When two elephants fight, it is the grass which gets trampled

by

Paul Griffiths and Sue Harris. 2001.

'When two elephants fight,
it is the grass which gets trampled'

African proverb

MCH shares the concern of much of the Australian and international community about the treatment of refugees in Australia. MCH will continue with its program of public discussion and involvement in lobbying parliamentarians and other decision makers for better policies and practices regarding treatment of refugees.

Refugees will also be a topic at the MCH Weekend of Ideas from March 1-3.

At the end of 2001 Manning Clark House held three events about refugees —
a discussion group at the house led by Dr John Eddy SJ,
a Late Night Live program with Phillip Adams,
and a seminar, Australia’s refugee policies and practices - a better way forward, on 12 December at the Legislative Assembly building.

The purpose of this seminar was to expand on the issues raised on ABC Radio’s Late Night Live . We cut to the chase with this seminar. Its purpose was to look at different and better ways of thinking, planning and acting regarding refugees: ways that might work better than the current refugee policies and practices in Australia.

The speakers were Dr Jim Jupp, Centre for Immigration;
Judy Horacek, cartoonist;
Kerrie Tucker MLA, the Greens;
Sue Harris, Human Rights Policy Officer, ACFOA;
Phillip Griffiths, Refugee Action Committee; and
Eveline Goy, Australasian Research Foundation for Pacific, Oriental and Western Studies.

Dr Jamie Mackie, Racial Respect, chaired the evening, and moderated the discussion following the presentations from the speakers.

Manning Clark House thanks the chairman and all the speakers for their time and thoughtful contribution.

Following are notes from presentations by Sue Harris and Phil Griffiths:

The current policy towards refugees and indigenous Australians represent a failing of human rights education and an absence of independent philanthropic funding for human rights advocacy.

The avenue of changing policy appealing to Parliament has not been successful over the last six years. Our most useful focus should be on building community campaigns which change community opinion, much in the same way as the reconciliation movement used events like the Bridgewalks and the Sea of Hands.

Two areas need caution: firstly, indigenous issues should not be forced off the agenda by asylum issues - they are linked by the concept of racism (and the same portfolio and Minister), but indigenous peoples issues remain crucial and distinct.

Secondly, we should not play a numbers game. Our Convention obligation is quite separate to our migration intake. Our offshore program is tiny but wonderful, but it is an optional obligation with no legal basis in the Refugee Convention. Our obligation is to offer protection to those who seek asylum on our shores if they fit the definition under the Convention and to honour the concept of non-refoulement. Even the most good-hearted advocates often miss this point - we could quadruple our off-shore program but it is not a substitute or in any way linked to our obligation to process asylum-seekers onshore.

There are various ways in which people can be actively involved with improving Australia's treatment of refugees, including:

Sign the Fair Go Australia Pledge - to be presented to Parliament at the opening session (Feb 12) http://www.petitiononline.com/fairgo/petition.html

Make a submission to the HREOC Inquiry into Children in Detention - it is CRUCIAL that it is not just the usual suspects this time
http://www.hreoc.gov.au/human_rights/children_detention/index.html

Further info on children - http://www.chilout.org

Rural Australians for Refugees - meeting with Captain Rinnan next May, also creating Welcome Books and Welcome Towns, and tours for a soccer team Tiger Elevens

Australians Against Racism - need help promoting their ad with letters to the editor

Sue Harris
Human Rights Policy Officer
Australian Council for Overseas Aid (ACFOA)

sharris@acfoa.asn.au
http://www.acfoa.asn.au

From Phil Griffiths

As Sue Harris rightly pointed out, there is wide agreement on some of the basic policies we need the government to adopt to create a humane system for dealing with asylum seekers who come to Australia without authorisation. These include:

1. Repeal the Border Protection (Validation and Enforcement Power) Bill 2001 and Migration Amendment (Excision from Migration Zone) Bill 2001, Migration Amendment (Excision from Migration Zone) (Consequential Provisions) Bill 2001 and other Migration Legislation Amendment Bills (No 5, Judicial Review, No 1, No 6) that restrict the rights of those seeking asylum in Australia;

