/">numerous other countries</a> have done in response to the pandemic. At a bare minimum, the government should make vaccines available.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/166101/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anthea Vogl does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The largest immigration detention centre is located in a COVID hot spot in western Sydney. We need to make vaccinations for detainees and staff an urgent priority.Anthea Vogl, Senior lecturer, University of Technology SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1637252021-07-01T06:43:13Z2021-07-01T06:43:13ZWho’s being allowed to leave Australia during COVID? FOI data show it is murky and arbitrary<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/409246/original/file-20210701-19-167dmlw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=104%2C47%2C3258%2C1624&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Rick Rycroft/AP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>With outbreaks of COVID-19 in most states and territories, and low rates of vaccination, <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/thousands-enter-australia-for-holidays-and-business-as-wait-drags-for-stranded-locals-20210630-p585pd.html">concerns</a> have arisen again about who is being permitted to exit (and re-enter) the country. </p>
<p>Western Australia Premier Mark McGowan, for instance, <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/national/australia-news-live-nsw-wa-nt-and-queensland-turn-to-lockdown-measures-as-covid-19-cases-grow-across-nation-20210629-p585bu.html?post=p52et3">said</a> there should be stricter measures for people wanting to leave Australia “while there’s a pandemic running wild around the world because inevitably they want to come back”, posing a health risk to the community.</p>
<p>Questions have also been raised about where travellers are being permitted to go, and for what reasons. </p>
<p>Even though we are more than a year into the pandemic, the Commonwealth’s general prohibition on citizens and permanent residents leaving Australia remains in effect. Despite the passage of time and the increasingly widespread availability of vaccines, Australia is among a small number of countries that continues to rely on border restrictions as the primary pandemic response.</p>
<h2>What statistics from Home Affairs show</h2>
<p>We recently <a href="https://www.kaldorcentre.unsw.edu.au/sites/kaldorcentre.unsw.edu.au/files/Decision_FA_21.05.00347.pdf">obtained</a> <a href="https://www.kaldorcentre.unsw.edu.au/sites/kaldorcentre.unsw.edu.au/files/Document_released_FA_21_05_00347.pdf">detailed data</a> from the Department of Home Affairs through a Freedom of Information request that answer these questions. The statistics show who has been allowed to <a href="https://covid19.homeaffairs.gov.au/leaving-australia">leave Australia</a>, which countries they are going to, and why. </p>
<p>The data cover the period from August 1 2020 to April 25 2021, and reveal some concerning trends. </p>
<p>In particular, the figures show that while the top countries of intended destination were India (25,443 requests), followed by China (21,547) and the UK (15,703), approval rates to the UK (68%) were 22 percentage points higher than India (46%), and 11 points higher than China (59%). </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-airline-industry-hasnt-collapsed-but-thats-the-only-good-news-for-overseas-travel-158867">The airline industry hasn't collapsed, but that's the only good news for overseas travel</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This was at a time when the UK was experiencing a drastic <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/27/uk-covid-deaths-pass-150000-milestone-analysis-shows">second wave</a> of COVID-19 — but India’s second wave had only just begun. </p>
<p>The figures are reminiscent of <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/border-force-travel-rejection-rates-raise-racial-bias-questions-20210520-p57tjp.html">approval rates for travel exemptions to enter Australia</a>, which precipitated allegations of <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/border-force-travel-rejection-rates-raise-racial-bias-questions-20210520-p57tjp.html">racial bias</a> earlier this year. Those numbers were even more stark: only 7.17% of requests from India were approved, compared to 23.48% from the UK and 30.73% from South Africa.</p>
<h2>Who can leave Australia?</h2>
<p>Some people don’t require permission to leave Australia (and <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/whos-travelling-to-and-from-australia-and-why/13426710">are not counted</a> in the numbers above). </p>
<p>These include people who usually live overseas (as well as New Zealanders who ordinarily live here), aircraft crew or maintenance staff, freight workers, those who have “essential work at an offshore facility in Australian waters”, those travelling on official government business, and those travelling directly to New Zealand (who are not transiting from another country).</p>
<p>But most of us do need permission. Among the reasons would-be travellers <a href="https://covid19.homeaffairs.gov.au/leaving-australia">are able to leave the country</a>:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>it’s part of the response to the COVID-19 outbreak (including the provision of aid)</p></li>
<li><p>business-related</p></li>
<li><p>necessary to receive urgent medical treatment that is not available in Australia</p></li>
<li><p>for a compelling reason for three months or longer </p></li>
<li><p>for compelling or compassionate reasons</p></li>
<li><p>or in the national interest.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>Many of these concepts are very murky, and it is up to the decision-maker to determine the appropriate level of evidence required.</p>
<p>The data show that travelling overseas for a compelling reason for at least three months made up the vast majority of exemption approvals (71,249), while comparatively fewer requests were approved on compassionate and compelling grounds (28,391). By contrast, only 4,797 requests were approved for urgent and unavoidable personal business.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1410156356888260608"}"></div></p>
<p>Some of these numbers are still fuzzy due to category adjustments. For example, “travelling overseas for at least three months” was included in the “urgent and unavoidable personal business” category prior to September 30, 2020. </p>
<p>Similarly, on January 8, 2021, “travelling overseas for at least three months” became “travelling overseas for a compelling reason for at least three months”. </p>
<p>We were unable to calculate the percentage of approvals from this data because no reason was available for a sizeable number of requests (25,966). </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/theres-a-ban-on-leaving-australia-under-covid-19-who-can-get-an-exemption-to-go-overseas-and-how-145089">There's a ban on leaving Australia under COVID-19. Who can get an exemption to go overseas? And how?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Objective decision-making?</h2>
<p>Although the Australian Border Force has released an <a href="https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/covid-19/Documents/outward-travel-restrictions-operation-directive.pdf">operational directive</a> to clarify how departure exemptions are granted, the data we obtained suggest the thresholds for decision-making are not as systematic (or objective) as desired.</p>
<p>In the period we examined, officials assessed 208,791 exemption requests and approved 119,922 applications. A further 17,017 requests were deemed not to require an individual exemption. </p>
<p>This means roughly 65% of requests were either approved or deemed not to require an exemption. </p>
<p>However, anyone granted an exemption to travel to India who had not yet left by early May had it revoked, following “expert health advice” that considered India a high-risk COVID-19 country. </p>
<p>Similar travel bans were not enacted for other countries — including the UK and US — despite the fact that, as of October 16 2020, the <a href="https://www.health.gov.au/news/health-alerts/novel-coronavirus-2019-ncov-health-alert/coronavirus-covid-19-restrictions/coronavirus-covid-19-advice-for-international-travellers">Department of Health</a> has considered travellers arriving from any country besides New Zealand to be high risk.</p>
<h2>Policy being made behind closed doors</h2>
<p>In short, these data reveal the arbitrary nature of exit requests being granted or denied. It rings true with the anecdotal evidence we have heard from lawyers trying to assist people to leave, as well as would-be travellers themselves. </p>
<p>Much depends on who the decision-maker is in Home Affairs or the Australian Border Force, how they choose to exercise their discretion, and — based on these figures — where the person wants to go and for how long. </p>
<p>Without the opportunity for appeal, there is no independent review of how the factors are weighed, and little, if any oversight of the decisions being reached.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/we-need-to-restart-immigration-quickly-to-drive-economic-growth-heres-one-way-to-do-it-safely-147744">We need to restart immigration quickly to drive economic growth. Here's one way to do it safely</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>When viewed alongside the barriers preventing the return home of thousands of Australian citizens and permanent residents, the highly variable rates of exit permissions suggest an arbitrariness stemming, in part, from the fact that both individual and policy decisions are being made behind closed doors. </p>
<p>While the Commonwealth, state and territory governments consistently premise their decisions on “the medical advice”, there is not always uniform consensus among medical experts. </p>
<p>Indeed, we have seen in the past week how slippery that notion can be — especially when the prime minister decides to make a unilateral decision about access to vaccines. Governments are effectively making political decisions dressed up as scientific ones, without any oversight from parliament or the public.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/163725/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Regina Jefferies is affiliated with the Andrew & Renata Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jane McAdam receives funding from the Australian Research Council, including for a project examining internal border controls during epidemics.</span></em></p>More than two-thirds of requests to go to the UK were approved, compared to just 46% for trips to India and 59% to China.Regina Jefferies, Affiliate, Andrew and Renata Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law, UNSW SydneyJane McAdam, Scientia Professor and Director of the Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1580652021-03-30T18:54:46Z2021-03-30T18:54:46ZWill new Home Affairs Minister Karen Andrews bring a more compassionate approach?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/392433/original/file-20210330-13-lyx3qj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Mick Tsikas</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Perhaps optimistically, Scott Morrison hopes his belated moves to involve women more formally in decision-making will arrest his government’s slumping fortunes, and grant space for other priorities.</p>
<p>Weeks of mealy-mouthedness in the face of horrendous claims of misogyny, boorishness, and even alleged sexual assault in Parliament House, had begun to take their toll. Morrison’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/morrisons-ratings-take-a-hit-in-newspoll-as-coalition-notionally-loses-a-seat-in-redistribution-158048">approval ratings have slid</a> and put his government behind Labor on two-party preferred in recent Newspoll surveys.</p>
<p>Before then, <a href="https://theconversation.com/embattled-albanese-uses-reshuffle-for-a-political-reset-154168">pressure had been mounting</a> on Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese, amid fears within Labor of a possible spring election. Nobody’s worrying about that anymore.</p>
<p>Monday’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-morrison-sets-up-his-own-womens-network-but-will-it-produce-the-policy-goods-158072">female-friendly cabinet reshuffle</a> was the first significant concession from the prime minister that he faced something wholly more substantial than a common-or-garden governmental crisis. This was not some routine controversy to be managed, spun, and outlasted.</p>
<p>In politics, messages are important. The most significant messages in the reshuffle were the demotion of Attorney-General Christian Porter and the elevation of the Industry and Science Minister, Karen Andrews, to the hawkishly masculine, security-heavy mega-ministry of home affairs.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-morrison-sets-up-his-own-womens-network-but-will-it-produce-the-policy-goods-158072">View from The Hill: Morrison sets up his own women's network but will it produce the policy goods?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Naturally quiet, Andrews is no household name.</p>
