Let’s Do Something About Human Trafficking in Australia!

The worldwide issue of human trafficking is very much at the forefront of my prayers and awareness. That it is also happening in Australia is all the more reason to take every action to eliminate it within our borders! Thank God for people like Paul Green, a Christian Democrat and Senator, and Caroly Houmes, the chief executive of International Justice Mission in Australia, who are dedicating their lives to do just that! They and others, are answers to many of our prayers!

Here is the article I found today:

GOVERNMENT CRACKDOWN IN NSW AGAINST MODERN SLAVERY

You’d be shocked to learn how much modern-day slavery is going on in Australia. A NSW government report has revealed that in the 2016 financial year, the Australian Federal Police investigated 169 cases of modern slavery including forced marriage, sexual exploitation and child trafficking. Sadly many of these crimes weren’t prosecuted; witnesses often fear violence and refuse to give evidence. The NSW Police say there’s links between outlaw bikie gangs and trafficked sex workers, and every month the Department of Family and Community Services hears of at least two or three new cases of children at risk of underage forced marriage in NSW.

And, tragically, charities working at the coalface like the Salvation Army say the issue is under-investigated, in other words, things are even worse than the figures show. All of this is why Paul Green, a Christian Democrat and member of the upper house in NSW, introduced the Modern Slavery Bill on behalf of a team of campaigners called the Modern Slavery Working Group. If passed by the Parliament, the bill will make existing laws even stronger, and an anti-slavery Commissioner will be appointed to clamp down on forced labour and human trafficking in NSW.

Businesses will also be required to ‘slave-proof’ their supply chains to ensure ethical work practices in overseas manufacturing. In his speech while tabling the bill, Mr Green described human trafficking as a “transnational crime that preys on society’s most vulnerable.” He called on the NSW parliament to lead the way for Australia in eradicating slavery, and echoed the words of William Wilberforce, the 18th century hero of abolition, with the statement, ‘You may choose to look the other way, but you can never say again that you did not know’.

Speaking to Stephen O’Doherty on Hope 103.2s Open House, Mr Green said ‘modern slavery’ covers a wide gamut of crimes, including forced labour, servitude forced marriage, debt bondage, deceptive recruiting, and even organ trafficking. As if that list weren’t shocking enough, the newest crime to be added is cybersex trafficking. That’s the sexual abuse of children, live-streamed over the web for people to watch in Western countries, including Australia. Mr Green, who chaired a year-long enquiry into the issue, said he was surprised just how much trafficking happens under our noses.

“One of the reasons we called the enquiry was that we know human trafficking happens around the world to about 45.8 million people, and 4000 cases in Australia have been identified (emphasis mine), so it was very important to ask what’s happening in our state,” he said. “It opens your eyes.
I travelled to the USA and spoke with the FBI, the LAPD, Homeland Security and a lot of agencies, and it starts to open your eyes to what massage parlours are doing, what the nail salons are doing. You wonder about the workers in there. The hospitality area is not short of having people in slave-like conditions, they have to work all day, they’re not allowed to leave the shop.”

An anti-slavery commissioner would have the full-time job of helping stamp out the work of traffickers, and see vulnerable people not only rescued, but rehabilitated. The legislation calls for a compassionate approach to victims. The community also has a role to play in spotting the signs of human trafficking. “The commissioner would be in charge of education programs, teaching young people about the warning signs of human trafficking,” Mr Green said. “They would work co-operatively with potential suspected human trafficking issues, and prepare and publish an annual report to the parliament,” Mr Green said.

The bill has support from both the NSW government and the Opposition, and Mr Green hopes it will be passed by mid-2018. “If it stalls, it will be for political reasons, and I don’t think politics should interfere with trying to do this particular legislation,” he said. “This is above politics, it’s about helping people without a voice to be rescued and restored.” While Mr Green chaired the government committee for modern slavery, it is an issue being tackled by many passionate organisations and individuals, he said. “A lot of good people did a lot of good work on this and I’ve had the privilege to be the vessel to carry it. It is one of my passions.”

One of the many working hard behind the scenes on the issue is Caroly Houmes, the chief executive of International Justice Mission in Australia. She was at Parliament House to see the bill being tabled, and said she felt history was being made. “It was quite a moment how he addressed the issue, and there was a lot of support in the room,” she said. “So it felt like we were part of something that will change the course of history, because five or ten years ago this was a topic lots of people didn’t think about or didn’t know about.

