Commission Website: National Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention
Click here to return to the Submission Index
Submission to National Inquiry
into Children in Immigration Detention from
Hunter Community Council
1. The Hunter Community Council
The Hunter Community
Council was established in 1986 as a peak representative body to support
and advocate on behalf of the non-government welfare sector in the Hunter
region. In April of this year the Hunter Community Council held a forum
attended by welfare agencies representing a wide range of services including:
the youth sector, education, mental health, migrant centres and refugee
resettlement services, the Catholic Social Justice Commission, and early
childhood and family support services.
2. General Statement to the
Inquiry
In recognising the
focus of the Inquiry this submission does not comment on the issue of
border protection, however, we believe very strongly that regardless of
how detainees have arrived on Australian shores, each individual deserves
quality of care whilst their requests are being processed. Australia is
a society that is proud of how we care for our children, yet the conditions
of detention centres breach our own state child protection laws. These
children should not be punished or used as 'examples' in order to deter
others.
The Hunter Community
Council is gravely concerned by the propaganda perpetuated by the government,
which not only dehumanises detainees but deliberately engages in misinformation
whilst preventing others from obtaining information. The HCC is particularly
concerned with the use of children in this matter (i.e. the 'children
overboard incident'). Additionally, the HCC believes current immigration
policies are not only damaging those detained within the centres but are
also damaging the already delicate social fabric of Australian society
outside of these centres.
The Hunter Community
Council is also concerned about the government practice of contracting-out
the running of detention centres. This practice has already proved detrimental
to the welfare sector in Australia by allowing the government to both
distance itself and deny responsibility for 'incidents' it wishes to ignore.
The HCC is concerned that contracting out to a commercial company exposes
detainees to systems abuse that arises from the pressure of profit making
where the well-being of the detainees, and particularly children, is not
the focus, and that there is a general lack of accountability for the
behaviour of the guards (particularly in relation to mandatory reporting).
In order to be brief,
this submission will focus on the following three points of reference:
refugees and the rights of the child, the psychological and social well
being of children in immigration detention, and the alternatives to immigration
detention.
3.1 Refugees Rights and the
Rights of the Child
As a peak body representing
welfare agencies in the Hunter, the HCC is concerned that the Australia
government does not meet its commitments to child detainees under the
Convention of the Rights of the Child. Under the Convention the government
has agreed to take all appropriate measures to ensure that the child is
protected against all forms of discrimination or punishment on the basis
of the status, activities of the child's parents or family members (Article
2). It could also be argued that the government is not working in the
best interest of the child in relation to adequate care, protection, supervision
and general standard of living, nor is it recognising the importance of
maintaining the family unit (Articles 3, 9 and 27 of the Convention).
The HCC is particularly
concerned that the best interest of the child are not being considered
in relation to the following matters:
Children's Guardian
The inherent tension
between the role of Minister of Immigration and his obligations as the
children's Guardian. It is proposed that the Minister of Immigration should
not also hold the position as the children in immigration detention's
Guardian; nor should this position be held by the Prime Minister. Rather,
in order to act in the best interest of the child, the children's Guardian
should be a person who is independent of the government and one that is
appointed by a justice body.
Disparity between
Federal and State Law
Children in immigration
detention do not receive the same rights as other children in Australia
because federal and state laws are not in agreement and a breach of state
child protection laws is not recognised within these centres.
Education is recognised
as a key factor in delivering people from poverty and is recognised not
only as a fundamental right for children under the Convention but also
an obligation under state legislation.
The HCC calls for
an agreement between DIMA and state and territory governments in relation
to child protection laws and access to local schools.
3.2 Psychological and Social
Well-Being
Welfare agencies
in the Hunter would like the Commission to take into account the following
points when considering the psychological and social wellbeing of children
in immigration detention:
- Inadequate educational,
recreation and healthcare, and an overwhelming sense of loss and uncertainty
impede the child's ability to develop and grow physically and psychologically
- Inadequate provision
for the particular and changing needs of children can retard normal
development
- Experience in
Out of Home Care and the Youth sector has already shown that the residual
effect on children who experience alienation, insecure and abusive living
conditions is that they have difficulty functioning fully in a society
that they have learned to mistrust. Some of these children will remain
in Australia and they deserve to be brought up in a welcoming and secure
environment
Stress and Trauma
- The length of
time a child lives in a traumatic and stressful situation impacts on
the likelihood and rate of their recovery,
- Disruptive living
conditions caused by overcrowding, interrupted sleep, and inadequate
recreational facilities compound any trauma already experienced by the
child
- The impact of
stress and trauma on other family members exposes the child to secondary
trauma
- Adults have demonstrated
they will damage themselves if held in detention under current conditions.