<p>As a Queenslander, she is a member of the colourfully conservative LNP, along with more bombastic alpha-males such as Peter Dutton, George Christensen, Matt Canavan, and Andrew Laming.</p>
<p>Yet for all their jaw-jutting, Andrews has impressed stakeholders in her industry sector. She has also attracted attention in the parliament for being both uncommonly capable, and refreshingly unpolitical.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/392492/original/file-20210330-15-1f4at2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/392492/original/file-20210330-15-1f4at2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392492/original/file-20210330-15-1f4at2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392492/original/file-20210330-15-1f4at2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392492/original/file-20210330-15-1f4at2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392492/original/file-20210330-15-1f4at2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392492/original/file-20210330-15-1f4at2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Karen Andrews takes over from Peter Dutton in home affairs, while Dutton moves to defence.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Mick Tsikas</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>However, competence is hardly a guarantee of promotion in Canberra. It can even be a liability. Indeed, not being a partisan attack dog can mean forgoing notoriety, and the phalanx of party true-believers that comes with it.</p>
<p>So while Morrison has sent the signal about upping the female participation in his executive, Andrews would certainly have made it had merit been the only selection criterion.</p>
<p>Breaking through glass ceilings is familiar territory for the 60-year-old former small business owner. In 1983, she joined another female student at the Queensland University of Technology to become the first females to receive a bachelor of mechanical engineering.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1350704675767500803"}"></div></p>
<p>But all eyes now are on what her stewardship of the powerful home affairs ministry will mean for the government. More importantly, there will be much interest in what it might mean for asylum seekers and refugees, and the plethora of legal and security issues attaching to the Australian Federal Police, Australian Border Force, immigration and settlement services, cyber-security, and other agencies.</p>
<p>Interest in her appointment is doubly spiced by the fact she replaces Dutton, the unrivalled hard man of the Morrison government and leader of the parliamentary Liberal Party’s national right grouping.</p>
<p>Dutton has been a lightning rod for criticism, most notably for his uncompromising approach to asylum seekers, and his outspoken attacks on the political left.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/scores-of-medevac-refugees-have-been-released-from-detention-their-freedom-though-remains-tenuous-156952">Scores of medevac refugees have been released from detention. Their freedom, though, remains tenuous</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Ahead of his move to defence, a portfolio he is known to have coveted, Dutton indicated he was considering <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/insiders-on-the-outer/news-story/afe1c64207efd1b5284e1b1ac832cdb8">possible defamation remedies</a> for a slew of attacks on social media sites such as Twitter and Facebook.</p>
<p>Andrews has declined to comment on the possibility of bringing a more compassionate approach to refugee applications and deportations. But she has nominated one area that will be of interest to women and to Dutton, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulvQkTaj2V0">telling Sky News</a> on Tuesday she wants to address the scourge of online disrespect – particularly by anonymous people:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>[I] will certainly be taking an active interest and engaging as much as I possibly can on that issue.</p>
<p>Look, social media has significant challenges, one of those issues is the level of anonymity. We need to make it very clear that people can’t hide or should not be allowed to hide on these social media platforms so absolutely I will be taking a very close look at that.</p>
</blockquote>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/392491/original/file-20210330-23-1an8dxp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/392491/original/file-20210330-23-1an8dxp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=918&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392491/original/file-20210330-23-1an8dxp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=918&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392491/original/file-20210330-23-1an8dxp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=918&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392491/original/file-20210330-23-1an8dxp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1154&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392491/original/file-20210330-23-1an8dxp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1154&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/392491/original/file-20210330-23-1an8dxp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1154&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Murugappan family has been held on Christmas Island since August 2019.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/supplied</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Top of mind for many, though, is the <a href="https://theconversation.com/its-time-to-give-visas-to-the-biloela-tamil-family-and-other-asylum-seekers-stuck-in-the-system-155354">Biloela asylum seeker case</a>, in which a Tamil family of four has spent more than 1,000 days in immigration detention initially in Melbourne, and since August 2019, on Christmas Island.</p>
<p>Dutton’s department has been desperate to deport Nades and Priya Murugappan and their Australian-born daughters, Kopika and Tharnicaa, but has been blocked by successive legal proceedings.</p>
<p>Advocates for the family say the deportation is cruel and the detention is unconscionable, especially in view of the willingness of the Biloela community in rural Queensland to host the family’s return.</p>
<p>While human rights groups will be looking for signs Andrews intends to soften the Dutton approach, she has refused to comment before extensive briefings.</p>
<p>Australia’s notoriously tough suite of border policies may be in for a more compassionate, case-by-case interpretation. It is possible changes could go beyond that and into broader policy.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/morrisons-ratings-take-a-hit-in-newspoll-as-coalition-notionally-loses-a-seat-in-redistribution-158048">Morrison's ratings take a hit in Newspoll as Coalition notionally loses a seat in redistribution</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>On the other hand, it is important to remember the trophy in the PM’s office, which rather crassly proclaims, “I stopped these”, above an unmistakable silhouette of an Asian fishing boat.</p>
<p>As a former immigration minister, Morrison is critically aware of how the Coalition’s harsh policies allowed it to position Labor as “soft” on borders.</p>
<p>Populist though it is, it is not an electoral advantage that Morrison, nor for that matter Dutton as a still influential cabinet figure, will surrender lightly.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/158065/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mark Kenny does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>For the first time, a woman has been appointed to the hawkishly masculine home affairs portfolio. Whether this will bring a change of approach on asylum seekers and other issues remains to be seen.Mark Kenny, Professor, Australian Studies Institute, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1569522021-03-21T18:51:02Z2021-03-21T18:51:02ZScores of medevac refugees have been released from detention. Their freedom, though, remains tenuous<p>Over 100 refugees have been abruptly and quietly released from immigration detention in <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/like-flying-dozens-more-refugees-released-from-hotel-detention-in-melbourne-20210121-p56vr3.html">Melbourne</a>, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/mar/01/calls-for-refugees-released-from-brisbane-hotel-detention-to-be-given-emergency-housing">Brisbane</a> and <a href="https://www.9news.com.au/national/iranian-refugee-family-who-has-spent-the-last-eight-years-in-detention-has-been-released-from-darwin-hotel-room/23480477-184d-4478-a978-04dd60691803">Darwin</a> hotels since early 2021. These releases are welcome and long overdue, following a sustained public campaign for their freedom. </p>
<p>But their newly gained freedom remains conditional and their futures uncertain. What’s more, many other refugees who were also transferred to Australia from offshore detention for medical treatment have <a href="https://rac-vic.org/media-releases/">yet to be released</a>. </p>
<p>This raises serious concerns for the ongoing welfare of the refugees — those now in the community and those still in detention. </p>
<p>It also raises questions about the arbitrary, non-transparent and even cruel nature of ministerial decision-making when it comes to who is released and who isn’t.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1371372400374280195"}"></div></p>
<h2>Why release these refugees now?</h2>
<p>To date, the Department of Home Affairs has not provided any official rationale for the timing of these releases. Nor have they outlined any criteria or policy explaining the decisions to grant some refugees temporary visas to live in the Australian community and not others. </p>
<p>By our estimation, about 80 people transferred under the now-repealed <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/dec/04/medevac-repeal-bill-passes-after-jacqui-lambie-makes-secret-deal-with-coalition">medevac legislation</a> remain in detention. But it is hard to get precise figures due to lags and gaps in government <a href="https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/research-and-stats/files/immigration-detention-statistics-31-january-2021.pdf">statistics</a> and its longstanding <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13642987.2016.1196903">lack of transparency</a>. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/hotels-are-no-luxury-place-to-detain-people-seeking-asylum-in-australia-134544">Hotels are no 'luxury' place to detain people seeking asylum in Australia</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In January, Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton explained the initial releases as a cost-saving measure, stating it was “<a href="https://minister.homeaffairs.gov.au/peterdutton/Pages/ray-hadley-21012021.aspx">cheaper</a>” for people to live in the community than in a hotel. </p>
<p>While this has long been true, it seems a hollow line from a government that continues to maintain a policy of offshore detention in Nauru and Papua New Guinea to the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/dec/11/budget-blowouts-offshore-processing-costs-12bn-for-fewer-than-300-people">cost</a> of over $1.2 billion per year (that’s roughly $4 million per person this financial year).</p>
<p>Sadly, refugees are <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/dec/15/playing-games-with-us-the-medevac-men-languishing-in-hotel-detention-for-almost-two-years">all too used</a> to the inconsistent and arbitrary use of power under Australia’s migration laws. </p>
<p>Under federal law, the minister <a href="http://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ma1958118/s195a.html">can</a> issue a visa to any non-citizen in immigration detention at any time. This even applies to people who have been transferred from offshore detention for medical reasons and are <a href="http://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ma1958118/s46b.html">prohibited</a> from applying for any visa while in Australia.</p>
<p>Yet, even at the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic last year, Dutton largely refused to issue temporary visas to people from immigration detention. This was despite the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/mar/24/we-are-sitting-ducks-for-covid-19-asylum-seekers-write-to-pm-after-detainee-tested-in-immigration-detention">impossibility</a> of social distancing and <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1741659020946178">heightened risk</a> of infection for people detained in prisons, immigration detention and hotels.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/a-covid-vaccine-passport-may-further-disadvantage-refugees-and-asylum-seekers-155287">A COVID 'vaccine passport' may further disadvantage refugees and asylum seekers</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In fact, Dutton fought tooth and nail to stop the courts from ordering the release of refugees from detention. This included <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/melbourne-immigration-detainee-to-be-forcibly-flown-to-wa-after-losing-coronavirus-court-battle">forcibly moving</a> an elderly man to a Western Australian detention centre rather than release him to live with his family in Melbourne. </p>