“He just put the issue on the forefront of the NSW political agenda. He has made everyone very aware of what modern-day slavery is. What is significant for us at International Justice Mission is that it recognises cybersex trafficking as a form of modern-day slavery, making it the serious crime that it actually is, and how we in Australia contribute to the demand side of that. She said society cannot turn a blind eye to the evils of slavery. Slavery exists because we let it exist,” she said. “This bill introduces various solutions to how we can combat it together.”

Source: Hope 103.2

KEEP PRAYING INTO THIS!

ANGLICAN SYNOD PLEADS FOR AUSTRALIA TO TAKE 12,000 MORE REFUGEES

The Anglican Church of Australia has urged the Federal Government to take another 12,000 refugees from Syria and Iraq, especially Christians and other minorities. The church also asked the Government, as a matter of human decency, to resettle in Australia any refugees and asylum seekers still detained on Manus Island and Nauru, and urged the Government to partner with the churches in healing and resettling the refugees. At its triennial General Synod in Maroochydore, Queensland, late last year the church affirmed the life-saving consequences of the earlier allotment of 12,000 extra places, particularly for Christians and other minorities who had been targeted by Islamic State.

The synod has urged each of Australia’s 23 dioceses to give 0.7 per cent of gross income to projects supporting sustainable development goals, and asked the Government to give 0.7 per cent of gross national income to overseas development. It also asked the Government to increase diplomatic and humanitarian efforts for Rohingya Muslims. The synod voted to oppose assisted dying, urge the government to improve palliative care resources, and to encourage Anglicans to contact their MPs.

Source: Compiled by APN from media reports
Published 23 January 2018

Curbing misuse of government monetary support to vulnerable people groups – some impressive answers!

Allow me to present my researched observations about this issue, as well as a recently published article on an effective trial intervention amongst some Aboriginal tribal groups and the possible reasons why it seems to be so impressively successful:  

I am convinced that governments tend to see financial aid mainly as a political obligation, social at best. The trouble with politics is that decisions  are often made in order to “look good”: in the eyes of their voters and other perceived significant stakeholders. Decisions about where to allocate funds often are made “from the top down”, the norm in bureaucracies: from governments, to charities, to church institutions!  The trouble with this type of decision making is that many important factors “known on the ground” are not taken into consideration, or worse are unknown due to lack of willingness to allow consultation to occur, especially with the leaders of these community groups. The leaders themselves need to first undergo scrutiny as to their trustworthiness, which  takes considerable time, but which is necessary if taxpayers’ and donors’ money is to be used wisely and responsibly! We know that some politicians and other decision makers just don’t care- looking good is all they are concerned with! They should not be there in the first place!

As well, governments need to tick the “foreign aid box”, with aid to third world countries. All too often, that money ends up in the pocket of “fat cats” at the top of those countries, or is used to acquire weapons, instead of helping the poor and strengthening that country’s economy and infrastructure (sadly, there are many examples of this; the contested “Palestinian Territories” foreign aid contributions is one of these https://www.wsj.com/articles/where-does-all-that-aid-for-palestinians-go-1453669813).

There are several initiatives in place by various very smart benefactors, who have conducted research on the ground and within various needy communities, engaging in consultation with important stakeholders within those communities. They have proven that individual loans to enterprising individuals (very often women!) have led to a widespread improvement of social conditions within those communities. As well, because the monetary aid was in the form of an interest free LOAN, when those recipients are able to pay back the loan, their dignity is left intact, or best, increased! THIS to me is smart foreign or even domestic aid! (https://hbr.org/2010/03/microfinance-mega-impact?referral=03759&cm_vc=rr_item_page.bottom) This is just one of several ingenious ways the poor can be helped by foreign and domestic aid.

I wish governments would subcontract foreign aid to smart organisations using these type of tried and tested allocation strategies and stop the often monstrous abuse of those funds, due to lack of accountability!

