A new deal for new settlers?

Miss Eagle has been a supporter of A Just Australia since its earliest days. Those who seek justice and a better deal for asylum seekers and refugees in Australia are looking to the new Australian Government for the humanity in immigration and refugee policy which was lacking in the policies of the harsh regime that was the Howard Government.

To-day, Miss E has received the following email from AJA. Of particular interest is the advice on how to campaign against the term "illegal/s" in the media by using the Press Council decision against such usage.

The work continues
After the election, AJA staff and board have been analyzing the need for an organization like A Just Australia to continue. It is clear to us that while the sector is in a much better position to achieve positive policy change, there is still work to be done. Luckily most of that work is now advising and negotiating on policy implementation, as opposed to developing public pressure campaigns to simply get the previous government to admit that change is needed.There have already been announcements that the 7 Burmese on Nauru will be resettled in Australia before Christmas, and the 72 Sri Lankans found to be refugees may be settled shortly in the new year. Today there was also an announcement that Labor is living up to the pledge to review the 45 day rule, which prohibits some asylum seekers from working.AJA will continue to advocate for change to policy using as a guide our 10 Steps to Clean Up Our Act. We hope that most of these steps will be adopted by the new government which will achieve our objective of putting A Just Australia out of business, which is our ultimate goal!But we cannot continue without your support. Early in the new year we will be running our membership drive again. We hope that all memberships will be renewed, and we can pick up some new members and donors to continue the work towards making a more just Australia.In the meantime, happy holidays to everyone. Lets all hope that the ALP gets rid of TPVs very soon, so that refugees who have been separated from their wives, husbands or children by the previous government's policy of denying family reunion, can celebrate the festive season next year with loved ones by their side.

Where to from here?

AJA coordinated the convening of a planning meeting in Melbourne with many of the key advocacy groups and legal/health practitioners. Out of that meeting came two clear objectives:
1. The identification of 6 high priority areas of reform that were needed immediately. These were seen as righting the most grievous wrongs, such as bringing people off Nauru, conversion of TPVs and THVs to permanent visas and giving split-family reunion priority to those who had been on TPVs, removal of vulnerable people from detention and halting any imminent removals of people refused Ministerial Intervention and a review of those cases.
2. That A Just Australia and the Refugee Council of Australia were seen as the best agencies to take those matters to the Minister on behalf of the sector..A Just Australia is hard at work at preparing those policy recommendations along with other organizations.

There have already been some informal discussions with the Minister's office and we feel very positive about the direction that we see asylum seeker and refugee policy taking over the coming months. Change is not something that can happen overnight, but we feel assured that it is coming and it will be change that achieves compassionate policy creating an 'orderly migration system' that is not at the human rights expense of the world's most vulnerable people - refugees.

News from our Annual General Meeting
A Just Australia held our AGM on 10th December, Human Rights Day.There have been some changes to the board makeup:Mark Madden has stepped down from the chair, a position he held for two years. Mark worked tirelessly behind the scenes on the strategic direction of AJA, providing key policy writing and directing the fundraising efforts of our membership drive. Great thanks are extended to him from the rest of the board, as well as the staff of AJA. We would not be in the position we are today without all his efforts.Dianne Hiles has stepped up to the role of chair. Dianne is a founding member of ChilOut (Children out of Detention) and a passionate speaker on children's rights .A long term supporter of Amnesty International, Dianne was elected to the Board of A Just Australia in April 2006 and became Secretary at the last AGM.John Ball has remained as deputy chair and Ian Anderson has also remained as Treasurer. Both have made a great positive impact on AJA and will continue to do so. Sean Cleary has taken the role of Secretary, and Mary Stuart and Phil Glendenning remain as board members. Philip Adams is expected to continue but was unable to attend due to illness.The board gratefully acknowledges the work of Sarina Greco and Josh Bornstein, previous board members who resigned their positions at this year's AGM.