<p>It is highly likely the decision to release people from hotel detention now is in response to political pressure and social mobilisation.</p>
<p>Refugees in hotel detention have <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/mantra-refugees-transferred-to-former-covid-19-quarantine-hotel-20201217-p56nmb.html">persistently</a> drawn attention to their incarceration through social media, community protests and with the support of high-profile advocates like former footballer <a href="https://theathletic.com/2397908/2021/03/07/craig-foster-the-former-footballer-saving-refugees-and-asylum-seekers-lives/">Craig Foster</a>. Some have filed lawsuits to challenge the <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-03-03/medevac-cases-falling-into-black-hole-federal-court-judge/13211422">legality</a> of their detention. </p>
<p>This mobilisation has seemed to work in their favour, at least in the short term. </p>
<h2>Freedom yet abandonment</h2>
<p>Release from hotel detention has brought enormous <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-01-20/victoria-medevac-detainees-released-from-melbourne-park-hotel/13074722">relief</a> and joy for the refugees. It comes after more than eight years of <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3392128">physical confinement and legal limbo</a> in offshore detention, and over one year in detention in Australia without visitors or <a href="https://arena.org.au/not-the-hilton-vernacular-violence-in-covid-19-quarantine-and-detention-hotels/">even access to fresh air</a>. </p>
<p>But their new reality is now complex. Their freedom is neither guaranteed, nor accompanied by the necessary financial and social support. They are living precariously. </p>
<p>The government has reportedly given each person <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/mar/01/calls-for-refugees-released-from-brisbane-hotel-detention-to-be-given-emergency-housing">up to six weeks</a> of support, including motel accommodation and income support payments, as well as limited casework support. </p>
<p>When this support runs out, these men will effectively be abandoned to fend for themselves. They must either pay for government-provided accommodation or find their own private accommodation. They must also pay for any non-subsidised medical costs out of their own pockets, a difficult proposition for some people with complex medical needs. </p>
<p>This pattern is <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3601191">not new</a>. Increasingly, some countries are actively withdrawing support for asylum seekers and undocumented migrants to make conditions so miserable they surrender their right to seek asylum. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/could-the-biden-administration-pressure-australia-to-adopt-more-humane-refugee-policies-153718">Could the Biden administration pressure Australia to adopt more humane refugee policies?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>As Kurdish writer Behrouz Boochani, who is now living in New Zealand, has <a href="https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/opinion/topic/2018/08/11/manus-prison-theory/15339096006690#hrd">commented</a>, this <a href="https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/research-subject-groups/centre-criminology/centreborder-criminologies/blog/2019/07/active-neglect">neglect</a> often leads refugees to a “point of hopelessness”, pushing them to “finally decide to return to their country of origin”.</p>
<p>Since their release this year, the medevac refugees have largely relied on support from private individuals (including crowdfunding) and NGOs. The government’s policy is effectively confining them to precarity, dependency and impoverishment in our community. </p>
<p>In response to detailed questions about the refugee release and support systems in place to assist them, a spokesperson for Home Affairs said, </p>
<blockquote>
<p>The Australian Government remains committed to regional processing and third country resettlement for persons under these arrangements. Government policy is steadfast – persons under regional processing arrangements will not settle permanently in Australia.</p>
<p>Transitory persons were brought to Australia temporarily to receive medical treatment. Their temporary stay in Australia is not a pathway to settlement.</p>
<p>Status Resolution Support Services (SRSS) providers have been engaged to provide short-term support including case worker support to link individuals to essential services and accommodation. </p>
</blockquote>
<h2>An uncertain future</h2>
<p>For now, the released refugees have been granted what are known as “<a href="https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/visas/getting-a-visa/visa-listing/bridging-visa-e-050-051">final departure Bridging Visa Es</a>”. These are usually granted for a six-month period and there is no guarantee they will be renewed. </p>
<p>This visa usually gives people work rights. But finding a job in the current economic climate, coupled with their lack of employment histories after years of detention, make this a herculean ask.</p>
<p>The temporary visa also formally requires people to make arrangements to depart Australia. Home Affairs has said the released refugees have three options: </p>
<ul>
<li><p>resettlement in the US (a virtually impossible option limited to a select few) </p></li>
<li><p>return to their country of origin </p></li>
<li><p>return to Nauru or PNG. </p></li>
</ul>
<p>Yet, none of these are feasible long-term solutions. Most of the people have been officially recognised as refugees, so they cannot safely return to their home states. Countries <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/mar/15/iran-refuses-to-take-back-asylum-seekers-who-have-been-forcibly-returned">like Iran</a> also refuse to accept involuntary returns. </p>
<p>Lacking any other options, two refugees <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-03-18/tamil-medevac-refugees-return-to-nauru-from-darwin-detention/13248378">chose to return</a> to Nauru last week. But those who take this path remain vulnerable due to a lack of adequate medical care and, in the case of PNG, a <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-catastrophe-looms-with-pngs-covid-crisis-australia-needs-to-respond-urgently-156953">spiralling COVID crisis</a>.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1372405398284603394"}"></div></p>
<p>Given this, the temporary nature of these visas means the threat of future re-detention or deportation is an ongoing risk. This sense of uncertainty is heightened by the mandate that released refugees sign a pernicious <a href="https://www.crimejusticejournal.com/article/view/1690">code of behaviour</a>.</p>
<p>And to date, many medevac refugees remain in detention in Australia, causing them even more distress. In the <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-03-02/four-refugees-detained-in-darwin-hotel-released/13206642">words</a> of Refugee Voices spokesman Ahmad Hakim: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>They are just seeking answers why have they been left there and others are out. They feel it is a type of torture by Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton, to break them down more.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The pandemic offered a <a href="https://theconversation.com/with-our-borders-shut-this-is-the-ideal-time-to-overhaul-our-asylum-seeker-policies-146016">chance</a> to reset Australia’s cruelty towards refugees and other temporary migrants, including through a large-scale <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-covid-vaccine-passport-may-further-disadvantage-refugees-and-asylum-seekers-155287">immigration amnesty</a>. </p>
<p>Releasing refugees from detention on temporary visas is a missed opportunity to give them a <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/they-are-human-beings-released-medevac-detainees-call-for-permanent-resettlement-option-for-refugees">permanent</a> home and stable future.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/156952/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sara Dehm is a national co-convenor of Academics for Refugees.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Claire Loughnan is a research partner with the Comparative Network on the Externalisation of Refugee Policies, and is a co-convenor of the University of Melbourne Branch of Academics for Refugees</span></em></p>Those who have been released have little financial or social support, confining them to lives of precarity, dependency and impoverishment in our community.Sara Dehm, Lecturer, University of Technology SydneyClaire Loughnan, Lecturer, School of Social and Political Sciences, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1460162020-09-15T07:09:39Z2020-09-15T07:09:39ZWith our borders shut, this is the ideal time to overhaul our asylum seeker policies<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/358051/original/file-20200915-16-1s0fe2v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=97%2C59%2C4351%2C3513&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Darren England/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>It is virtually impossible for anyone to travel to Australia at the moment due to COVID-19 restrictions — let alone those seeking asylum. But even before the pandemic, it was very difficult for asylum seekers to make their way here.</p>
<p>With our borders completely shut, this is an opportune time to reflect on what our asylum seeker policy could look like in a post-pandemic world. </p>
<p>Completely closing our borders to those in need of protection is neither sustainable nor defensible as long-term policy. Australia cannot expect other countries to step up and provide protection while we turn our backs to those in need.</p>
<h2>Our current system is arbitrary and ad hoc</h2>
<p>The major political parties have made it clear they do not want to see asylum seekers coming to Australia by boats again. But it is hypocritical to take such a position without providing alternative safe pathways for asylum seekers to get here.</p>
<p>One such pathway is air travel. Before the pandemic, it was possible for people who qualified for tourist, student or other types of visas to fly to Australia and subsequently apply for protection.</p>
<p>But those coming by plane typically faced pre-screening and were often denied boarding – precisely because they fit the profile of someone who might claim asylum. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/FG62PR6prYs?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>At Australian airports, border officials also use a highly discretionary system to identify and cancel the visas of potential asylum seekers before even considering their protection claims. This places these individuals at serious risk of refoulement to persecution or other serious harm. </p>
<p>This process has resulted in refugees being handcuffed and detained, simply for raising a protection claim in the airport. Some are only detained briefly and promptly placed on a flight home, while others spend months or years in immigration detention while their claims are assessed. </p>
<p>These policies not only prioritise removal or visa cancellation over protection, but actually serve as a disincentive for people to apply for protection at the airport. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/358053/original/file-20200915-24-1xl6n0a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/358053/original/file-20200915-24-1xl6n0a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=432&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358053/original/file-20200915-24-1xl6n0a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=432&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358053/original/file-20200915-24-1xl6n0a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=432&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358053/original/file-20200915-24-1xl6n0a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=543&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358053/original/file-20200915-24-1xl6n0a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=543&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358053/original/file-20200915-24-1xl6n0a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=543&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">It’s been seven years since Australia started transferring asylum seekers who arrive by boat to offshore detention facilities.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Darren England/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Ensuring access to protection</h2>
<p>With COVID-19, we have a rare opportunity for a policy reset. Maintaining the integrity of the system is important, and we do not dispute the need to have systems in place to fairly and efficiently distinguish between those who need protection and those who do not. </p>
