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