Yet separating children from their families is not the answer as it
simply exposes children to a different form of stress
Supporting families
and Unaccompanied Children
- Families may be
better supported in immigration detention by providing access to clear
ongoing culturally relevant information about their status and the processes
which they need to undergo in their quest for refugee determination
- The lack of access
to such knowledge reinforces a sense of helplessness and engenders frustration
and even despair, which only serve to undermine families' psychological
and social wellbeing
- Families could
also be better supported by having access to greater regular contact
from appropriate organisations who could offer counselling and emotional
support to minimise any impact of trauma
- Unaccompanied
children may be better protected if they are placed in the care of a
family and community from the same ethnic, cultural and religious background
- Alternatively,
unaccompanied children who are especially vulnerable, with little protection,
limited advocacy, and minimal appropriate support may be accommodated
in special quarters, similar to a group home concept with trained "house
parents," independent of the Detention Centre management and appointed
specifically to look after their interests, and support them through
the processes of determination. There is a range of NGOs and church
based organisations who would be very willing to be involved in this
way.
Education
- All children in
detention must be provided with access to educational opportunity which
is meaningful, appropriate to their needs, and delivered by trained
educators. Adequate educational activities, or access to a local school
can provide opportunities for children to engage in constructive play
and interact with peers.
- Ultimately, the
provision of education will be to Australia's own benefit, given that
a high percentage of asylum seekers do receive refugee status: and in
effect educating these children is tantamount to educating potential
new Australians.
3.3 Detention and Alternatives
to Detention
The HCC is concerned
that children and families currently in detention remain uninformed of
their rights and the facilities available to them. In some cases information
is only presented in English. It is also understood that detainees do
not have access to a complaints process. Additionally, children and their
families are subjected to unnecessary delays when receiving visitors simply
because there is inadequate staff at reception.
The HCC does not
support the current model of immigration detention, however, if children
must be detained the government must ensure that:
- These children
receive the same rights as other children in Australia, particularly
in relation to child protection and education
- The family unit
must not only be maintained wherever possible, but also adequately supported
so that the well-being of each individual within the family contributes
to the general well-being and resilience of the family as a whole
- Community representatives
and health and welfare professionals are given appropriate access to
children and their families
- Children are provided
with appropriate recreational facilities
- Regular assessment
of the situation of detainees and their children by an independent body
of legal, health and welfare experts
- An independent
complaints process be established for detainees
- Whilst recognising
there are legitimate limitations, priority must be applied to hasten
screening and determination processes
Alternatives to
Detention
Welfare agencies
within the Hunter region have been involved previously with refugees and
asylum seekers. Experience has shown that even when people are detained
in better conditions (for example the Safe Haven Project), the need for
freedom and autonomy is still very strong.
The HCC urges that
the current model of detention be seriously reconsidered. There are more
appropriate and humane systems to deal with asylum seekers, which Australia
could adopt, which are also much more cost effective than incarceration.
When considering
alternatives to immigration detention the HCC would like to stress the
importance of keeping families together and the detrimental impact of
isolating detainees from others. The HCC endorses the approaches taken
by both Sweden and New Zealand and other countries where asylum seekers
have greater freedom of movement once medical and security checks have
been made.
Conclusion
The Hunter Community
Council not only recognises that there is more than sufficient evidence
to confirm that the conditions created by immigration detention are detrimental
to the physical, psychological and social well-being of children, but
that currently children are being subjected to systems abuse because their
rights are not being recognised or protected by the Australian government.
Of particular concern
are those children who are in detention unaccompanied by a family member.
Any children, however, will remain vulnerable within a system that does
not provide adequate health care, educational and recreational facilities,
and where monitoring and early detection procedures that identify the
initial signs of stress and trauma are not put in place.
Hunter
Community Council
PO Box 775
Newcastle NSW 2300
Last
Updated 9 January 2003.