<p>The problem is the discretionary nature of the present system has given rise to an arbitrary approach that places too much power in the hands of border enforcement officials with no background or training in identifying people in need of protection. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-refugees-succeed-in-visa-reviews-new-research-reveals-the-factors-that-matter-131763">How refugees succeed in visa reviews: new research reveals the factors that matter</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In our new <a href="https://www.kaldorcentre.unsw.edu.au/sites/default/files/Policy_Brief_9_Airports.pdf">policy brief</a> for UNSW’s Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law, we make several recommendations for how to improve the system.</p>
<p>First, we argue people’s visas should not be cancelled while they are in immigration clearance solely because they seek to lodge a protection claim in Australia. </p>
<p>This a breach of the <a href="https://www.unhcr.org/en-au/1951-refugee-convention.html">UN Refugee Convention</a>, which prohibits penalising asylum seekers for “irregular entry or presence” in a country where they are looking for protection. It also goes against the principles of non-discrimination in international human rights law. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/358055/original/file-20200915-20-1qprenj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/358055/original/file-20200915-20-1qprenj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358055/original/file-20200915-20-1qprenj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358055/original/file-20200915-20-1qprenj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358055/original/file-20200915-20-1qprenj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358055/original/file-20200915-20-1qprenj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358055/original/file-20200915-20-1qprenj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The current process for evaluating asylum claims at airports is arbitrary and unfairly harsh.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">BRENDAN ESPOSITO/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>We also argue Australia should pass new legislation to improve screening procedures for asylum seekers at airports, including these changes:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>applicants should be interviewed by a trained official from the humanitarian program section of the Department of Home Affairs.</p></li>
<li><p>the threshold for referring applicants to the full asylum procedures should be set low. Only those who are clearly not refugees or whose claims are clearly fraudulent should be screened out at the airport.</p></li>
<li><p>applicants should have access to legal advice, competent interpreters and
officials from UNHCR during both the preliminary decision and review stages. Asylum seekers who raise a protection claim at the airport should be informed of this right and given help to seek such assistance.</p></li>
<li><p>detention should only be used as a last resort. If it is required, it should be for the shortest time necessary, proportionate and subject to regular independent review.</p></li>
<li><p>applicants should not be removed from Australia until their protection claims have been finally determined, including any available judicial review.</p></li>
</ul>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/refugees-need-protection-from-coronavirus-too-and-must-be-released-136961">Refugees need protection from coronavirus too, and must be released</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Better tracking of people being turned away</h2>
<p>In addition to these changes to the screening process, it’s imperative airlines are not fined for carrying passengers who ultimately receive protection in Australia.</p>
<p>And the Department of Home Affairs needs to improve its data collection practices to start recording reasons for visa cancellations — both within and outside Australia — as well as outcomes of all screening decisions.</p>
<p>This should include establishing a method for recording all protection claims made at or before immigration clearance, and recording all removals of travellers “screened out” after making a protection claim.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/people-are-crying-and-begging-the-human-cost-of-forced-relocations-in-immigration-detention-132193">'People are crying and begging': the human cost of forced relocations in immigration detention</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The government <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-dont-know-how-many-asylum-seekers-are-turned-away-at-australian-airports-111344">has conceded</a> it does not accurately collect such data. This information is critical to assessing the extent to which Australia is complying with its domestic and international obligations.</p>
<p>Australia cannot permanently keep its borders shut to asylum seekers. It’s not only inhumane, but it also goes against our obligations under international refugee and human rights law. When travel to Australia resumes, we need to prioritise protection over deflection and removal.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/146016/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Daniel Ghezelbash is a member of the management committee of Refugee Advice and Casework Services and a Special Counsel at the National Justice Project.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Asher Hirsch is a Senior Policy Officer with the Refugee Council of Australia.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Regina Jefferies is an affiliate of the Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law. </span></em></p>Denying protection to asylum seekers is neither sustainable nor defensible as long-term policy. Here are ways to make the screening process at airports more just when the borders do reopen.Daniel Ghezelbash, Associate Professor, Macquarie UniversityAsher Hirsch, Sessional Lecturer and PhD Candidate, Monash UniversityRegina Jefferies, Affiliate, Andrew and Renata Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1388272020-05-19T07:09:45Z2020-05-19T07:09:45ZAustralia doesn’t need more anti-terror laws that aren’t necessary – or even used<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/335975/original/file-20200519-83375-4llefm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mick Tsikas/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/may/13/asio-could-question-children-and-more-easily-use-more-tracking-devices-under-new-powers">has introduced a new bill</a> that will amend the controversial questioning and detention powers held by the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO).</p>
<p>While some changes are welcome, others are a cause for concern. One major change is that the legislation will allow ASIO officers to coercively question children as young as 14. </p>
<p>For this bill to be passed, Home Affairs must offer a stronger justification as to why the expanded powers are needed in the current security climate.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-has-enacted-82-anti-terror-laws-since-2001-but-tough-laws-alone-cant-eliminate-terrorism-123521">Australia has enacted 82 anti-terror laws since 2001. But tough laws alone can't eliminate terrorism</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Calls for new counter-terrorism powers have become commonplace in Australia, to the point where we now have <a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-has-enacted-82-anti-terror-laws-since-2001-but-tough-laws-alone-cant-eliminate-terrorism-123521">more than 80 laws</a> directed at the threat of terrorism. </p>
<p>Any call for additional powers should be met with careful scrutiny, particularly when the rights of children are at stake.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1260385609102749698"}"></div></p>
<h2>Repealing controversial detention powers</h2>
<p>One of the biggest changes in the bill is that it would repeal ASIO’s power to detain people for questioning. Currently, ASIO has the power to seek a <a href="http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/cth/consol_act/asioa1979472/s34g.html">questioning and detention warrant</a> (QDW) that allows people to be <a href="http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/cth/consol_act/asioa1979472/s34s.html">detained for up to one week</a>. Detention can be approved if a person is likely to fail to appear for questioning, alert someone involved in terrorism, or tamper with evidence. </p>
<p>During that period, a person can be questioned in eight-hour blocks up to a <a href="http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/cth/consol_act/asioa1979472/s34r.html">maximum of 24 hours</a>. This is purely an intelligence-gathering exercise, and is not related to any investigation for a criminal offence. The questioning can be <a href="http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/cth/consol_act/asioa1979472/s34g.html">approved</a> if it would </p>
<blockquote>
<p>substantially assist the collection of intelligence that is important in relation to a terrorism offence</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The questioning is coercive, in that a person faces <a href="http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/cth/consol_act/asioa1979472/s34l.html">five years in prison</a> for failing to answer any of ASIO’s questions. The powers are also highly secretive: it’s <a href="http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/cth/consol_act/asioa1979472/s34zs.html">five years in prison</a> for anyone who reveals anything about a warrant.</p>
<p>These powers are some of Australia’s most controversial anti-terror laws, as <a href="http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/MelbULawRw/2012/11.html">no democratic country</a> has granted its domestic intelligence agency the same power to detain people for questioning.</p>
<p>Reviews by the <a href="https://www.inslm.gov.au/reviews-reports/certain-questioning-and-detention-powers-relation-terorism">Independent National Security Legislation Monitor</a>, the <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Intelligence_and_Security/ASIO/Report">Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security</a> and the <a href="https://www.ag.gov.au/Consultations/Documents/COAGCTReview/Final%20Report.PDF">COAG review</a> of counter-terrorism legislation have all recommended this power be repealed. Such a move would be welcome.</p>
<h2>Expanded powers to question minors</h2>
<p>At the same time, the <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r6554">bill</a> will expand ASIO’s power to seek questioning warrants (QWs). These trigger all the same questioning processes and criminal offences as QDWs, they just don’t allow ASIO to detain the person outside the questioning period.</p>
<p>If the bill passes, QWs will be split into “adult questioning warrants” and “minor questioning warrants”. Minor questioning warrants will be available for children as young as 14 who are “likely to engage in” politically motivated violence. </p>
<p>This significantly widens the current thresholds. QWs are currently available for 16-year-olds only when the attorney-general is satisfied the person “<a href="http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/cth/consol_act/asioa1979472/s34ze.html">will commit, is committing or has committed a terrorism offence</a>”.</p>
<p>Some additional safeguards will protect minors under the new measures. Before issuing a questioning warrant, for instance, the attorney-general will need to consider the “best interests” of the child. </p>
<p>This is consistent with international law requirements and <a href="https://theconversation.com/control-orders-for-kids-wont-make-us-any-safer-49074">Australia’s expanded control order regime</a>, which can include electronic tagging and curfews.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/control-orders-for-kids-wont-make-us-any-safer-49074">Control orders for kids won't make us any safer</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Under the proposed laws, a young person can only be questioned in blocks of two hours or less, and a lawyer must be present during all questioning.</p>
<p>However, restrictions currently placed on lawyers will be retained. Lawyers, whether acting for young people or adults, are <a href="http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/cth/consol_act/asioa1979472/s34zq.html">not allowed to intervene in questioning</a>, except to clarify an ambiguous question. They can even be kicked out of the room, and a new lawyer appointed, if they “unduly” disrupt the questioning.</p>
<p>These restrictions will significantly undermine the ability of lawyers to protect children from any forceful or inappropriate questioning by ASIO officers.</p>
<h2>Are the changes even needed?</h2>
