Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 14 Hansard (11 December) . . Page.. 4347 ..

MS GALLAGHER (continuing):

Our obligation under the convention is to offer protection to a person who, "owing to a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such a fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country".

This definition intentionally does not discriminate against an asylum seeker on the basis of how they reach a signatory country. The principle is simple: the convention is there to extend protection to asylum seekers, not to seek to deter them from seeking asylum or to force them to stay in environments of persecution or situations lacking adequate protection.

The scope of this convention is quite narrow. Rather than taking an expansive definition of people who seek, and perhaps need, protection, it takes a narrow definition. The criteria to be satisfied for a person to be recognised as a refugee under the convention are quite stringent. It is necessary to state this clearly, as there is a mixed conception in the community, promoted by the federal government, that many asylum seekers are not refugees but that many are economic migrants and that many cannot be welcomed to Australia. The government's own figures do not support this proposition. The vast majority of asylum seekers in Australia who arrive by boat are declared to be refugees, even under the government's regime.

Most recent asylum seekers have come from Afghanistan and Iraq, and the figures on their acceptance rate demonstrate the inadequacies of Liberal policies. Ninety-seven per cent of Iraqis and 93 per cent of Afghanis last year were accepted as refugees and released from detention.

Ms Tucker is correct to draw these matters to the attention of the Assembly, and I thank her for the opportunity to have this discussion this evening. Other organisations have criticised Australia's regime. HREOC commissioner Dr Sev Ozdowski stated on the detention of asylum seekers:

I believe the moral and human rights cost of the current system is too high. The mental health of asylum seekers is an issue of critical importance. In all the facilities I visited a large number of detainees were experiencing major mental stress and trauma, some requiring professional help.

Previous experience shows that significant numbers of detainees are recognised as refugees and released into the Australian community. These people already traumatised by oppression in their own countries and further traumatised by risky travel to Australia are suffering again from the effects of longterm detention. It is better for them and the wider Australian community if we consider their mental fragility early in the detention process.

The United Nations Special Envoy for Refugees, Mary Robinson, also raised severe concerns in relation to the current government's processing regime. Ruud Luubers from the UNHCR also criticised the detention regime, particularly in relation to children. He said:

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .