Australia: The refugee debate heats up
In the lead-up to the recent British general election, political party leaders addressed the sensitive topic of Immigration. Gordon Brown’s major address on this topic on 31 March, entitled “Controlling Immigration for a Fairer Britain”, sought to balance firmness with fairness. Meanwhile David Cameron called for a cap on immigration to the level of the early 1990s, when it averaged 50,000 annually.
Public interest in this topic is widespread in Western countries, given population movements to the West in recent decades. In Australia the asylum seeker debate in particular is assuming pressure-cooker proportions.
The debate is taking place at two levels. Some refugees arrive through the official program of resettlement of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). However, there are also “illegal immigrants” who arrive in Australia on boats often after paying exorbitant charges to anonymous people smugglers. Popular reaction against the second can have an impact on views of the first, with a conflating of the two.
The Refugee Council of Australia announced on 24 February 2010 that the refugee intake stood at 6.6% of total annual migration, and called for an increase in the refugee resettlement program over the next five years, from the current annual average of 11,900 places to a permanent program of 20,000 places per year (including illegal immigrants).
Working against this argument is the widespread and growing popular anxiety with the recent surge in illegal refugee numbers. On 29 March it was announced that the 100th refugee boat had arrived on Australia’s shores since the election of Kevin Rudd’s Labor Government in November 2007. This contrasts markedly with the record of the previous conservative government of John Howard, which enforced a strict policy of detention of illegal refugees on islands in the Pacific and Indian oceans, resulting in a dramatic reduction in such arrivals.
Furthermore, the upward trend in Australia contrasts with trends elsewhere. In the words of Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, Scott Morrison: “last year asylum applications in the UK, Canada and the US all declined, yet in Australia they increased by more than 30%. In the UK, asylum applications in the December quarter fell by 30%.”
The debate is articulated in terms of push factors versus pull factors: whether the asylum seeker trade is largely fuelled by refugees being pushed out of their countries of origin through persecution and violence or rather being drawn to Australia because it is perceived to have become much softer on refugee applications under the Rudd Labor Government.
The churches largely speak with one voice on this debate, providing a voice of advocacy on behalf of asylum seekers, whether arriving through official or unofficial routes, emphasising the push factor. In late October 2009 the Catholic Church of Australia held a national conference on the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Refugees. Archbishop Philip Wilson, President of the Australian Bishops’ Conference, emphasised the push factor in stating that “our pastoral response has to be affected by the reasons for the migrants’ arrivals in Australia. Have they come because they have been driven out of their homeland with no prospect of returning, for example, or have they been the victims of extreme violence and hatred in their homelands?” Such an approach is echoed by all the major churches, including the Uniting Church of Australia, arguably the most proactive church in terms of refugee advocacy.
On the political stage the debate is being fought by two of Australia’s most prominent lay Christians. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, a practising Anglican, argues that the surge in illegal refugee arrivals merely reflects increased international instability and insecurity, while at the same time expressing concern at the undoubtedly exploitative nature of the people smuggling industry.
A rare voice from the broader Church-going community asking hard questions about the refugee issue, and emphasising the pull factor, is Opposition leader, Tony Abbott, a practising Catholic. In a radio interview in Easter week, on 2 April 2010, he called for four urgent measures: a temporary protection visa for refugees that does not provide all the rights of permanent residents; rigorous offshore processing; improved relations with neighbouring countries that can impede people smugglers; and “we’ve got to be prepared to turn boats around as a last resort.”
This debate may well become a key issue in the Australian general elections to be held later this year, reflecting a similar perception by British politicians that this particular area of public concern can be a vote winner, or loser.
An edited version of this article first appeared in "Evangelicals Now" (http://www.e-n.org.uk/), May 2010, p24
Public interest in this topic is widespread in Western countries, given population movements to the West in recent decades. In Australia the asylum seeker debate in particular is assuming pressure-cooker proportions.
The debate is taking place at two levels. Some refugees arrive through the official program of resettlement of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). However, there are also “illegal immigrants” who arrive in Australia on boats often after paying exorbitant charges to anonymous people smugglers. Popular reaction against the second can have an impact on views of the first, with a conflating of the two.
The Refugee Council of Australia announced on 24 February 2010 that the refugee intake stood at 6.6% of total annual migration, and called for an increase in the refugee resettlement program over the next five years, from the current annual average of 11,900 places to a permanent program of 20,000 places per year (including illegal immigrants).
Working against this argument is the widespread and growing popular anxiety with the recent surge in illegal refugee numbers. On 29 March it was announced that the 100th refugee boat had arrived on Australia’s shores since the election of Kevin Rudd’s Labor Government in November 2007. This contrasts markedly with the record of the previous conservative government of John Howard, which enforced a strict policy of detention of illegal refugees on islands in the Pacific and Indian oceans, resulting in a dramatic reduction in such arrivals.
Furthermore, the upward trend in Australia contrasts with trends elsewhere. In the words of Shadow Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, Scott Morrison: “last year asylum applications in the UK, Canada and the US all declined, yet in Australia they increased by more than 30%. In the UK, asylum applications in the December quarter fell by 30%.”
The debate is articulated in terms of push factors versus pull factors: whether the asylum seeker trade is largely fuelled by refugees being pushed out of their countries of origin through persecution and violence or rather being drawn to Australia because it is perceived to have become much softer on refugee applications under the Rudd Labor Government.
The churches largely speak with one voice on this debate, providing a voice of advocacy on behalf of asylum seekers, whether arriving through official or unofficial routes, emphasising the push factor. In late October 2009 the Catholic Church of Australia held a national conference on the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Refugees. Archbishop Philip Wilson, President of the Australian Bishops’ Conference, emphasised the push factor in stating that “our pastoral response has to be affected by the reasons for the migrants’ arrivals in Australia. Have they come because they have been driven out of their homeland with no prospect of returning, for example, or have they been the victims of extreme violence and hatred in their homelands?” Such an approach is echoed by all the major churches, including the Uniting Church of Australia, arguably the most proactive church in terms of refugee advocacy.
On the political stage the debate is being fought by two of Australia’s most prominent lay Christians. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, a practising Anglican, argues that the surge in illegal refugee arrivals merely reflects increased international instability and insecurity, while at the same time expressing concern at the undoubtedly exploitative nature of the people smuggling industry.
A rare voice from the broader Church-going community asking hard questions about the refugee issue, and emphasising the pull factor, is Opposition leader, Tony Abbott, a practising Catholic. In a radio interview in Easter week, on 2 April 2010, he called for four urgent measures: a temporary protection visa for refugees that does not provide all the rights of permanent residents; rigorous offshore processing; improved relations with neighbouring countries that can impede people smugglers; and “we’ve got to be prepared to turn boats around as a last resort.”
This debate may well become a key issue in the Australian general elections to be held later this year, reflecting a similar perception by British politicians that this particular area of public concern can be a vote winner, or loser.
An edited version of this article first appeared in "Evangelicals Now" (http://www.e-n.org.uk/), May 2010, p24