WhAT’S OFTEN FORGOTTEN 22 IssuE 7 VERTIGO will julia GillaRd continue austRalia’s policY of detaininG oR dismissinG RefuGees, oR will she take a moRe matuRe appRoach to the situation? felicitY evans looks into austRalia’s immiGRation histoRY and whY it looks as thouGh little is set to chanGe.
1788 (6 januaRY) - the bRitish beGin colonisation of austRalia 1851 - the Gold Rush leads to mass immiGRation 1901–1973 - white austRalia policY officiallY implemented 1945 - wwii immiGRants beGin to aRRive in austRalia 1988 - one austRalia policY pRoposed bY john howaRd 1996 - pauline hanson announces, “i believe we aRe in danGeR of beinG swamped bY asians” australia is quite good at forgetting its history, especially when it comes to how each of us got here. To be quite frank, unless you are of Aboriginal decent, and therefore an original inhabitant of this land, you are an immigrant of sorts. Whether it was on a tall ship, dinghy, cruise-liner or in a cargo container; Australia’s diverse population has arrived here in all manner of methods. However, judging by the number of policies, laws and border protection TV shows on air, it seems that not all of us have quite come to the realisation that Australia is an island that was colonised, and that the vast majority of us landed here. So why do we continue to refuse refugees, asylum seekers and immigrants entry to the country? Are these people really ‘queue jumpers’ or is Australia responsible for some far more sinister legal and immigration practices? Australia is a signatory to the Refugee Convention and Protocol. Designed by the UN, these laws are not enforceable, but provide a guide for sovereign nations trying to assess refugee claims and accommodation. Under this convention refugees are entitled to basic tenets of human rights as well as; • The right to seek asylum in a country outside their country of origin, which has agreed to be bound by the Refugee Convention; • The right not to be returned to the country where they have a well-founded fear of persecution; • Freedom of religion and movement. Australia, especially in recent times has breached almost all of these obligations. Not only do we declare these people ‘queue jumpers’ and quite cruelly ‘boat people,’ we return them to war zones or lock them up for processing in detention centre. Maybe this is my simplistic, heartfelt opinion on the issue and perhaps you do not agree. The reality is, though, in almost all cases, these people are seeking protection from war, persecution and punishment. Hardly the story we have been fed in recent years. 2001 - tampa affaiR, childRen oveRboaRd and siev-X sinkinG 2001–2007 - howaRd’s pacific solution 2008 - Rudd ends pacific solution 2010 (apRil) - pRocessinG of applications fRom sRi lankan and afGhan asYlum seekeRs suspended 2010 (julY) - julia GillaRd announces neGotiations foR pRocessinG plants in timoR leste and new new Zealand; anGeRinG the timoR GoveRnment 2010 (julY) - tonY abbott announces policY to ‘dRaG boats back out to sea’ And yet, despite its open involvement in two wars and the knowledge that hundreds more are being waged, Australia’s government has not yet realised that these ‘boat people’ have few other options left to them. Julia Gillard’s announcement that Timor Leste should be the next holding ground for refugees fell flat in Australia and had the Timorese Government up in arms. But was her plan just a miscommunication, or was it a breach of international conventions? Unfortunately, under the conventions of a refugee, refoulment laws, which forbid the returning of asylum seekers to their home country, are only eligible if and when a refugee arrives in a country. Despite these laws, Julia Gillard has announced plans to try and return Afghan refugees through a pact with their government. Only two have been returned since 2008, but such plans make you wonder about Australia’s commitment to human rights, international law and its international reputation. Julia Gillard shows no signs of changing Australian policies or coming up with a tangible, popular solution. Detention centres are an embarrassing blight on Australia, while trying to palm off asylum seekers is an underdeveloped and costly plan. That being said, anything would be better than the Coalition’s plan to drag illegal boats back out to sea and leave them there. Border protection is a dangerous and spiralling notion that the government needs to give up before it causes too much animosity in the world community. Refugee law is, like so much of UN policy, disappointingly unenforceable, something which the government continues to take advantage of. However, as a ‘free’ and ‘democratic’ country, it would be encouraging to see Australia take a long, hard look at its policies and the rhetoric surrounding boat people. As both sides of politics look down the barrel of another election, it is additionally disappointing that neither will move away from a docudrama-esque stance of naval intervention and border protection. At the end of the day, need it be said that Julia Gillard’s family came here from another country? . VERTIGO IssuE 7 23
Change language