Complaint on use of term 'illegals'
For many years the term "illegals" has been used by both the media and the previous government to describe unauthorized entry asylum seekers. The use of such terms has contributed to the here harmful stereotyping of asylum seekers and has had a serious negative impact on public opinion. This term is not only incorrect, but it is inflammatory and does not add any positive input to public discourse about a sensitive area of public policy.This term did fall out of use under Amanda Vanstone, but was brought back by previous Minister for Immigration, Kevin Andrews in many media statements. See here or here , just to name a few. He even uses this term in his profile on the Liberals website. The first story that we have seen attributing comments by Senator Chris Ellison makes use of the term 'illegals.' There is no direct quote by the Senator, so this may be the fault of the journalist in question. However we will be keeping a watch on any future use of this term.A Just Australia wrote to the West Australian newspaper to complain about the article, based on a Press Council ruling on the issue. We also wrote to the Press Council, as a previous letter of complaint on another article had no response. We did get an immediate response to our 2nd letter. AJA encourages any supporter who sees an article, or hears the use of the term illegals on the radio to make a similar complaint. Our vigilance will ensure that the term stops being used by the media, which will have an enormous impact on public opinion. This allows for greater room for movement towards compassionate policy reform, as there will be less voter backlash. See our letter below for ideas on how to structure your complaint.AJA notes that Mira Wroblewski was the person who went to great lengths to make the original complaint to the Press Council back in 2004. She won the ruling we can now all use to ensure accurate media reporting on this issue. Good on you Mira!

Dear Paul Armstrong,

I am writing to you to make a strong complaint about a story written on the 11th December by Rhianna King "Keep Pacific Solution: Opposition"Our concern is with the line "Senator Ellison - the former justice minister appointed as shadow immigration minister last week - urged Labor to retain the coalitions Pacific Solution, in which all illegal boat people were detained on Nauru then resettled in a third country."

Such claims made by the media are inflammatory and do not add any positive input to public discourse about a sensitive area of public policy.

I refer you to the Australian Press Council guideline No. 262:

The Australian Press Council has received complaints about the terminology that is applied, and ought to be applied, to those arriving in Australia who do not have normal immigrant credentials. Technically in Commonwealth immigration legislation they are referred to as "unlawful non-citizens". However, they are often referred to as "illegal immigrants", or even "illegals".The problem with the use of terms such as "illegal refugee" and "illegal asylum seeker" is that they are often inaccurate and may be derogatory.

The Council cautions the press to be careful in the use of such unqualified terms in reports and headlines.See also the adjudication on a complaint made to the Press Council on a similar case: http://www.presscouncil.org.au/pcsite/adj/1242.html

I also attach a letter of complaint we sent on 27th November re another article by Rhianna King and Nick Butterly, which contains the same problem. This letter was sent to you via email and to date we have had no response from you.I would like to know any action to intend to take both for the published articles and to ensure that these terms are not used in any future publications.

Yours sincerely

Kate Gauthier

National Coordinator

The West Australian wrote back the same day with a positive response:

Dear Kate Gauthier

RE: Use of the term "illegals" in The West Australian.

Your letter has been referred to me by the editor Paul Armstrong for response.The reporter who wrote both stories, Rhianna King, has now been counselled about the misuse of the term "illegals" in her reports.An internal message has also been sent to all reporting and sub-editing staff on the newspaper urging caution about the use of the term and referring them to our long-standing style point. The message states:Please exercise caution with the terms "illegals", "illegal boat people", "illegal asylum seekers", "illegal refugees", "illegal detainees" etc. In most cases the word "illegal" is not appropriate, is inaccurate and can be seen as us using derogatory language.Our style is quite clear yet this has happened twice in the last month.

Our style is:

illegals - do not use when referring to detainees or asylum seekers.

Australian Press Council has even issued a guideline on the matter (Number 262), in which they caution newspapers "to be careful in the use of such unqualified terms in reports and headlines".