<p>Dutton has justified the proposed changes by claiming Australia faces a <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-05-14/peter-dutton-introduces-bill-giving-asio-powers-to-talk-to-teens/12246886">significant threat of terrorism from young people</a>. While we cannot know the intelligence on which this assessment is based, the urgent need for these changes is doubtful.</p>
<p>The statistics show that questioning warrants are used very rarely. The <a href="https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/committees/reportjnt/024080/toc_pdf/ASIO'squestioninganddetentionpowers.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">last QW was issued in 2010</a>, and the last one before that in 2006. </p>
<p>Only 16 QWs have ever been issued since their introduction in 2003, and <a href="https://www.asio.gov.au/2018-19-annual-report.html">none since the threat from Islamic State</a> emerged. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-quest-for-national-security-is-undermining-the-courts-and-could-lead-to-secretive-trials-122638">Australia's quest for national security is undermining the courts and could lead to secretive trials</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Given this record, it is difficult to see how QWs for 14-year-olds are suddenly needed to prevent acts of terrorism.</p>
<p>Indeed, in a <a href="https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/committees/reportjnt/024080/toc_pdf/ASIO'squestioninganddetentionpowers.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf">recent PJCIS inquiry</a>, ASIO explained their lack of use by saying the powers were difficult to approve on a short timeframe. This made them not very useful for the kinds of low-tech attacks seen in recent years, such as stabbings and shootings, which require little advance planning.</p>
<p>If the new powers are passed in the bill, they should at least be sunsetted to expire after three years, rather than the proposed ten. Without this amendment, more extraordinary counter-terrorism powers will be on Australia’s statute books for the foreseeable future.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/138827/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Keiran Hardy does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Some changes in the new security bill submitted to parliament last week are welcome, but others require careful scrutiny, especially when the rights of children are at stake.Keiran Hardy, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Griffith Criminology Institute, Griffith UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1321932020-03-02T00:06:49Z2020-03-02T00:06:49Z‘People are crying and begging’: the human cost of forced relocations in immigration detention<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/316989/original/file-20200225-24701-1cbgddo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">RICHARD WAINWRIGHT/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Between July 2018 and August 2019, the Home Affairs Department <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Senate_estimates/legcon/2019-20_Supplementary_Budget_Estimates">spent A$6.1m</a> flying refugees, asylum seekers and other immigration detainees around Australia. </p>
<p>This figure includes $5.7 million for charter flights and $400,000 for commercial flights with airlines like <a href="https://accr.org.au/2019/08/28/international-investor-backs-qantas-human-rights-resolution/">Qantas</a>. It does not include the cost of keeping planes on standby and transporting staff who accompany detainees. Neither does it include the cost of transporting detainees by road.</p>
<p>Details of these and other expenses have led <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/jan/29/home-affairs-department-racked-up-61m-bill-transferring-refugees-and-asylum-seekers">Labor to ask why minister Peter Dutton’s departmental costs continue to rise</a>. Given revelations the government spent <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/christmas-island-detention-centre-cost-27-million-to-detain-four-people">$26.8 million</a> reopening Christmas Island detention centre to hold <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-the-biloela-tamil-family-deportation-case-highlights-the-failures-of-our-refugee-system-123685">a single family</a> last year, this is a pressing question. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-the-biloela-tamil-family-deportation-case-highlights-the-failures-of-our-refugee-system-123685">How the Biloela Tamil family deportation case highlights the failures of our refugee system</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Yet deeper questions about what these relocations involve and how they affect detainees and their supporters have been largely ignored. As a researcher studying immigration detention, I can attest forced relocations impose profound human costs. </p>
<p>Over the past five years, I have conducted over 70 interviews with regular visitors to Australia’s onshore immigration detention centres. Speaking with volunteers and advocates, as well as detainees’ friends and family members, I have collected witness accounts of <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1440783318796301">conditions and practices within the system</a>.
A constant theme in these interviews has been <a href="https://academic.oup.com/jrs/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/jrs/fez069/5570305?redirectedFrom=fulltext">the harm caused by involuntary transfers</a>. </p>
<h2>How many forced transfers are occurring</h2>
<p>When we think of immigration detention centres, we often imagine places of confinement. This is accurate, but it is not the full picture. </p>
<p>Refugees and asylum seekers in Australia’s onshore detention system are held in <a href="https://academic.oup.com/rsq/advance-article/doi/10.1093/rsq/hdy008/5048429">prison-like facilities</a> on the outskirts of our capital cities or – in the case of <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/jan/26/inside-christmas-island-the-australian-detention-centre-with-four-asylum-seekers-and-a-26m-price-tag">Christmas Island</a> and Yongah Hill in Western Australia – in remote parts of the country. </p>
<p>In December 2019, there were at least <a href="https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/research-and-stats/files/immigration-detention-statistics-31-december-2019.pdf">504 refugees and asylum seekers</a> within the system, as well as hundreds of other immigration detainees, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/sep/08/i-was-petrified-the-new-zealanders-deported-from-australia-despite-decades-working-there">including those about to be deported</a>. Detention can last months or even <a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/12/refugee-diaries-10-years-immigration-detention-australia-191228024730946.html">years</a>. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-people-in-immigration-detention-try-to-cope-with-life-in-limbo-106645">How people in immigration detention try to cope with life in limbo</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>As monotonous as detention can be, detainees are not allowed to become comfortable. Between July 2017 and May 2019, there were <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/the-8000-forced-movements-on-australian-flights-in-two-years-20190906-p52oq8.html">8,000 involuntary movements</a> within the system. Some of these were deportations, but others were forced transfers between facilities.</p>
<p>Detainees are rarely given an explanation when they are moved. The opacity of the practice is undoubtedly one of its concerning aspects, and has been criticised by the Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC). In a <a href="https://www.humanrights.gov.au/our-work/asylum-seekers-and-refugees/publications/use-force-immigration-detention">report</a> last year, the commission recommended that when a relocation occurs </p>
<blockquote>
<p>the department and facility staff should ensure as far as possible that the person […] receives a clear explanation of the reasons for the transfer. </p>
</blockquote>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/317496/original/file-20200227-24676-gptz6p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/317496/original/file-20200227-24676-gptz6p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/317496/original/file-20200227-24676-gptz6p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/317496/original/file-20200227-24676-gptz6p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/317496/original/file-20200227-24676-gptz6p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/317496/original/file-20200227-24676-gptz6p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/317496/original/file-20200227-24676-gptz6p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Federal police outside Yongah Hill Immigration Detention Centre to monitor a 2012 protest against refugee detention.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">REBECCA LEMAY/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>‘Sheer, random cruelty’</h2>
<p>Participants in my study stressed the secrecy of relocations. Detainees were typically moved with minimal warning or explanation. At times they knew a transfer was pending, but they were often moved with just a few hours’ notice. </p>
<p>In some instances, the staff woke detainees up and gave them minutes to collect their belongings. As one regular visitor to Yongah Hill Detention Centre described it,</p>
<blockquote>
<p>It was always early in the morning - you’ve got 10 minutes to pack your bags. And they would lose things. They were always in such a hurry. It was made to be traumatic for them.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Confronted with what a visitor to the Brisbane Immigration Transit Accommodation described as “the sheer, random cruelty of it”, detainees felt their vulnerability. So, too, did those left behind.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>There’s constantly distressing scenes as one family or another is being dragged away to be put on a plane with very little notice. And it’s so upsetting for all the other refugees […] that they’re seeing people get hauled off and people are crying and begging […] You never know if it’s going to be you tomorrow morning.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The AHRC has documented the <a href="https://www.humanrights.gov.au/our-work/asylum-seekers-and-refugees/publications/inspection-maribyrnong-immigration-detention">“excessive” use of restraints</a> during transfers. Just in the last fortnight, <a href="https://www.ombudsman.gov.au/media-releases/media-release-documents/commonwealth-ombudsman/2020/report-into-the-current-state-of-immigration-detention-facilities">the Commonwealth Ombudsman</a> observed that handcuffs had become “accepted transfer practice” during transport operations.</p>
<p>In his recommendations, the ombudsman advised</p>
<blockquote>
<p>the Aviation Transport Security Regulations [to] restrict the use of mechanical restraints to circumstances where there is a genuine risk to the safety of the aircraft that cannot be mitigated by any other option.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1140916207249481733"}"></div></p>
<h2>The human costs of forced relocations</h2>
<p>Beyond the stress of the transfer process, relocations separate detainees from support networks within the facilities, as well as friends, advocates, doctors and lawyers in the community. As a regular visitor to Melbourne Immigration Transit Accommodation explained, the relocation experience is one of loss. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>They might put down roots and get a few mates where they are, but when they move they lose those bonds that they’ve developed. If they’re getting any medical help they lose that contact with that medical care, their ability to learn English gets less.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Interstate transfers are particularly devastating for people with families in the community. Partners and children without social or financial resources in Australia can rarely travel to visit loved ones. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-how-australia-decides-who-is-a-genuine-refugee-72574">Explainer: how Australia decides who is a genuine refugee</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The despair caused by relocations is perhaps best exemplified by stories I heard of detainees self-harming immediately before or after a transfer. </p>
<p>These testimonies accord with <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28601787">previous research</a> at Victoria University that has found a link between forced relocations and self-harm in immigration detention facilities. Forced transfers, this researcher found, are among a number of “precipitating factors or triggers for self-harm” in both immigration detention and prison settings. </p>
<h2>An unconscionable practice</h2>
<p>The practice of moving detainees around Australia’s immigration detention network is doubly unjustifiable on economic and humanitarian grounds. A consistent finding from my research is that forced relocations cause harm. They harm detainees, and they harm the people who love and support them. </p>