2. Immediately end the Pacific solution and return to the Australian mainland those asylum seekers who have been transported to Papua New Guinea and Nauru and other Pacific islands;

3. End the policy of mandatory and non-reviewable detention of asylum seekers who arrive without documentation;

4. End the discriminatory practice of temporary protection visas and restore full right to all refugees (including, permanent residency, English lessons, family re-union, the right to work, Medicare, and other social services) and grant an amnesty to all escapees;

5. Increase the refugee intake to at least 20,000 (to be assessed on the basis of need) and unlink onshore and offshore applications for humanitarian visas so that family re-union, refugee resettlement from overseas is not reduced by asylum applications made onshore.

These items form the body of a new petition being circulated by the Refugee Action Committee in Canberra and refugee action groups interstate.

We need to campaign to end ALL administrative detention of asylum seekers; a position that is at odds with many in the refugee movement who accept the need for some detention.

* Detention of anyone is a traumatic experience; and should only be allowed on the basis of a proper judicial proceding. The right to personal liberty is one of the foundations of our democratic rights.

* Refugees are amongst the most traumatised people on earth; any form of detention is an extreme punishment to them. Australia's detention regime has led to extraordinary levels of psychological damage amongst detainees.

* Locking people up sends the wider a community a message that these people are a danger, or potential danger, to society. Locking up asylum seekers underlines a message of danger; and that message is given a racist edge when most detainees are from countries or backgrounds vilified in much of the mainstream media.

* Detention is no protection against war criminals and "economic" migrants.
Most war criminals enter Australia legally and comfortably; including the many who were deliberately sponsored here after the Second World War, and some who have come via the Government's own humanitarian program. People who come on boats are not seeking material rewards, but protection. Most have been middle class or professional people in their homelands and end up here in labouring and other "unskilled" jobs, which hardly represents an improvement in their economic situation.

The issue is not just refugee policy per se. The government and other racist agitators have sought to whip up hatred against refugees and the societies they come from. The issue is not just a decent refugee policy, but fighting that racism. That involves identifying its causes, and the social conditions racism feeds off.

John Howard used hatred and fear towards refugees as a way of getting his hated government re-elected, on the votes of people who have suffered as a result of the GST, education cutbacks, hospital cuts, attacks on workers' rights and industrial awards, deregulation and privatisation, and so on ad nauseum, and who will suffer more in the next three years. Many of them will come to deeply regret voting for Howard, and we need to show that they were cynically used and their fears built up by lies and deceit.

In all this the role played by the unions can be vital. People generally have their ideas challenged and shaped by discussions at work. Many union leaders support refugee rights. We need to use every opening possible to discuss these issues with union members. A good refugee policy is so much paper without the support of millions of anti-racist, caring people, arguing the point in every workplace in the country. We should not forget that anti-Irish and anti-Catholic bigotry used to be widespread in Australia; as did mass hostility to southern European immigrants, who were regarded as not "white". The trade union movement, along with the political left, played the key role in challenging these attitudes.

The wider refugee catastrophe in the world is in part a product of American economic and foreign policy, in which the Australian Government is largely complicit. One element leading to the disaster in Afghanistan was the US decision to fund mujahadeen fighters, in the hope of provoking a Soviet invasion. Similarly, US support for Saddam Hussein before the 1990 invasion of Kuwait, and then the US war and blockade against Iraq ever since, has been a major cause of the mass exodus of Iraqi refugees. Similar comments could be made about Iran, Cambodia and many other situations that have driven millions into exile from their homelands. The destruction caused by globalisation has been another major cause of social disintegration and conflict. Any long term solution to the world's refugee crisis involves limiting the power of the United States, and other great powers, to attack, blockade and economically devastate other parts of the world.

Phil Griffiths Convenor,
Refugee Action Committee

Note: these comments are personal, and do not necessarily reflect the policies of the Refugee Action Committee

School of Social Sciences #9; #9; Australian National University
Phone 02 6125 0323