Yours sincerely

This newsletter is brought to you by A Just Australia Inc..To contact us, email: mail@ajustaustralia.com.

Downer, Burma, refugees and guano

Photo: The Age

Hands up if you think Alexander Downer is charismatic - with or without the fishnet tights? Mmm...no hands up people and you are looking puzzled. Miss Eagle is not sure if he has great intellectual capacity either.

We know the Howard Government has great difficulty with refugees - actually the Howard Government has great difficulty with people, particularly people who are not Anglo, not rich, not powerful. But Downer has put his foot in his mouth this time. He reckons that we can't take all the refugees in the world (duh!) but we should focus on Burma and take refugees from there.

What a difference a headline makes! No, local headlines won't do. They have to be international - and preferrably supported by George W. Bush and Condi Rice. So Burma and the Burmese become the flavour of the month.

Meanwhile, in the real world - where people other than Alexander Downer live - the words Burmese and refugee are lived out experiences for some people - not mealy-mouthed words in the face of a sanctimonious Australian Minister for Foreign Affairs. You see, dear Reader, there are Burmese refugees left to rot in that very strange place where no shit actually describes its landscape, Nauru.

So this Foreign Minister who speaks loud and long of "experience" and the need for it as an echo of His Master's Voice, John Howard, clearly cannot hold two consequential thoughts in his mind to make some sort of sense: refugees Burma.

• They're here already, Alexander Downer.
• You ignore them already, Alexander Downer.
• You are full of guano, Alexander Downer.
• Suggest you take up residence on Nauru, Alexander Downer.
• You clearly have the capacity, Alexander Downer, to make renewable deposits of guano such that the economy of Nauru could be easily revived.

Love is a challenge

I have to-day received an email from a friend. It is absolute drivel. I publish it below with my comments interpolated.

Have you ever thought -- Is Australian Moslem really an oxymoron? Can a devout Moslem be an Australian and a loyal citizen?
I forwarded that question to a friend who worked in Saudi Arabia for 20 >years. The following is his forwarded reply:
"Theologically, no. Because his allegiance is to Allah, the moon god of Arabia.
Mmmmm..... Don't know about the moon god bit but how do we interpret Islamic acceptance of Abraham, Moses, Jesus? How do we tally this up against a God (whom Christians and Jews worship) who is known as God of the Mountains (El Shaddai) and Lord of Armies (that's what Lord of Hosts means - not to mention various warlike characteristics that can be drawn from the Old Testament).
Religiously, no. Because no other religion is accepted by his Allah except Islam (Quran, 2:256)
Jesus said: "I am the way, and the truth and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me." (John 14:6) So where are modern Christians in all this as they inhabit a pluralist society? How does this statement of Jesus' inform our discourse with Jews, Buddhists inter alia....and yes Muslims?
Scripturally, no Because his allegiance is to the five pillars of Islam and the Quran (Koran).
John Fitzgerald Kennedy, back in 1960, became the first Catholic elected to the US Presidency. Questions were asked during the campaign, (these same questions, I might add, had prevented previous Catholic hopefuls from running for the highest American office) concerning his allegiance to the Pope in Rome. Such questions by Christians have been used to discriminate against fellow Christians who own the name of Christ. Why should we believe, as we read this, that this statement is on any firmer ground than the Christian discriminators were.
Geographically, no. Because his allegiance is to Mecca, to which he turns in prayer five times a day.
And the sun doesn't set on the British empire; and every night at 7pm at the RSL a light shines and a little prayer is said; and some Christians stand to pray, some sit, some kneel; some join their hands, some raise their hands. and some fold their arms. I am reminded of a saying of an old Pentecostal lady who was a friend of mine in younger days: It's not the position. It's the disposition that counts. And, tell me again, what this has to do with citizenship?
Socially, no. Because his allegiance to Islam forbids him to make friends with Christians or Jews.
Well - one thing is for sure. We now know that the person who wrote this drivel has never travelled (even if he did work in S/Arabia for 20 years, it is clear he did not move beyond his European enclave) in Africa or Asia. There is a long history of Jews, Christians, and Moslems living peaceably in their communities. To give an indication of this, I have attached a document by the distinguished writer and historian William Dalrymple. Here is a link to William Dalrymple's home page. Here is the entry for William Dalrymple in Wikipedia.
Politically, no. Because he must submit to the mullah (spiritual leaders), who teach annihilation of Israel and destruction of America, the great Satan.
As a Christian, I am required to submit to spiritual leadership.
Now can we know which mullah, which Moslem community, which Muslim denomination. Just like us peaceful, wise, and non-warlike Christians, there are many denominations/theological schools/communities within the Islamic tradition. Their teachings (unlike we unified Christians) are not universally the same.
Domestically, no. Because he is instructed to marry four women and beat and scourge his wife when she disobeys him (Quran 4:34).
Oh, you mean that, like the Patriachs of the Old Testament, they may have more than one wife not like men in Christian societies who have one wife, one mistress, and some one night stands. And you mean women are beaten there like in Christian societies - many of whom are killed along with their children. Oh, you forgot to mention, that unlike women in Christian societies until the late 20th century, women entering marriage under Islamic law have economic rights. In fact, the Islamic community in Australia would like to have the Family Court of Australia recognise this in family law. Not mentioning those facts was a bit of a slip up.
Intellectually, no. Because he cannot accept the Australian Constitution since it is based on Biblical principles and he believes the Bible to be corrupt.
Well, I almost doubled up with laughter at this one. Because one thing that the writers of the Australian Constitution were very careful to do was to keep any hint, smell or taint of religion out of the document. In fact, it is clear that our informants have never read the Australian Constitution otherwise they would know that the major concerns of the document have to do with commerce and the balance of power between six colonies (for here think individual nations in all but name) in bringing them into one nation. In case any one hasn't noticed, the colonies still get really stroppy and their relationships and their relationship with the Commonwealth of Australia have to be sorted out by the High Court of Australia. I have never heard anybody suggest that the High Court is a biblical body or that its decisions are based on the Bible or that they interpret the Constitution with the Bible in one hand and the Constitution in the other. In fact, I can think of a few decisions which were completely unbiblical.
Philosophically, no. Because Islam, Muhammad, and the Quran do not allow freedom of religion and expression. Democracy and Islam cannot co - exist.
Mmmm...Clearly all that lack of teaching of history that Australian schools are accused of is catching up. Christians have never been good on freedom of religion and expression until recent times. I am 62, was brought up in a pre-Vatican II Irish-Catholic-Australian tradition, and had a very Irish name which gave my religion away immediately. This does not raise an eyebrow these days. In fact, there's a certain cachet to such a heritage. But when I was growing up, religious bigotry was alive and well between Protestant and Catholics. Look at the history of the Queensland Police Force where there are historic divisions between Catholic and Masons. This was why Ray Whitrod had to leave the Qld Police Force. He was neither Catholic nor Mason : he was a Baptist. I could go on with the way Peter Hollingworth was vilified by the secular press when he accepted the appointment of Governor-General (keep this separate from what came later). And I am of the view that if the Chamberlains had been Anglican instead of Seventh Day Adventist their story would have been very different. As for democracy: well, democracy for whom? Could go on ad infinitum ad nauseam about this. Just suffice to say that The Power Elite by C. Wright Mills says it - even though it was written about the US of fifty years ago. It is a sociological classic about who controls what and how much and it informs the Australian milieu as well.
Every Moslem government is either dictatorial or autocratic.
Yeah. I know some of them are not attractive - to say the least. And yes I would like to see democratic institutions and universal suffrage. But have a look around democracies and tell me if there is a complete absence of dictators and autocrats and dictatorial and autocratic actions. This will be a shoo-in for Queenslanders to answer.
Spiritually, no. Because when we declare "one nation under God," the Christian's God is loving and kind, while Allah is NEVER referred to as heavenly father, nor is he ever called love in the Quran's 99 excellent names."
Now it becomes clear (as if it couldn't be figured out before this point). The answer is not from an Australian but from a citizen of the United States of America. You see only citizens of the USA refer to "one nation under God". SO-O-O please go back to the beginning and put this in your mind. As for the Christian's God being loving and kind - well there are a few other descriptions in the Bible. A reading of God - a biography by Jack Miles would shed a little light on this. Read about Jack Miles here and here.
Therefore after much study and deliberation.... Perhaps we should be very suspicious of ALL MOSLEMS in this country. They obviously cannot be both "good" Moslems and good Australians. Call it what you wish.....it's still The truth.
If you find yourself intellectually in agreement with the above statements, perhaps you will share this with your friends. The more who understand this, the better it will be for our country and our future.The religious war is bigger and more complex than most Australians currently know or understand.

