Australia for Unhcr newsletter2010

Boat arrivals are increasing in many parts of the world, including the Horn of Africa where 74,000 people crossed the Gulf of Aden to Yemen in 2009.

UN

HC

R/J

.Bjö

rgvi

nsso

n

As we look back over events in 2009, we see a rather mixed report card for refugee protection in the region.

The two principal factors that drive asylum-seekers’ movements towards Australia, New Zealand and the broader Pacifi c region are confl ict and human insecurity in their countries and regions of origin and the lack of any credible opportunities for people to fi nd asylum and solutions en route to this region. It is no accident that the largest numbers of people coming by boat to Australia are nationals of Afghanistan, Sri Lanka and Iraq and who are for the most part – and contrary to speculation that most of these people are economic migrants –

The number of people seeking asylum – arriving by both air and sea – in Australia between January and October 2009 was 4,835, an increase on the 3,884 who sought protection over the corresponding period in 2008. In New Zealand, where geography makes boat arrivals a rather more remote prospect, asylum claims rose from 212 to a still modest 279 over the same period.

UNHCR has always argued that these fi gures need to be seen in a global perspective, given that there are some 42 million forcibly displaced people worldwide. Despite the increases in our region, less than one per cent of the world’s refugees come to seek protection in Oceania.

By contrast, in 2009 some 74,000 people crossed from the Horn of Africa to Yemen by boat, while Mediterranean nations such as Greece, Italy and Spain each receive tens of thousands of boat arrivals each year. Meanwhile, almost 300 people tragically lost their lives over the past two years while trying to reach the United States by boat from the Caribbean and South and Central America.

Despite the steady increase in asylum-seekers trying to fi nd protection in Australia during the course of the year, the public debate around refugee issues remained relatively moderate until October.

United NationsHigh Commissioner for RefugeesRegional Offi ce for Australia,New Zealand, Papua New Guineaand the Pacifi c

No. 1/2010

www.unhcr.org.au

Refugee Newsletter

From theRegional Representative

However, in October 2009 two events sparked a vigorous public debate and the airing of some extreme views that were unhelpful to our efforts to improve cooperation for refugee protection across the region. The fi rst event was the interception, in Indonesian waters, of a vessel carrying 255 Sri Lankan nationals. The second was a rescue at sea, by the Australian Customs Vessel Oceanic Viking, of a group of 78 people also from Sri Lanka. At the time of writing, UNHCR is working hard to fi nd resettlement solutions for all those formerly aboard the Oceanic Viking. Meanwhile, the humanitarian situation for those on board the much larger vessel in Merak Harbour in Indonesia remains of great concern to UNHCR.

Leaving to one side the often polemic and unfocused public debate about who bears responsibility for these particular events and how they are to be solved, UNHCR believes that we need to address the deeper and underlying challenges posed to states and refugees in the region.

In particular, as we look towards 2010 and beyond, we need to fi nd comprehensive and more collaborative strategies that: 1. Address the root causes of forced

displacement in coherent and systematic ways. These must engage a whole suite of measures ranging from diplomacy and enhanced human security to humanitarian and development aid and which, together, will encourage people to return to their places and regions of origin as conditions of safety permit;

2. Involve closer cooperation with transit and asylum States in order to improve the physical and legal conditions of asylum – what we call the ‘protection’ or ‘humanitarian’ space. In particular, we need to avoid protracted detention and family separations and to provide temporary rights that allow human dignity and self-suffi ciency for those most affected;

