CATHOLICS and Catholic agencies have given the recommendations made by the panel looking into Australia’s asylum seeker policy a mixed “scorecard”.
The Houston Panel, led by former defence chief Angus Houston, recently delivered 22 recommendations to the Federal Government, ranging from increasing Australia’s humanitarian intake to removing Section 198A of the Migration Act, which ensured that asylum seekers processed offshore had legally binding protections.
Since the report was released the Government has passed legislation to reinstate offshore processing on Nauru and Papua New Guinea’s Manus Island.
The Australian Catholic Migrant and Refugee Office (ACMRO) that operates under the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference (ACBC) produced its own “scorecard” on the Houston Report and said there were a number of “hopeful aspects” but also some problems.
It was a sentiment mirrored by others within the Church, including Archbishop Mark Coleridge of Brisbane, Brisbane archdiocese’s Catholic Justice and Peace Commission (CJPC) and the St Vincent de Paul Society.
ACMRO director Scalabrinian Father Maurizio Pettenà, in the “scorecard” story, said the recommendation to increase Australia’s humanitarian intake to 20,000 people per year would have the greatest impact on the asylumseeker phenomenon.
CJPC executive officer Peter Arndt agreed but was concerned by the thrust of most of the recommendations.
“Increasing the number of refugees Australia resettles each year to 20,000 is wonderful, but so much of the report proposes actions which will treat asylum seekers with even greater cruelty and inhumanity,” Mr Arndt said.
“Sending asylum seekers to isolated detention centres in Nauru and Papua New Guinea for many years will undoubtedly produce more and more refugees who will eventually come to Australia with serious mental illness as we saw when asylum seekers were first sent to Nauru by Australia,” he said.
Archbishop Coleridge said detention centres in Nauru and Papua New Guinea were unlikely to prove more of a deterrent than had Christmas Island and other remote detention facilities.
“It is also questionable for the Government to spend $1.4 billion penalising the little more than 2000 asylum seekers who will end up in Nauru or Papua New Guinea,” he said.
“The same sum will be spent on resettling humanitarian entrants.
“One has to ask: Why not spend both sums on resettlement?”
St Vincent de Paul Society National Council chief executive Dr John Falzon expressed sadness over some of the Houston Report’s key recommendations.
“We reject the rehash of the Pacific Solution,” Dr Falzon said.
“Offshore processing is not the answer.
“Neither is the punitive treatment of asylum seekers and their families.”
Dr Falzon said it was time for Australia to accept its international obligations and to respect the human rights and human dignity of the people who sought asylum in our country.
CJPC member and refugee worker Camilla Cowley is concerned by the proposed removal of Section 198A of the Migration Act that would offer human rights protections to asylum seekers sent to Nauru and Papua New Guinea.
“I understand that when the Howard Government first introduced the policy of sending asylum seekers to Nauru, the Opposition Leader at the time, Kim Beazley, was only prepared to let the legislation pass if the Government put human rights protections in place,” she said.
Edmund Rice Centre co-ordinator of research John Sweeney echoed many of the sentiments expressed by fellow Catholics.
“Nauru is not stopping any boat from embarking on a dangerous journey, it is merely a different destination for those who do,” Mr Sweeney said.
Fr Pettena said the sanctity of family unity was non-negotiable in Catholic teaching.
“Preventing vulnerable people from being able to reunite with their families can never have positive consequences for our society and we need only imagine what this could lead to,” he said.
