Sunday 7 August 2011

Refugee children and the Malaysia Solution: "a very scary proposition"

By Ruth Skilbeck 
In the lead-up to the Australian Labour government’s proposed ‘Malaysia Solution’ - ‘swapping’ 800 asylum seekers in detention in Australia for 4000 ‘cleared refugees’ from Malaysia, with no ‘blanket exemptions’ - I spoke via email with Dr Rosie Scott, novelist and social justice activist, on a renewed movement  in Australia to end mandatory detention of children.
Refugee children are back in the news in Australia. The government’s implementation on Friday (5/8/11) of the hardline ‘Malaysia Solution’- that will deport all asylum seekers to Malaysia including unaccompanied children- has caused an ‘uproar’ including criticism from the United Nation’s children’s agency, UNICEF, that this will not only traumatise the children for life but also damage Australia’s international reputation as a compassionate country. The government’s determination to deport 14 unaccompanied minors, has led to calls for reconsideration from UNICEF.


In Australia, in the politicisation of ‘the refugee problem’ the most widespread concern has focused on the most vulnerable: refugee children. The traumatic impact of mandatory detention on children’s mental and physical health was extensively documented in A Last Resort, National Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention, by the Australian Human Rights Commission (2004) which led to increased calls for policy change. During the years of the Howard government a very strong movement lobbied for refugee rights and specifically for the humane protection of children, through the organisation, ChilOut.  One of the platforms of the incoming Rudd Labour government was policy change to end detention of children, yet 


this was never fully implemented. ChilOut was quiet for a few years, until it became clear that 'alarming' numbers of children were still being held in detention. Last month, with talk of policy change in the air, ChilOut renewed its campaign placing an advertisement in the Weekend Australian (3-4 July 2011) calling to end children’s mandatory detention. Dr Rosie Scott is one of those involved in the campaign. I spoke with her via email about the impacts of changing refugee policies in Australia, and the controversial Malaysia Solution, on the youngest and most vulnerable asylum seekers.
Ruth Skilbeck: Since 2007 when we talked about writers exiled in Australia * held in mandatory detention, there have been several changes in refugee policy; one of these was the change in policy to prohibit the holding of children in mandatory detention. In your view how much has changed since 2007?
 Rosie Scott: It was not  made into law, as up until very recently there were still  over 1000 children in detention- there are still 300 in locked detention now. The others have been moved to community detention. So there are still children being locked up in Australia and  the strong likelihood of the numbers increasing again. There is still overcrowding, a rise in  self harming especially among teenagers,  and other signs of mental illness- there are still riots,  hunger strikes, suicide and despair. Some refugee advocates say the situation is worse, it's certainly no better. 

Ruth Skilbeck: What needs to be, and can be done to improve conditions, and lives, for refugees including children arriving in Australia?
 Rosie Scott: The basic problem is mandatory detention. In a system like New Zealand people are first of all evaluated and those who have a legal right to stay are put into the community, given support, English lessons etc to get their lives together. We also did it in the 50s in Australia - where they stayed in hostels. This is cost effective, humane and positive for society. Mandatory detention of refugees in camps run by commercial operators will always  be open to abuse and leads to long term mental illness, huge costs for society in both money and in human rights abuses. 
Ruth Skilbeck: What are your views on the debate over the proposal to send 800 Australian refugees to Malaysia in ‘exchange’ for 4,000 cleared refugees from there?
Rosie Scott: This is a very scary proposition. At a recent rally a Malaysian human rights lawyer spoke eloquently about the treatment of refugees in Malaysia - they have no legal safeguard nor rights - the camps are hideous, with bad food, canings and inhuman conditions. It is outrageous that we are deliberately putting human beings into this situation.
Ruth Skilbeck: Can you talk about the term used by politicians in the media of being sent “to the back of the queue.” What is this supposed queue that keeps recurring in the policy debate?
Rosie Scott: The 'queue' is an old myth. Anyone who is knowledgable about the way refugee camps work know that the so-called queues, if they in fact exist, can lead to years and years in limbo in camps  with no certainty of  ever being accepted anywhere.

Ruth Skilbeck: To your knowledge are there still any exiled writers in mandatory detention in Australia? Around the world? Why is it important to campaign for the release of exiled writers?
Rosie Scott: No, I haven't heard of any in Australia - I'm sure they exist here and in other countries though. The reason we don't know much about individual refugees is because the policy of putting them into inaccessible camps like Christmas Island means it is much harder for us to contact people individually and visit them (which of course is the reason for the policy).
Ruth Skilbeck: What can be done by concerned citizens to help the situation of writers in exile; children in refugee centres and others held in mandatory detention?
Rosie Scott: A concerted movement of writing to MPs, setting up ads, contacting the refugees in the camps and helping them in practical ways, getting as much  publicity for their cause as possible, rallying, keeping the cause continually  in front of the public, advocating for individual refugees, supporting  organisations like ChilOut, RACV, Bridge for Asylum Seekers, and Asylum Seekers Resource Centre, - in fact all the actions many thousands of Australians took during the Howard era.
Ruth Skilbeck: The ‘problem’ of increasing refugees around the world is arguably the biggest social issue of the 21st century, the social equivalent of climate change; and in many ways they may be linked, with sadly an ever increasing number of environmental refugees fleeing from natural disasters., as well as war... Do you have any visions on what can be done to create a sustainable situation for refugees in Australia, and globally?
Rosie Scott: My comments about the way New Zealand does it apply here too, so the social costs of accepting refugees here are minimised and end up enriching the life of Australians as they have done in the past..   We can also do our bit for climate change by agreeing to the tax and by creating a sustainable economy. While we have  media moguls like Rupert Murdoch and politicians like Tony Abbott (both of whom are strongly supported by oil and coal companies) who run a full time  and well-funded  campaign against  any attempts to counteract climate change, it's an uphill battle - but recent events in News Corporation have made the world a bit more hopeful that the truth will out and the urgent action needed will happen.
Ruth Skilbeck: Is there anything else you'd like to say about the new ChilOut campaign, or anything else to do with these issues?
Rosie Scott: ChilOut ran a magnificent campaign in the past  and now they're gearing up to do the same - they  need our support for this.
[Email interview: 15 July, 2011.]
If nothing else, one thing that is become increasingly clear in this latest round of political ‘Solutions’ is that the ‘refugee problem’ goes beyond party politics; arguably like global warming and the global economy it is a global world wide problem that is beyond the scope of any one country to solve; it will take a whole world approach to effectively manage it. In the meantime as signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention relating to the status of refugees and its 1967 protocol, Australia, unlike some of our regional neighbours who are not signatories, has made an international commitment to offering compassionate refuge to asylum seekers, of all ages.
© Ruth Skilbeck 2011
*Skilbeck, Ruth  (2010), ‘Exiled writers, Human Rights, and Social Advocacy Movements in Australia: A Critical Fugal Analysis’, Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, Vol. 7, No. 3, September 2010, pp. 280-296
*Skilbeck, Ruth (2009).'Arts Journalism and Exiled Writers: A Case Study of Fugal, Reflexive Practice'. Pacific Journalism Review, Vol. 15, No. 2, Oct 2009: 132-151

No comments: