I’m going to cut to the chase in this post as it may otherwise become a bit too long.
Boat people and the Government
In this post I want to talk about the Government’s policy on boat people. At the moment the Government is trying to put together an on shore processing solution after the High Court effectively ruled out off shore processing. But I want to begin this piece with some discussion on the Malaysia solution. If you listen to its labour proponents the practicality of the solution was perfect: you take away the reason for boat smuggling by sending them to the ‘back of the line’. This aim was by far the policy’s best quality – it marked a turn from treating the symptoms of illegal immigration towards cutting the problem off at its source i.e. making illegal immigration pointless. However while such an aim gets the Government some kudos, they loose it all in the method of their policy.
You can read a simple explanation for why the High Court decided the Malaysia solution was illegal here. Basically the High Court found that it did not comply with the Migration Act (i.e. it was illegal) and that it was against Australia’s international obligations to refugees. But this was only half the problem. This solution in effect took refugees from the incoming boats and gave them rights and care that is denied to refugees who have been legitimately ‘waiting in line’. So how does this discourage illegal boat immigration? IT DOESN’T.
In practice it encourages illegal immigration. Refugees face the choice of going to refugee camps or other legitimate government sanctioned avenues and following a lengthy application process, or catching an illegal boat and receiving the aforementioned rights and care – still making illegal immigration a more attractive option than waiting. So this scheme was doomed to fail from the start.
The Need for a Solution
We need a way of ‘keeping out the hoards’! Up until recently this was the reason behind boat people policy, but this was too politically incorrect. The position on boat people policy now is that policy is required to protect immigrants from disasters such as the Christmas Island sinking. This is a legitimate interest that should be protected by policy.
We can’t forget that in almost all cases these illegal immigrants are genuine refugees, people in need. Despite the means they use to escape, their intentions are to find safety and prosperity – aren’t these things that we all strive for? Unfortunately, these legitimate interests are lost, forgotten or covered by stigma, xenophobia, and misinformed popular opinion resulting in the vilification and alienation of these needy people (for more on public opinion read this). Such attitudes are a problem, as they encourage a hostile response to refugees rather than one of compassion.
However, in saying this there is a need to dissuade boat people. It is actually dangerous for boat people to come over in the vessels they do – they are cheap, unsafe and have minimal crew. While the reasons for this position being adopted by the government are less than compassionate, it is still a legitimate interest. Furthermore a policy is needed to regulate intake. There are two main reasons for this; growth must remain sustainable and unrestricted entry into Australia poses a security threat (in saying that Australia does have an abundance of space and resources, so there is no immediate danger of overpopulation). But the most important reason for implementing effective policy is ending the exploitation of asylum seekers by people smugglers. The smugglers do not exist to help people find better lives, they just want to make a quick buck from desperate people. Boat people policy is needed to stop this.
So while the boat people come to protect their own legitimate interests there is a need to adopt some sort of process that can regulate it. However, ultimately the system that Australia employs to deal with refugees needs to be one based on compassion, at least this is what my conscience tells me.
A Humble Suggestion
As I mentioned before, the idea behind the Malaysia deal was to take away what the people smugglers were offering – a fast track into Australia. People smugglers have always had a market for their trade because gaining legitimate entry into Australia is lengthy and involves great hardship. Often people will live in refugee camps or other hostile environments for years awaiting the process of their application for asylum. If you have a family, is this really something you would want? No. So instead people turn to people smugglers.
What if I told you there was a way to possibly fix this? What if I told you Australia could increase its current refugee intake rate and at the same time cripple the people smuggling trade? Well it can be done. This will require the Australia government to grow a pair and be willing to demonstrate international initiative. The idea is that the Australia Government steps into places such as refugee camps and directly take steps to care for and process refugees. This would involve increasing Australia’s intake of legal refugees and making the application process more efficient.
You can read about the process for granting asylum here. If you believe this website it should take no longer than 90 days to review an application, however, I don’t necessarily trust the information on this page as the Immigration department has a vested interest in inflating the role Australia plays in dealing with asylum. Also, I have spoken with a couple of people who have legitimately sought asylum in Australia and they have said that it took them much longer than 90 days to have their applications dealt with (in one case a man and his brother waited over 3 years). In short the procedure involves an immigration officer assessing whether an asylum seeker is a legitimate refugee according to the Refugees Convention. This involves reviewing the person’s background and confirming it with their country of origin. The confirmation is difficult because third world countries don’t keep the best records, so it may be difficult to get confirmation of an asylum seekers identity or background. But if anything, having an Australian processing facility on the ground will mean that it will be easier to access such information as immigration officers will be in closer proximity to the source of the information.
If refugee camps become a better option than illegal boats then people will stop using the boats, simple!
But it can’t be that easy can it? Well no, it isn’t. There are concerns that if Australia were to do this that other countries would slack off and leave dealing with refugees to Australia. But this is stupid, if no one ever starts doing something then how can other people follow? Rather than taking a pessimistic view like it should be seen as an opportunity to help our fellow man, to start something that could go a long way toward improving the lives of others.
Should cost hold something like this back? No. The Malaysia deal initially cost the Government over $250,0000,000 but that didn’t stop it, so clearly cost shouldn’t be that big a factor, especially when you are protecting refugees!
Conclusion
So where to from here? Well the government has to set up some on shore processing here to deal with asylum seekers for the time being and should keep on-shore processing for future immigrants, however it should also take proactive steps to stop illegal immigration at its source. This means implementing some policy, whether it be something like the one I have suggested or something else along those lines. Whatever it is we cannot lose sight of the fact that boat people are real people and need to be treated with care and compassion. If you have anything to say on the matter I’d love to hear it, so leave a comment below!