This drivel smells very much of stuff that comes from the Australia First Party and its associates. . You will note their involvement in the Cronulla riots and, more recently, drumming up racism against refugees in Tamworth. Moslems are like Christians. Each has their share of those who we would rather not own as citizens. In fact, most Moslems do not share the above views. Not all Moslems have plural marriage and nor do they all scourge their wives. One could go on. I would draw people's attention to a book that has been on must read lists for a while now A Short History of Islam by Karen Armstrong. You can read about Armstrong here and here.
We serve a risen Lord. His way is straight and narrow and we are to follow in His footsteps. He has given us two commandments. How does the above tally up with these. Where is the love? Where is the mercy? Where is "yourself"?
36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Tell the Howard Govt to stop its nonsense

Kate Gauthier from A Just Australia has provided an update on the new bill which will provide for offshore processing of refugees in an insane way - excluding the continent of Australia from the migration zone. Here it is in full:

As you will have heard, the new Bill for offshore processing - Migration Amendment (Designated Unauthorised Arrivals) Bill 2006 - has been introduced both into the House and the Senate. You can find information about the bill here. This includes the text of the bill as well as the (not particularly) explanatory memorandum. A Just Australia is preparing some information for supporters to explain what the effects of this bill will be and we will forward this to you as soon as it is ready. In the meantime however, you can read our Brief on the Proposal.The Bill is listed for debate in the House for next Tuesday 23rd May. It's listed as the last bill of the day so it may well be passed over until later that week, or even be held back until the 2nd sitting week (starting may29). It's unusual for it to be debated next week because John Howard will still be overseas and will return for the 2nd sitting week. Please phone/email/fax to your MPs and let them know how you want them to vote. You can get the contact details from the APH website Senate Inquiry. The bill has been passed to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Committee for investigation. You can find details of the inquiry here. Submissions must be lodged by next Monday 22nd May. Its very easy to make a submission - it can be on anything you want, even just to voice your opinion as a concerned Australian. We encourage people and organisations to make their voice heard. The Inquiry will be reporting on June 13th, with the Senate probably voting on the bill in that week. Write for rights! If you haven't taken the time to contact your state's Senators, please do so over the next two weeks. Their contact details can be found at the APH website. If Parliamentarians are going to cross the floor, negotiate amendments or take other actions against this bill, they need to show proof of the community concern that drove them to take these actions. So please, if you haven't already done so, write a letter and fax or email it soon.

Kate Gauthier
for the A Just Australia team --
Kate Gauthier
National Coordinator
A Just Australia
www.ajustaustralia.com
02 9745 9727
0414 876 139
We believe that Australia's policies toward refugees and asylum seekers should at all times reflect respect, decency and traditional Australian generosity to those in need, while advancing Australia's international standing and national interests. We aim to achieve just and compassionate treatment of refugees, consistent with the human rights standards which Australia has developed and endorsed.

