AT WHAT COST?

At What Cost? – The Human, Economic and Strategic Cost of Australia’s Asylum Seeker Policies and the Alternatives
These numbers do not appear to include the people who have been recognised as refugees in Nauru and PNG
who are no longer residing in the RPCs.
Relative costs of processing and detention
Offshore processing has been very expensive to implement due to high overhead costs (extensive capital
expenditures, regional agreements with partner countries), and the costs of managing the centres in the remote
locations (travel costs, logistics, and transport). Robust estimates of the per person per year cost consistently
exceed $400,000. 226
On the other hand, onshore detention has been costly in absolute terms because while it is cheaper to manage and
provide services on mainland Australia, there were more people in onshore detention. At its peak in July 2013, the
onshore detention network housed nearly 7,000 people. 227 On a per person basis, the cost of onshore detention is
lower than offshore at around $240,000 per person, per year. 228
The figure below illustrates the relative costs of the different categories of detention per person, highlighting that
community detention and Bridging Visa-E categories have a much lower cost than detention in immigration facilities
– around $90,000 and $33,000 per person per year respectively.
RELATIVE COST PER PERSON FOR 12 MONTHS IN DETENTION, 2013
BV-E
Community
Onshore
Offshore
0
50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000 500,000
Cost per person per year ($)
Source: Reproduced from National Commission of Audit, originally from Department of Finance – assumes chart is to scale. 229
The difference in the relative cost per person of the categories of detention show how the distribution of people
directly affects the cost of IMA policy. If a person currently in an RPC were to be detained onshore instead, the
Government saves around $200,000. Moving that person into community residence saves around a further
$150,000. And finally if that person was issued a Bridging Visa-E, the cost would be reduced by another $50,000.
Before discussing each of the main cost components in more detail, it is important to put the lower expected
fiscal cost of the Government’s policies into perspective. Lower outlays in the future are not necessarily driven by
efficiencies in service provision, but reflect that large capital expenditures had been incurred (and largely sunk);
and that the rate of arrival of new IMAs has slowed or stopped altogether due to the fact that boats are being
prevented from reaching Australian territories So the lower cost should not be interpreted as an efficiencyachieving
result, but rather that the same amount of human cost that the current policies inflict on the people in
detention can be achieved at a lower dollar cost.
The following sections describe the costs incurred in regional offshore processing, onshore detention, boat turnbacks
regional agreements and cooperation, and other important areas of the Government’s deterrence policies.
For each element, the numbers of people affected as well as the top line costs are reported. Where possible, some
disaggregation of the costs into key activities conducted is also explored.
43