<p>As a country, we can find better ways to spend taxpayer money.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/132193/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>This research was funded by an Australian Government Research Training Program Stipend Scholarship and grants from the University of Queensland and the University of Sydney. Michelle Peterie has received funding from the Australian Research Council for other research projects. </span></em></p>There were 8,000 forced relocations in Australia’s immigration detention system in a nearly two-year span. New research shows how distressing and destabilising these movements are for refugees.Michelle Peterie, Research Fellow, The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1250682019-10-13T19:02:50Z2019-10-13T19:02:50ZThere’s no airport border ‘crisis’, only management failure of the Home Affairs department<p>In the past five years, more than 95,000 people who arrived by plane have lodged a claim for asylum in Australia, <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/asylum-seeker-processing-wait-time-blows-out-to-two-years-20191008-p52yso.html">new statistics</a> show. </p>
<p>Labor’s Immigration Spokesperson, Senator Kristina Keneally, has labelled this a “crisis”, <a href="https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/significant-surge-in-number-of-asylum-seekers-arriving-by-plane/news-story/a1b5c6d49a2cc1fc3a1d1b1a9b304ecc">stating</a>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Peter Dutton’s incompetence and recklessness has allowed people smugglers to run riot and traffic record-breaking numbers of people by aeroplane to Australia.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>But the “crisis” is not that visa-holding travellers are flying to Australia, then later lodging a claim for asylum. It’s not unprecedented for tourists or students to later lodge a claim for asylum due to circumstances beyond their control. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/peter-dutton-is-whipping-up-fear-on-the-medevac-law-but-it-defies-logic-and-compassion-119297">Peter Dutton is whipping up fear on the medevac law, but it defies logic and compassion</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In 1989, for example, after events in Tiananmen Square, Australia provided refuge to thousands of Chinese students who had entered Australia with visas.</p>
<p>Instead, the “crisis” is the Australian government’s failure to properly manage the refugee-processing system. It gutted the ranks of experienced decision-makers and made organisational changes that undermine the quality of decisions, contributing to long processing delays and backlogs.</p>
<p>These organisational failures may have contributed to the increase in asylum applications over the last five years. </p>
<h2>High staff turn-over</h2>
<p>Protection visa decisions are highly complex. They must examine a variety of factors, including country-specific conditions and individual circumstances. </p>
<p>Yet, as the <a href="https://www.anao.gov.au/sites/default/files/ANAO_Report_2017-2018_45.pdf">Australian National Audit Office noted in 2018</a>, the Home Affairs department experienced a significant loss of “corporate memory” due to staff turn-over, “with almost half of SES officers present in July 2015 no longer in the department at July 2017”.</p>
<p>In a <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/api/qon/downloadestimatesquestions/EstimatesQuestion-CommitteeId6-EstimatesRoundId2-PortfolioId20-QuestionNumber82">Senate Estimates hearing</a> last year, Home Affairs officials said the average processing time for permanent protection visas, from lodgement to primary decision (not including appeals), was 257 days, or 8.5 months. </p>
<p>And the department’s <a href="https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2262.html">training deficiencies</a> are well-documented. The most recent Australian Public Service Employee Census put the department’s organisational management problems into <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-29/bleak-outlook-for-home-affairs-staff-morale/11461442">stark relief</a>: only 35% of employees said the department inspired them to do their best work, while two-thirds of respondents said they did not consider department senior executives to be of “high quality”. </p>
<p>These publicised problems raise important questions about the quality of decision-making at the primary level.</p>
<h2>Stacking the AAT with political allies</h2>
<p>Poor decision-making at the primary level can lead to higher numbers of appeals. So it’s perhaps unsurprising that appeals to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) from people who arrived by plane are also experiencing significant blowouts. </p>
<p>The number of active refugee cases to the AAT has ballooned from <a href="https://www.aat.gov.au/AAT/media/AAT/Files/Statistics/MRD-Refugee-Caseload-Statistics-2016-17.pdf">8,370</a> two years ago, to <a href="https://www.aat.gov.au/AAT/media/AAT/Files/Statistics/MRD-refugee-caseload-statistics-2019-20.pdf">23,063</a> in 2019.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/cruel-and-no-deterrent-why-australias-policy-on-asylum-seekers-must-change-117969">Cruel, and no deterrent: why Australia's policy on asylum seekers must change</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This results in a backlog. In 2017, the tribunal made 5,153 decisions on refugee claims, and so far this financial year, only 815 claims have been concluded.</p>
<p>In part, these worrying figures are due to the federal government <a href="https://www.crikey.com.au/2019/09/24/aat-anatomy-of-a-scandal/">appointing people</a> with Liberal Party ties to the AAT over the last couple of years. </p>
<p>The Attorney-General recognised these problems in the <a href="https://www.ag.gov.au/Consultations/Documents/statutory-review-tribunals-act-2015/report-statutory-review-aat.pdf">2019 Report on the Statutory Review of the Tribunal</a>, which pointed to “competencies of members” as a key contributor to complications in the operation of the tribunal. </p>
<p>Stacking the AAT with political allies, many of whom are not lawyers and who are not appointed on merit, has removed independent expertise from the tribunal, risking errors and further delays.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-the-biloela-tamil-family-deportation-case-highlights-the-failures-of-our-refugee-system-123685">How the Biloela Tamil family deportation case highlights the failures of our refugee system</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>And with more errors come further appeals in the courts. This not only places a heavy burden on the resources of the Federal Circuit Court and Federal Court, but also leads to more delays and backlogs in the AAT, where the court sends matters which were unlawfully decided for re-determination.</p>
<h2>Address organisational failures</h2>
<p>The solution is in proper organisational management. Instead of blaming refugees for fleeing persecution by safe means, the government must address the failures of its refugee processing system.</p>
<p>To this end, an urgent review of the Department of Home Affairs policies and organisational failures is needed. A review could find out whether there’s a management culture stopping Home Affairs from attracting and retaining staff who can make reasoned and well-supported decisions in an environment they can be proud of. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/stop-playing-politics-refugees-stuck-in-indonesia-rally-against-unhcr-for-chronic-waiting-124176">'Stop playing politics': refugees stuck in Indonesia rally against UNHCR for chronic waiting</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Similarly, there must be a transparent and independent system for appointing AAT members that prioritises skills and experience over politics – exactly what was recommended by the Attorney-General’s <a href="https://www.ag.gov.au/Consultations/Documents/statutory-review-tribunals-act-2015/report-statutory-review-aat.pdf">recent review</a>.</p>
<p>If people seeking asylum can have their claims assessed quickly and fairly, then those who are not refugees can be sent home, while those needing safety could receive it. </p>
<p>Without the chance to remain in Australia for years while their claims are assessed, there would be no loophole for traffickers and others to exploit. </p>
<p>In turn, the number of non-genuine claims will go down, allowing decision-makers to focus on those who are actually fearing persecution.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/yes-peter-dutton-has-a-lot-of-power-but-a-strong-home-affairs-is-actually-a-good-thing-for-australia-121047">Yes, Peter Dutton has a lot of power, but a strong Home Affairs is actually a good thing for Australia</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>We should be supporting refugees to access safety by air. If people fleeing persecution can access a flight to Australia, they won’t risk a dangerous journey by boat to find safety.</p>
<p>This is not an airport border “crisis”, it’s a management failure that can be fixed with more staffing, better resourcing, and transparent and meritorious appointments of decision makers.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Correction: A previous version of the article stated 815 refugee claims were concluded this year. This has been updated to clarify that 815 of claims were concluded during this financial year.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/125068/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Regina Jefferies is a Scientia PhD Scholar at the University of New South Wales and an Affiliate of the Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Daniel Ghezelbash is a senior lecturer and director of the Social Justice Clinic at Macquarie Law School, a member of the management committee of Refugee Advice and Casework Services, and a special counsel at the National Justice Project.</span></em></p>From high staff turn-overs to filling the appeals tribunal with political allies, the Home Affairs department needs to clean its mess.Regina Jefferies, Affiliate, Andrew and Renata Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law, UNSW SydneyDaniel Ghezelbash, Senior Lecturer, Macquarie Law School, Macquarie UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1216262019-08-08T04:23:50Z2019-08-08T04:23:50ZNew ASIO head, Mike Burgess, is moving from one security agency to another<p>The new director of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) will be Mike Burgess, who moves from heading the Australian Signals Directorate.</p>
<p>Burgess has a solid history in the intelligence area and Labor has welcomed the choice.</p>
<p>Announcing the appointment, Scott Morrison and Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton said that in his ASD job, Burgess has been leading work “across the spectrum of operations required of a contemporary signals intelligence and security agency, including foreign intelligence, cyber security and offensive operations in support of the Australian government and Australian Defence Forces”.</p>
<p>Burgess earlier was on the government’s naval shipbuilding advisory board, and was deputy director for cyber and information security at the Defence Signals Directorate (DSD). He also worked as chief information security officer at Telstra.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/media-chiefs-unite-on-press-freedom-but-will-it-result-in-any-action-119405">Media chiefs unite on press freedom, but will it result in any action?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Recently he was involved in the controversy over a News Corp report by Annika Smethurst of top level bureaucratic correspondence about a plan to expand ASD’s remit. Burgess and two departmental heads issued a rare public statement disputing the report. Later Smethurst’s home was raided by the Australian Federal Police.</p>
<p>As head of ASD, Burgess has brought the organisation “out from the shadows”, as he puts it, talking publicly about its role, which is as both a foreign intelligence and a cyber security agency.</p>
<p>He said <a href="https://www.asd.gov.au/publications/speech-lowy-institute-speech">in a speech</a> earlier this year, “transparency informs, helping dispel myths and most importantly helps with our value proposition to prospective employees”, admitting he was using transparency to attract recruits.</p>
<p>He has also <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-10-30/australian-signals-directorate-boss-explains-huawei-ban/10444064">spoken publicly</a> about the exclusion of Huawei from the 5G mobile communications network, saying “my advice was to exclude high-risk vendors from the entirety of evolving 5G networks”. He has attacked critics of the encryption laws passed late last year.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-we-should-be-wary-of-expanding-powers-of-the-australian-signals-directorate-119078">Why we should be wary of expanding powers of the Australian Signals Directorate</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>A public profile has become more important as part of the ASIO job in recent years.</p>