Of course, not all recipients are enterprising and many require monetary support to help with daily living, for themselves and their families. Much allocated money has been squandered and worse, has been used to cause damage to recipients and others. I blame that mindless government “top down” bureaucratic machinery! Nevertheless, every now and then, some individuals within that machinery break that norm and shine as a consequence. Not only that, but whole communities are helped and start blossoming! All mainly because someone has taken the time to engage in meaningful dialogue with key people in those communities! We need more of these caliber type of people informing our government and being given decision making power!

For those who are intercessors: here is an important issue to pray for, for the sake of good stewardship, on all levels!

As some may remember from my recent travel report published on Facebook (Oct/Nov 2017), involving a conference with several groups of Christian Aboriginals, at one stage, some of the unspoken attitudes of “us whities” caused a walkout by the Aboriginal contingent. The rest of us were flabbergasted, puzzled and at a loss, until it was explained to us by those who had spent much time in their midst, that we had started to engage in “managerialism”; that much resented tendency to take over and to start to “run the show”, especially on their behalf! Thankfully, we were able to regain their trust, after our sincere apology! Better still, not only did we apologize but they too apologized to us (after being reprimanded by some of their elders who weren’t there at the time) for their anger and “rude” behaviour! That is true reconciliation! Genuine dialogue is where it’s at!

On the above topic, here is a recent example published by the Australian Prayer Network:

ALCOHOL ABUSE DROPS IN ABORIGINAL COMMUNITIES UNDER WELFARE CARD

The cashless debit welfare card has led to a large drop in alcohol abuse and family violence in trial communities, according to an independen­t report that found community and leader support for the scheme to be rolled out nationally. The landmark final report has found the positive health and social outcomes are almost without precedent. Almost half the 2141 welfare recipients in the remote trial communities of East Kimberley in West­ern Australia and Ceduna, South Australia, reported significantly cutting their drinking, drug and gambling dependence. There was a significant reduction in alcohol-related family violence and a drop in arrests, assaults­ and flow-on impacts.

A fall in alcohol­-related hospital admissions and improved welfare outcomes and ­caring for children was also noted. The evaluation of the federal government trial program, conducted by ORIMA research, reported­ that 41 per cent of drinkers said they drank alcohol less frequently, and there was a corresponding 14 percent reduc­tion in arrests for public drunkenness. The Federal Government intends to expand the mandatory participation trials into another community. Qualitative research suggest­ed the card had led to greater use of public facilities by families and the community feeling safer. 

Almost 40% of parents and carers reported­ that they spent more time involved in their children’s schooling and homework, and 45% of participants in the scheme said they were now saving money. “There was a large degree of support from stakeholders and community leaders for the trial to be extended across the country because of the positive changes that had been observed, which were considered to be applicable on a broader scale,” the report said. “The evaluation findings indi­cate that the trial has had a considerab­le positive impact in both trial sites. The qualitative research­ found considerable evidence cited by many community leaders and stakeholders of a ­reduction in ­violence and harmful behaviours.”

The report concluded­ that there had been few previous initiatives that had produced such a positive impact for health and community outcomes, with the improvements increasin­g over time. “We are hoping it is the beginning of the turnaround,” minister for Human Services Alan Tudge said. “The card is not a panacea but it has led to a fundamen­tal improvement in these communities. There are very few other initi­atives that have had such impact. As many local leaders noted, these communities were in crisis, largely due to massive alcohol consumption paid for by the welfare dollar. I hope that we can look back in a decade’s time and say that this initiative was the beginning of the turnaround. 

A large part of the success has been the close working relationship with local leaders, who have co-designed and implemented the trial with us . They have demonstrated true leadership” (emphasis mine), Tudge said. 

The cashless debit card trials were introduced in Ceduna and the East Kimberley for a period of 12 months, following escalating concerns that alcohol abuse and related violence in the largely indig­enous communities had reached a “crisis” point. Under the trials, 80 per cent of all welfare payments are placed in an account accessible only through a Visa debit card that is locked from use in liquor stores and gambling venues, as well as preventing cash withdrawals.

Since the introduction of the card, alcohol-related presen­tations to hospitals in Ceduna had fallen by 37 per cent, leading to qualitative evidence of a fall in ­alcohol-related family violence. Of those who admitted to illegal­ substance abuse, 48 per cent reported to have been using less frequently, while 48 per cent of gamblers reporte­d gambling less. In Ceduna and the surrounding local government areas, poker machine­ revenue was reported to have been down by 12 per cent, the equivalent of more than $500,000 in 12 months. The number of people reporting that the card had made life more difficult had also fallen. 