Owning up and going from there

Boyd over at Non-violent Jesus has a great post on what we - and particularly those of the we who are Christians - should be doing. His post is out of the USA and relates to that nation's involvement in the war on Iraq. Miss Eagle has long advocated similar principles in Australia in relation to this nation's handling of reconciliation with the people of the First Nations and in the matter of refugees, asylum seekers, and immigration policies.

" 'Fess up!", Miss Eagle says. Come to grips with the truth about ourselves, our actions, our motivations. Then - and only then - can we move forward into new and creative policies and solutions. Christians, if we are worth our salt - or, as the good news says, if we are the salt which has not lost its taste and flavour - should stop shilly-shallying and being mealy-mouthed and lead the way in this direction. The principles espoused can be used on a number of fronts.

1. Honesty, self-criticism, confession.
2. Contrition, repentance, making amends, setting things right.
3. Reformation in our actions and ways of doing things. New actions. New attitudes.

These are principles that can be taken onto a number of fronts. Not only in the matter of war and peace. Not only in the matter of asylum seekers and hospitality. But also in the matter of the new workplace legislation. Miss Eagle has said harsh words, particularly about the Howard Government, in all this. But if Miss Eagle is to be honest, the most satisfactory result for all with justice for all - employers, employees, business and community - will involve reconciliation. And Miss Eagle has to say that the state jurisdictions - at least the one in which she worked in Queensland - have strong conciliaton processes, and the word 'conciliation' is in the title of the governing industrial relations tribunal.

But - most Christians sitting in pews do not seem to have a clue about industrial relations or the issues involved. In most parishes or congregations of most denominations, industrial relations is barely a blip on the agenda. In fact, some denominations have poor track records themselves in industrial relations. Yet the current state of industrial relations in this nation has the capacity to rend asunder community values and traditions with no significant benefit or enrichment to either. So, in the name of Christ, Christians, what are you doing?

BILL FARMER, HEAD OF DIMIA RESIGNS POST

The Prime Minister, John Howard to-day announced the resignation of Bill Farmer AO from his position of Secretary of the Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs. See New Senior Appointments - 10 July 2005. Ordinarily, this would be a matter for much rejoicing in those seeking reform within the Dept of Immigration. However, his departure has been suspected as being imminent for two reasons:

1. He apologised to a Parliamentary Committee
2. He received an AO at the recent Queen's Birthday awards.

Awards are not unusual prior to the resignation of a senior public servant or their transfer to a significant overseas posting. In this case, Bill Farmer will become Australia's Ambassador to Indonesia. This posting need not be seen as unusual since his service prior to DIMIA was with the Department of Foreign Affairs & Trade (DFAT). If there is anything punitive in these changes to Bill Farmer's career because of the massive failures within the operations and organization of his department, it is not evident.

As a Christian and a practising Anglican, I have been particularly disappointed in the handling of immigration matters because Bill Farmer is the spouse of an Anglican priest in the Anglican Diocese of Canberra-Goulburn and because the excesses under his leadership also occurred under the ministry of that other well-known Anglican, Philip Ruddock, now the Commonwealth Attorney-General.

All of us can be forgiven and all of us deserve the right to a clean slate and a fresh start. I hope that Bill Farmer has been able to learn from what has occurred within the Department of Immigration and understands how the Department he led has been the bureaucratic hand of gross injustice. I also hope that his new position gives him more time for biblical study - in particular, I hope he has a glance at the references in the Old Testament on how the Lord God of Israel instructs us to care for the sojourner - because you were once sojourners. The New Testament could provide material for reflection - particularly the matter of Jesus, with his parents Mary and Joseph, fleeing persecution to become asylum seekers in Egypt. There is no mention of how the Egyptians treated this little family of refugees but clearly they were not locked in interminable detention and were, at an appropriate time of their choosing, able to return. And thereby hangs a story! Now, Bill, narrative theology is a worthwhile pursuit. Listen to the stories.