<p>Burgess replaces Duncan Lewis, who recently announced he was stepping down.</p>
<p>ASIO, an independent authority, comes under the Home Affairs portfolio, where it was moved by the Coalition government. Previously it was under the Attorney-General, who is still required to sign off on some operations.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/121626/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Mike Burgess, previously head of the Australian Signals Directorate, has a solid history in the intelligence area and Labor has welcomed the choice.Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1210472019-07-31T20:05:31Z2019-07-31T20:05:31ZYes, Peter Dutton has a lot of power, but a strong Home Affairs is actually a good thing for Australia<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/286424/original/file-20190731-186814-11sqd7p.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=676%2C0%2C3041%2C1994&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The creation of the Home Affairs department means that complex and sometimes competing security and law enforcement priorities now have a strategic policy home.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Wes Mountain/The Conversation</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>It’s been two years since the government <a href="https://pmc.gov.au/news-centre/pmc/home-affairs-portfolio-established">announced</a> it would establish a Home Affairs portfolio, and just over 18 months since it came into being. Since then, the department, and its high-profile minister and secretary, have attracted much controversy, discussion and criticism. </p>
<p>The latest debate centres on concerns that Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton is further consolidating power with <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/proposed-laws-to-ban-foreign-fighters-spark-concerns-about-dutton-s-growing-power">legislation</a> that would prevent foreign fighters from returning home for up to two years and the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/may/29/peter-duttons-department-regains-control-of-refugee-settlement-services">recent decision to move refugee services</a> into his department. </p>
<p>There’s also been criticism that the portfolio is cloaked in secrecy, with some questioning why an <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jul/10/peter-duttons-home-affairs-department-keeping-strategic-review-secret-from-public">internal strategic review</a> of the ministry has not been made public. </p>
<p>Are we seeing an unprecedented consolidation of unregulated power? Or is there a reasonable story of good public policy behind the headlines?</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1154203726556483589"}"></div></p>
<h2>Creating a single defence portfolio</h2>
<p>These questions need to be placed in the context of both history and broader developments in home affairs policy.</p>
<p>We’re used to having a single <a href="http://www.defence.gov.au/">Department of Defence</a> in Australia. But it was only 40 years ago that the momentous <a href="http://guides.naa.gov.au/melbourne/chapter2/defence.aspx">decision</a> was made to consolidate five departments — including one for each of the armed services — into a single agency. </p>
<p>There was push-back at the time from some agencies, and also a focus on the high-profile personalities involved in the process, including Defence Secretary <a href="https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/sir-arthur-turns-100/">Sir Arthur Tange</a>, and his relationship with ministers and service chiefs. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/theres-no-clear-need-for-peter-duttons-new-bill-excluding-citizens-from-australia-119876">There’s no clear need for Peter Dutton’s new bill excluding citizens from Australia</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Decades later, the Department of Defence remains a large but effective organisation with a joint strategic and operational command, supported by a capable department. But its strategically important role and the significant resources needed to do its job mean it continues to require close management, attention and review. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.minister.defence.gov.au/minister/marise-payne/media-releases/new-chapter-australian-signals-directorate">Last year’s decision</a> to take the Australian Signals Directorate out of the department shows it remains a work in progress, but one that continues to head in the right direction. </p>
<p>The lesson is that significant change in important areas of government policy, operations and services takes time, accompanied by ongoing review and revision. </p>
<h2>Competing agencies and priorities</h2>
<p>Before the Home Affairs portfolio was created, there were numerous security issues that cut across government agencies and demonstrated the need for a more strategic approach and greater collaboration among agencies. </p>
<p>The crisis around the unauthorised boat arrivals in the late-2000s, for example, created significant <a href="https://www.anao.gov.au/sites/default/files/201112%20Audit%20Report%20No%2049.pdf">tension</a> between the Department of Immigration and Citizenship (DIAC) and the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO). </p>
<p>The high number of arrivals saw demands to speed up immigration visa processing. But ASIO was seen as delaying the process as it had to ensure the largely undocumented arrivals presented no security threat. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/286367/original/file-20190731-186846-1vkcmf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/286367/original/file-20190731-186846-1vkcmf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286367/original/file-20190731-186846-1vkcmf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286367/original/file-20190731-186846-1vkcmf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286367/original/file-20190731-186846-1vkcmf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286367/original/file-20190731-186846-1vkcmf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286367/original/file-20190731-186846-1vkcmf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=501&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Divisions emerged among various government agencies during the boat arrivals crisis.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Josh Jerga/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>It was challenging for the two agencies, with such different responsibilities, to work through these issues. There was also pressure on the Australian Defence Force to provide the operational response at sea, and on law enforcement and customs officials investigating people-smuggling operations and other related crimes. </p>
<p>The agencies worked reasonably well together, but were often constrained due to their separate roles and protocols that did not support collaboration. They got through the crisis, with a lot of effort. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/politics-podcast-peter-dutton-on-balancing-interests-in-home-affairs-92441">Politics podcast: Peter Dutton on balancing interests in home affairs</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Counter-terrorism has been another major cross-agency issue. ASIO handled terror threat advisories and terror investigations (along with the police), while the attorney-general’s department oversaw countering violent extremism (CVE) policy. </p>
<p>The prime minister’s department was home to senior counter-terrorism and cyber-security coordinators, and the departments of defence and foreign affairs and trade ran their own counter-terrorism initiatives.</p>
<p>There was no single agency responsible for providing strategic policy direction on the issue until the establishment of Home Affairs. </p>
<h2>One strategic policy home</h2>
<p>The advent of Home Affairs means that complex and sometimes competing priorities have a strategic policy home and can be worked through at a portfolio level. </p>
<p>Immigration and ASIO are now in the same portfolio. Other agencies have also been added to the mix, including the Australian Border Force (ABF), the Australian Federal Police (AFP), the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission (ACIC) and the Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre (AUSTRAC). </p>
<p>Even in the short period since its creation, Home Affairs has made progress in providing more effective operations and services, supported by enhanced information sharing and technical capabilities. </p>
<p>For example, the department now has dedicated leads <a href="https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/reports-and-pubs/Annualreports/2017-18/03-annual-report-2017-18-part-1.pdf">overseeing</a> cross-agency efforts on counter-terrorism, cyber-security, organised crime and foreign interference. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-new-department-of-home-affairs-is-unnecessary-and-seems-to-be-more-about-politics-than-reform-81161">The new Department of Home Affairs is unnecessary and seems to be more about politics than reform</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Yet, the breadth of issues handled by the portfolio has also raised concerns about consolidation of power. </p>
<p>But most of the Home Affairs agencies are separate statutory authorities, retaining the independence and power established in their roles. The heads of ASIO and AFP, for instance, provide advice directly to the prime minister and cabinet when required and carry out their own operations.</p>
<p>In the aftermath of the <a href="https://theconversation.com/media-raids-raise-questions-about-afps-power-and-weak-protection-for-journalists-and-whistleblowers-118328">AFP raids on media organisations</a>, both Dutton and AFP Commissioner Andrew Colvin <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jul/19/afp-adds-more-confusion-about-whether-ministers-consulted-over-raids">confirmed</a> the minister had no involvement in the operations. </p>
<h2>Ongoing communication and appropriate oversight</h2>
<p>The most important issue facing Home Affairs is the need for clear communication to the public on what the department does, why it’s important, and how its work is carried out. That must also include assurances the department has appropriate oversight and accountability systems in place. </p>
<p>This is easier said than done in the highly charged political atmosphere that’s surrounded Home Affairs since its inception. </p>
<p>It’s good news, then, that Labor chose to <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-03/kristina-keneally-the-biggest-winner-in-labors-new-frontbench/11172022">establish</a> a shadow home affairs minister after the federal election, thereby working with the new Home Affairs arrangements and letting the portfolio as a whole settle down. </p>
<p>The oversight and accountability mechanisms are also doing what they’re supposed to do. The proposed security laws, for example, <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/proposed-laws-to-ban-foreign-fighters-spark-concerns-about-dutton-s-growing-power">were scrutinised</a> by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security (PJCIS), which recommended changes to reduce the minister’s power. </p>
<p>Most suggestions were incorporated in the revised legislation, though Labor still has concerns about the minister’s power to grant a temporary exclusion order (TEO) for returning foreign fighters. The PJCIS will continue to examine the use of TEOs, as will the Independent National Security Legislation Monitor and other oversight organisations. </p>
<p>The PJCIS is also due to report to parliament in October on its <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Intelligence_and_Security/FreedomofthePress">inquiry</a> into press freedom, which will shed light on issues related to the AFP raids. And we’ll likely see the key findings of Home Affairs’ internal review as its annual report and regular <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Senate_Estimates/legcon">Senate Estimates appearances</a> approach.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/286365/original/file-20190731-186805-1amquny.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/286365/original/file-20190731-186805-1amquny.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286365/original/file-20190731-186805-1amquny.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286365/original/file-20190731-186805-1amquny.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286365/original/file-20190731-186805-1amquny.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286365/original/file-20190731-186805-1amquny.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/286365/original/file-20190731-186805-1amquny.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Anti-Dutton signs after a rally to protest the AFP raids on journalists in June.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Joel Carrett/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Why it should work</h2>
<p>The creation of Home Affairs enables a more strategic and integrated approach to security, law enforcement, migration and border issues. It also means more efficient delivery of services. </p>