Ceduna Mayor Allan Suter said the improvements to people’s lives in just 12 months had been ­”stunning” and provided the best hope that a lasting solution to the social crisis was possible. “The improvement we are most proud of is in the lives of families, it has been really quite amazing,” Mr Suter said. “Kids have been missing out on food because parents were pouring money down the throats of pokies  It is the most dramatic improvement I’ve seen. I’ve been involved for 14 years through council in trying a series of initiatives, some of them have given good results in the short term, but this is certainly the most significant change for the better I’ve seen.” 

“The results on the ground reflect the report. We have noticed a series of dramatic improvements, most notably the decrease in the amount of alcohol and gambling, and, while its harder to measure, a significant decrease in drug use.” Mr Suter said there had also been a “huge improvement in gener­al behaviour around town. You used to see a lot of intoxicated people and sporadic outbreaks of violence, that has dramatically decreased,” he said. “There has been a 40-50% decrease in all problem areas. But our biggest ambition was to improve the lives of families being neglected. I would like to see it expanded to other communities. I certainly hope the naysayers don’t get their way.”

Bill Shorten said ­Canberra should not be imposing outcomes on communities. “There’s no doubt that there’s concern in the community about the prevalence of ice and other drugs of addiction, but let’s also recognise, unless the community wants to do this cashless welfare card, it won’t work (my emphasis),” the Opposition Leader said. “The other thing I’ve got to make very clear here is that if you’re going to try and encourage people to break drugs of addiction, alcohol or other drugs of addiction, you need to make sure you’ve got the rehab facilities.” 

Mining magnate Andrew Forrest­, a champion of the CDC, said last week that the country would continue to suffer for years if the trials were not rolled out nationall­y. “Children are dying and being raped and absolutely suffering, and we are not helping them,” Mr Forrest said. “The cashless debit card needs a lot of courage from the opposition and from those in government to put up with all those who could tip the balance of power ­either way, who are a tiny minority.”

Source: Compiled by APN from media reports

 

A Just Australia campaign

The A Just Australia campaign is managed by the Refugee Council of Australia. The core mission of the campaign is to campaign for positive changes to government policy on refugee and asylum seekers. By working together with prominent Australians and community groups and thousands of concerned individuals, A Just Australia aims to achieve just and compassionate treatment of refugees, consistent with the human rights standards which Australia has developed and endorsed.

Exercise your right to be heard
In 2001, as Australia’s treatment of asylum seekers was rapidly deteriorating in the weeks after the Tampa incident, no one knew that significant change would come three years later from within the government’s own ranks. The situation today is similar: a government pushing ahead with harsh treatment of asylum seekers in the name of deterrence, supported by many in the Opposition, but with a small number of MPs and Senators in different parties publicly or privately expressing misgivings about policies which punish people seeking Australia’s protection from persecution. In thinking about when and how change might come, we can be sure that change will not come if Australians who oppose current policies remain silent.

In 2002, a group of Australians began a campaign, A Just Australia, to encourage Australians to speak up for just treatment of asylum seekers. Today, the Refugee Council of Australia is keeping this campaign alive by inviting Australian citizens and residents to exercise their right to be heard. We want you to let your local MP and the Senators who represent you know how you feel about Australia’s treatment of asylum seekers.

Participate in our “Write To Be Heard” campaign
We would like you to join us in our new “Write to Be Heard” campaign. The aim is to write to the MPs and Senators who represent us (by email or post) to let them know that we and many other fair-minded Australians oppose policies which punish and harm people who have sought Australia’s protection from persecution.

At least once a month, we will invite you to consider a current issue of concern to asylum seekers and refugees and to write to your political representatives about it. Our first request for your support is on the issue of Temporary Protection Visas.

Don’t underestimate the influence you can have. Every elector in Australia is represented in Federal Parliament by one member of the House of Representatives and either 12 Senators if they live in a state or two Senators if they live in the ACT or Northern Territory. The territories have Coalition and Labor Senators while each State has Senators from the Coalition, Labor and the Greens and one or two of the minor party or Independent Senators who hold the balance of power. The politicians who represent you will probably include people who strongly support current government policy, others who openly oppose and some who toe the party line but have misgivings or only limited knowledge of the issues.

Release all children from immigration detention
At the end of October 2014, 726 children were in immigration detention facilities.
We know the damaging effects of detention on young people’s lives.
The Government doesn’t have to detain children – there are community-based alternatives at its disposal.
The Write To Be Heard campaign is asking you to urgently write to MPs and demand the release of all children from immigration detention facilities.

The Refugee Council of Australia has produced a one-page background briefing on the issue which is available here.
We have developed a sample letter which can be used to develop your own letter. Please forward the campaign details to friends and like-minded people. Email, postal and telephone contact details for all MPs and Senators are available here.

Asylum Legacy Caseload Bill will harm vulnerable people
The government’s Asylum Legacy Caseload Bill is currently before the Senate. If passed it will have a devastating impact on some of the world’s most vulnerable people. Write To Be Heard is asking you to contact the cross-bench Senators and urge them to vote against the Bill. Find out how here.
If passed it will:
• Give the Minister for Immigration extraordinary powers during interception and turnback operations while limiting review by the courts or Parliament.
• Reintroduce harmful Temporary Protection Visas and remove pathways to permanent protection, condemning people to constant uncertainty.
• See asylum seekers ‘fast tracked’ through the visa application process where they will have to navigate complex legal systems without support or legal advice.

Other measures will replace the internationally-accepted definition of refugee status with the Government’s own interpretation. Even the Parliament’s Human Rights Committee, chaired by Liberal Senator Dean Smith, says the Bill breaches Australia’s core human rights commitments.

The Write To Be Heard campaign is asking you to urgently write to MPs – in particular cross-bench, Greens and Labor Senators – before it’s too late. Let MPs know that we will not support a Bill that strips refugees and asylum seekers of the few rights they have.

Please forward the campaign details to friends and like-minded people.

We have developed a sample letter which can be used to develop your own letter. Email, postal and telephone contact details for all MPs and Senators are available here.

Stop the forcible return of asylum seekers to Afghanistan
Last week, Refugee Council of Australia President Phil Glendenning wrote to the Department of Immigration and Border Protection, urging the Australian Government to suspend forcible returns of asylum seekers to Afghanistan. Phil’s pleas followed revelations in The Saturday Paper that an asylum seeker Zainullah Naseri, who was returned in August 2014, was subsequently abducted and tortured by the Taliban.

The Minister for Immigration and Border Protection Scott Morrison said he would investigate the circumstances surrounding Zainullah’s case. Write to Mr Morrison and urge him to immediately suspend the forced return of asylum seekers to Afghanistan. We have developed a sample letter which can be used to press the case for suspending returns.
Please send a copy of your letter to Shadow Minister for Immigration Richard Marles, Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young, Palmer United Party Federal Leader Clive Palmer, your local MP and Senators in your State.

Temporary Protection Visas
Federal Parliament is expected to push for the reintroduction of Temporary Protection Visas (TPVs). There is still time to write to Members of Parliament – in particular the Senators from the minor parties and independents – and let them know why the TPVs must be rejected.
We have developed a sample letter which outlines the case against TPVs and a series of key points you can use to write your own letters.
How to contact your MPs and Senators
Email, postal and telephone contact details for all MPs and Senators are available here.
Feedback is encouraged
Please share any responses you receive through your advocacy work. Send any feedback to writetobeheard@refugeecouncil.org.au

Join us on Facebook – look for ‘RCOA’
Follow us on Twitter – OzRefugeeCounc #WriteToBeHeard

Tips for writing letters
• Keep your letter short by raising only one or two key issues.
• Ask a question on those issues that require a personal response (refer to our sample questions for inspiration)
• If you are emailing your letter, write it in a word program and attach it as a document to the email rather than place it in the body of the email. Many electorate offices do not reply to emails as they are often not considered official communications.
• Use the correct title of the person you are addressing
• ‘Mr/ Mrs/Ms/Dr First Name Last Name MP’
• ‘Senator First Name Last Name’.
You are likely to get a wordy or evasive answer. Read it carefully. If it does not actually answer your question, write again pointing out politely that they have not answered the question. Repeat the question and ask for an answer. Repeat this process as often as necessary.