<p>But there are significant challenges to doing this and getting it right, particularly while managing such a vast portfolio of operations and responsibilities. Maintaining a balanced approach, and ensuring considered and appropriate oversight and review will be critical to its success. </p>
<p>More than 40 years after its creation, the Department of Defence is held up now for its strategic vision and stewardship of the country’s armed forces. The divisive politics surrounding its creation have long been forgotten.</p>
<p>And so it should be with Home Affairs. The creation of the portfolio is ultimately a good thing for Australia and for good public policy and services. But this is a long-term endeavour and the project is still in its early days.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/121047/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jacinta Carroll has a professional working and consulting relationship with the Commonwealth Government and the Australian National University's National Security College.</span></em></p>Similar concerns were raised 40 years ago when the Department of Defence was formed, but the decision to merge several agencies is now held up for its strategic vision.Jacinta Carroll, Senior Research Fellow, Counter Terrorism and Social Cohesion, National Security College, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1192972019-06-24T20:11:12Z2019-06-24T20:11:12ZPeter Dutton is whipping up fear on the medevac law, but it defies logic and compassion<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/280893/original/file-20190624-97751-1mp5obs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The medevac law was passed to streamline the process for emergency medical evacuation of refugees from Manus Island and Nauru. Thirty-one people have been transferred since its passage.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Refugee Action Coalition</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>With all the hyperbole about the <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-how-will-the-medevac-bill-actually-affect-ill-asylum-seekers-111645">medevac law</a>, it is easy to lose sight of its purpose. </p>
<p>Refugees have been transferred off Nauru and Manus Island for emergency medical treatment since offshore detention restarted on these islands in 2013. The Department of Home Affairs reported to Senate estimates that <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jun/23/peter-dutton-claims-asylum-seekers-refusing-resettlement-in-us-due-to-medevac-laws">898 refugees and asylum seekers</a> had been sent to Australia for medical treatment prior to the passage of the medevac law earlier this year. Of those, 282 were returned to Manus and Nauru after receiving treatment, and the rest remained in Australia in detention. </p>
<p>These transfers occurred in response to pleas from doctors and health professionals on an ad hoc basis. And it was up to the Home Affairs Department and Minister Peter Dutton whether to comply with such a request. Medical emergencies could include life-threatening brain or heart conditions, complex abortions, or emergency psychiatric care for children at risk for suicide – all of which are beyond the capacity of the health systems on Nauru and Manus to treat. </p>
<p>Although some refugees were granted emergency medical evacuation, many others were not. In response, <a href="https://www.sbs.com.au/news/somali-refugee-on-nauru-wins-bid-to-have-abortion-in-australia">legal cases</a> were brought against the government for breaching its responsibility to care for the refugees. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-how-will-the-medevac-bill-actually-affect-ill-asylum-seekers-111645">Explainer: how will the 'medevac' bill actually affect ill asylum seekers?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This required the federal court to convene at short notice to hear cases. It also required the expenditure of <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/sep/29/australia-spent-320000-fighting-requests-for-urgent-medical-transfers-of-asylum-seekers">huge amounts of taxpayer money</a> to call expert medical witnesses and file thousands of pages of supporting documentation. </p>
<p>Because of the delays in treatment, these legal battles were enormously risky for those in need of medical care.</p>
<p>Through these early cases, the court <a href="https://www.hrlc.org.au/human-rights-case-summaries/2018/5/23/federal-court-orders-australian-government-to-remove-refugee-children-from-nauru-to-receive-appropriate-mental-health-treatment">established</a> that it was a breach of the government’s duty not to provide refugees with emergency medical treatment. And yet, the Home Affairs Department continued to fight applications for transfers for emergency medical treatment, only to be overturned by the courts, time and time again. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1143066556378701825"}"></div></p>
<h2>How the process works under the medevac law</h2>
<p>The medevac law was passed due to concerns the department was rejecting transfer applications for political rather than medical reasons. The point was to provide an expedient, objective process to determine whether transfers were required. </p>
<p>And despite the Coalition government’s opposition to the bill, the process for determining which refugees are moved off Nauru and Manus for treatment remains highly deferential to the minister and Department of Home Affairs. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-asylum-seeker-policy-history-a-story-of-blunders-and-shame-118396">Australia's asylum seeker policy history: a story of blunders and shame</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>There are <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-how-will-the-medevac-bill-actually-affect-ill-asylum-seekers-111645">two stages</a> to this process. </p>
<p>First, two doctors must assess the person and make a recommendation for transfer. <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jun/19/federal-court-overturn-attempt-to-block-medevac-transfer-from-nauru">The federal court recently ruled</a> it was possible to make this medical assessment based on documentation alone, as opposed to an in-person or teleconference assessment. This was a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jun/20/do-duttons-medevac-law-claims-stack-up-against-court-ruling-explainer">necessary adjustment</a> to the law, given that the Nauru government has banned teleconferences for residents.</p>
<p>The minister is required to approve or refuse the recommendation for transfer within 72 hours. There are three grounds for refusal: </p>
<ol>
<li> the person is deemed a security risk </li>
<li> the person has a “substantial criminal record” (which equates to having been convicted of an offence with a sentence of imprisonment for 12 months or more)</li>
<li> the minister does not accept the transfer is necessary on medical grounds.</li>
</ol>
<p>If the minister rejects the transfer on medical grounds, the second stage of the process kicks in, with an independent health advice panel (IHAP) assessing the doctors’ recommendation. It is important to note that this panel is comprised of government medical officers and other health professionals appointed by the minister. </p>
<p>To date, there have been <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/medevac-panel-overturns-two-cases-in-four-months-despite-floodgate-fears-20190622-p5208u.html">31 medical transfers</a> under the law. In addition, nine recommendations were refused by the government. The panel of health experts upheld seven of the minister’s refusals, and overturned two.</p>
<h2>Dutton’s claims don’t stand up under scrutiny</h2>
<p>Dutton has made a number of claims about the impact of the medevac law that he argues justify its repeal. All defy reason and logic.</p>
<p>First, the minister has claimed “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jun/23/peter-dutton-claims-asylum-seekers-refusing-resettlement-in-us-due-to-medevac-laws">activist doctors</a>” were using the law to bring people to Australia when they do not require emergency medical care.</p>
<p>This is frankly highly offensive to the medical profession in Australia, and contradicts the clear intention of the law to take politics out of transfer decisions. Even if doctors making the initial recommendation are too left-leaning for Dutton, the expert panel is stacked with medical practitioners of his choosing.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/there-are-70-million-refugees-in-the-world-here-are-5-solutions-to-the-problem-118920">There are 70 million refugees in the world. Here are 5 solutions to the problem</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Second, the minister has <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-20/warnings-of-boat-arrivals/11226254">argued</a> that the capacity to be transferred to Australia for emergency medical treatment will lead to a resumption of the people-smuggling trade. </p>
<p>This is patently absurd. It is true that people smugglers can make up all sorts of stories about Australia relaxing its policies and it being easier to get to Australia. But the facts are crystal clear: the Coalition government maintains a policy of boat turn-backs and indefinite offshore detention for anyone thinking of making the journey.</p>
<p>Medical transfers to Australia are for a temporary period. Once people have been treated, they are returned to detention on Nauru or Manus. It is true that many asylum seekers have remained in Australia for extended periods for ongoing treatment, but these refugees remain within the immigration detention system. They are escorted to medical appointments and remain under guard while receiving treatment. They are given no hope of putting down roots in Australia. </p>
<p>The deterrent to people smugglers remains overwhelming. And, unsurprisingly, we have not seen a restarting of boat arrivals following the passage of the medevac law. Dutton’s own department has signalled this is unlikely in <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/feb/13/nine-facts-about-the-medical-evacuation-bill">a briefing</a>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>[Potential illegal immigrants] will probably remain sceptical of smuggler marketing and await proof that such a pathway is viable, or that an actual change of policy has occurred, before committing to ventures.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The only possible messaging that people smugglers might use to persuade people to get on a boat is the Coalition government’s own dire warnings of reopening the floodgates and political stunts like the brief resurrection of the Christmas Island detention centre at the staggering cost to taxpayers of over <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/apr/03/we-paid-180m-for-scott-morrison-to-have-a-press-conference-on-christmas-island">A$180 million</a>.</p>
<p>Dutton’s third claim is that some refugees are <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jun/23/peter-dutton-claims-asylum-seekers-refusing-resettlement-in-us-due-to-medevac-laws">refusing resettlement</a> offers in the US because of the medevac law.</p>
<p>Again, it defies logic for refugees to refuse the US option – it is the only hope of resettlement currently on offer. One wonders whether the minister is using this claim as a cover for the fact that transfers to the US have <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/mental-health-on-nauru-absolutely-devastating-as-trump-rejects-refugees-under-extreme-vetting-20181011-p5092w.html">come to a grinding halt</a> under President Donald Trump. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1142001387951157248"}"></div></p>
<h2>The medevac law and human compassion</h2>
<p>For over six years, successive Australian governments have maintained an unwavering narrow focus on stopping refugee boats with no concern for the victims of this policy – the innocent people on Manus and Nauru. </p>
<p>These people are under Australia’s care. It is Australia that pays the governments of Nauru and PNG to house offshore detention centres to create the disincentive for others to travel by boat to Australia. It is Australia that pays the security companies to keep them detained. And so it is Australia that is responsible for the dramatic decline in their mental and physical health. </p>
<p>It is the narrowest of concessions to offer emergency medical treatment in Australia to people we have so mistreated.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/119297/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alex Reilly receives funding from the Commonwealth Department of Social Services for a project on refugee women and work.</span></em></p>With parliament sitting next week, the home affairs minister is pressuring Labor to support a repeal of the medevac law. But the law has worked just as it was intended.Alex Reilly, Director of the Public Law and Policy Research Unit, Adelaide Law School, University of AdelaideLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.