Sample questions on different topics
Use these to help as inspiration for your letters to elicit a personal response and reflection from your representatives.

As the elected representative in my electorate of XX, I would like to know your position in the following matter:

Asylum seekers:
• Do you believe that Australia should accord to refugees and asylum seekers all their rights and entitlements under relevant international laws? Are you aware that current laws and policies violate these rights?
• Do you believe that people commit an offence by arriving in Australia without permission and seeking asylum? If Yes, what offence do they commit?
• Do you agree that all refugees should be treated equally regardless of how they arrived in Australia?
• Do you agree that asylum seekers not afforded protection in Australia should only be returned in safety and dignity, and never to a place of danger? Do you agree that where there is credible evidence this does not occur, Australia has a responsibility to investigate our methods and locations of forced removal?

Employment:
• Do you believe that work rights should be afforded to asylum seekers holding bridging visas?

Detention:
• Do you agree that children should not be detained?
• Do you agree that refugees and asylum seekers should not be detained indefinitely?
• Do you agree that no refugee or asylum seeker should be subjected to any human rights violation in order to deter others from seeking asylum in Australia?

An alternative to offshore detention

An alternative to offshore detention

by Julian Burnside | Nov 4, 2015 | Asylum Seekers, Human Rights

The  present system of dealing with asylum seekers who arrive by boat is cruel (intentionally) and hideously expensive.  There is a rational alternative to the  intentional cruelty of the present system. That system reflects the attempts of both major parties at the last election to outdo each other in their promises to mistreat a particular group of human beings.

And it’s expensive.  The current system costs between $4 billion and $5 billion a year.  That’s a big number: think of it as one million Geelong chopper rides each year!

Australia’s treatment of boat people needs a radical re-think.  It is shameful that we are now trying to treat asylum seekers so harshly that they will be deterred from seeking our help at all.  It is shameful that this deliberate mistreatment of asylum seekers has been “justified” by describing them falsely as “illegal”, when in fact they commit no offence by coming here and asking for protection.  It is shameful that the deliberate Coalition lies about asylum seekers have not been roundly condemned by the Labor party.  It is shameful that, out of an alleged concern about asylum seekers drowning in their attempt to reach safety, we punish them if they don’t drown.

There are better ways of responding to asylum seekers.  If I could re-design the system, I would choose between two possible models.

A Regional solution

Boat-arrivals would be detained initially, but for a maximum of one month, to allow preliminary health and security checks.  That detention would be subject to extension, but only if a court was persuaded that a particular individual should be detained longer.

After that period of initial detention, boat arrivals would be released into the community on an interim visa with a number of conditions that would apply until the person’s refugee status was decided:

  •  they would be required to report regularly to a Centrelink office or a post office,  to make sure they remained available for the balance of the process;
  •  they would be allowed to work;
  •  they would be entitled to Centrelink and Medicare benefits;
  •  they would be required to live in a specified rural town or regional city.

A system like this would have a number of benefits. First, it would avoid the harm presently inflicted on refugees held in detention.  Prolonged detention with an unknown release date is highly toxic: experience over the past 15 years provides plenty of evidence of this.

Second, any government benefits paid to refugees would be spent on accommodation, food and clothing in country towns.  There are plenty of towns in country areas which would welcome an increase in their population and a boost to their local economy.  According to the National Farmers Federation, there are more than 90,000 unfilled jobs in rural areas.  It is likely that adult male asylum seekers would look for work, and would find it.

However, even if every boat person stayed on full Centrelink benefits for the whole time it took to decide their refugee status, it would cost the Government only about $500,000 a year, all of which would go into the economy of country towns.  By contrast, the current system costs between $4 billion and $5 billion a year.  We would save billions of dollars a year, and we would be doing good rather than harm.

A variant of this would be to require asylum seekers to live in Tasmania instead of regional towns.  As a sweetener, and to overcome any lingering resistance, the Federal Government would pay one billion dollars a year to the Tasmanian government to help with the necessary social adjustments. It would be a great and needed boost for the Tasmanian economy, and Australia would still be billions of dollars better off.

Genuine regional processing  

Another possibility is to process protection claims while people are in Indonesia.  Those who are assessed as refugees would be resettled, in Australia or elsewhere, in the order in which they have been accepted as refugees.  On assessment, people would be told that they will be resettled safely within (say) two or three months.  Provided the process was demonstrably fair, the incentive to get on a boat would disappear instantly.

At present, people assessed by the UNHCR in Indonesia face a wait of 10 or 20 years before they have a prospect of being resettled.  During that time, they are not allowed to work, and can’t send their kids to school. No wonder they chance their luck by getting on a boat.

Genuine offshore processing, with a guarantee of swift resettlement, was the means by which the Fraser government managed to bring about 80,000 Vietnamese boat people to Australia in the late 1970s.  It worked, but it was crucially different from the manner of offshore processing presently supported by both major parties.  In addition, other countries also resettled some of the refugees processed in this way.  It is likely that Australians would be more receptive to this approach if they thought other countries were contributing to the effort.

A solution along these lines would face some practical problems.  At present, the end-point for refugees who reach Australia via Indonesia is a dangerous boat trip.  You have to be fairly desperate to risk the voyage, which probably explains why such a high percentage of boat people are ultimately assessed as genuine refugees: over the past 15 years, about 90% of boat people have been assessed, by Australia, as refugees lawfully entitled to our protection.  If the end-point is less dangerous, it is obvious that a number of people will set out who are not genuine refugees.  That would cause a problem for Indonesia, and Australia would have to help Indonesia deal with that problem.  But since our current system is costing about $5 billion a year, we can probably work out some arrangement with Indonesia which suits them and us.

There is another problem.  Because we have been indelicate in our relations with Indonesia in recent years, the Indonesian government may not be receptive to an approach like this.  Their reluctance may be softened if Malaysia was also recruited for a similar role.

Both of these solutions have these features in common: they are effective, humane, and far less expensive than our present approach.  But more than that: they reflect the essential decency of Australians – something which has been tarnished and degraded by our behaviour over the past 13 years.

 

NAURU DETENTION FOR CHILDREN UNACCEPTABLE SAY ANGLICAN CHURCH BISHOPS

Melbourne’s Anglican bishops have again urged the Prime Minister, Mr Malcolm Turnbull, to change the narrative on children in detention despite the High Court decision that there is no legal impediment to returning more than 250 asylum seekers to Nauru. In a published statement The Bishops claim “The fact that a legal determination has been made does not require the Government to act to return women and children to off-shore detention. No reasonable Australian wants to encourage people smugglers in any way, but it is simply morally unacceptable to leave children to languish in appalling conditions in off-shore detention centres. If the nation can agree on these two principles, surely it is not beyond us to find a solution.”

The Bishops statement went on, “The Anglican Church in Melbourne will continue to support asylum seekers and refugees with services and advocacy and spiritual help. The Church and its welfare agencies have long had considerable involvement in resettling refugees and helping them build a life in Australia. We applaud the motives of those Christian churches who intend to test the ancient common law notion of sanctuary, but our churches are not equipped to provide temporary accommodation. A better answer would be for Mr Turnbull to exercise compassion and moral principle and allow the asylum seekers to remain in Australia as the processes unfold.

The Archbishop of Sydney, Dr Glenn Davies, says Anglicans along with other Christians in Sydney are concerned by the prospect of 91 asylum seeker children being returned to Nauru following the High Court ruling, a situation which he said ‘should concern every Australian’. Australia is currently detaining around 80 children, at Wickham Point, and about 70 children on Nauru. The High Court’s ruling means that dozens of asylum-seeker families, including babies born in Australia, could be deported to Nauru. Dr Davies says the Human Rights Commission Report (2014) and the contemporary testimony of paediatricians indicate that the overwhelming majority of children suffer considerable trauma during detention. “There is no safe level of exposure when it concerns children in detention” Dr Davies said.

Dr Davies said he was mindful of the difficult decisions that the Immigration Department, under various governments, has had to make. “It is my sincere hope that the Immigration Minister and his Department can find a way to keep these children in Australia” the Archbishop said. “The Anglican Church in the Diocese of Sydney stands ready to offer help and facilities in whatever way we can.”

Source: Press Release from Anglican Church in Australia

Published in the Australian Prayer Network, 10 February 2016