3. Provide better ways of cooperating within a multilateral framework where

Contents1 From the Regional Representative3 2009 legal & protection

roundup4 World Food Day and Rural

Women’s Day5 Refugee protection

the focus of Fiji workshop6 Senior Executives take lead7 Preparing to respond to

disasters in the Pacifi c Islands8 Pacifi c Islanders face the reality

of climate change9 Settlement services

a vital part of refugee protection9 Settlement services in Australia: an

overview11 Breaking down barriers

to employment12 Housing & homelessness14 Strategic settlement framework16 Settlement services

in New Zealand: an overview18 Refugee research

in New Zealand20 Family reunifi cation in New

Zealand22 Tracking the health & wellbeing of

refugees in New Zealand23 Realities of settlement in the

context of Papua New Guinea25 Edward Kennedy receives the

2009 Nansen Refugee Award26 UNHCR encouraged by

US$477.5m27 Half of the world’s refugees now

live in cities28 Mission to Eastern Chad29 World Refugee Day 200930 From the National Association31 Thanks to our donors32 UNHCR resources

refugees in need of international protection.

2 Refugee Newsletter No. 1/2010

rescue at sea is involved. The events of recent months highlight the difficulties of responding alone or bilaterally when a wider system of cooperation and collaboration across the region is essential. Above all, the responses must place the humanitarian and protection needs of the victims themselves at the heart of actions taken;

4. Provide greater support for States through which people transit to find durable solutions for refugees (and non-refugees) in their territories. Protracted and unresolved displacement places a burden on host States and acts as a disincentive for them to provide support. It also causes great human suffering to those affected and drives onward movement for those desperate enough to seek the help of unscrupulous people smugglers. At present, the number of people needing protection through resettlement globally (747,000) vastly outstrips the combined number of places offered by the resettlement countries for UNHCR-referred refugees (approximately 76,000). This imbalance needs to be addressed by larger resettlement intakes and more significant support to those states hosting most of the world’s refugees.

Clearly, much of the onward movement of asylum-seekers and refugees to the region can be explained by the fact few, if any, long term solutions are available in Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand. Only if conditions of asylum improve in these other regions – and more effective and prompt solutions found – will the downward pressure of onward movement to Australia and New Zealand be eased and the dangerous and exploitative practices of people smugglers eliminated.

UNHCR is convinced that cooperation between States to combat people smuggling, trans-national crime and tougher border control measures will not, of themselves, resolve the underlying problems of people movement. In our experience, these activities tend to deflect the problem elsewhere. It is only by addressing the humanitarian and human dimension of forced people movements in the region that effective solutions can be found.

Despite the political and public focus on the debate around boat arrivals, there have been a number of lesser-known and positive developments in other parts of the region.

In New Zealand, the long-awaited changes to the Immigration Act came into

effect in November. Among the reforms under the Act, UNHCR welcomed the introduction of a wider protection category that will place on a statutory basis New Zealand’s obligations under the United Nations Convention against Torture and the United Nations Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The single immigration tribunal structure introduced under the Act will also provide greater administrative efficiencies provided the level of expertise and independence that currently resides in the Refugee Status Appeal Authority is maintained.

In the Pacific, we have made good progress with our regional capacity-building strategy that is based on UNHCR’s Ten Point Plan to manage mixed migration. In particular, we are working closely with the Pacific Immigration Directors Conference and International Organisation for Migration in the region. We are particularly pleased with the positive response we have received from Palau, Vanuatu, Solomon Islands and, more recently, the Cook Islands following a stakeholder awareness workshop in December. And in October, we had a very productive training session in Fiji for senior officials in a number of government departments responsible for border control. The presence of the Minister for Defence, National Security and Immigration, Ratu Epeli Gavidi Ganilau, was most encouraging.

In Papua New Guinea, we have had some success in bringing the arterial road to the remote East Awin settlement of Papuan refugees but the physical terrain and weather are constant adversaries to progress. The quality of asylum in PNG is mixed and much work remains to be done if PNG is to have a self-sufficient and credible asylum system in place without the need for UNHCR’s direct involvement.

The problem of climate change, and the greater frequency and intensity of natural disasters in the Pacific, is of great concern to UNHCR. The Region consists of island States scattered across a vast geographic area and Pacific Islands Countries are amongst the most vulnerable states in the world to natural disasters. They are highly exposed to adverse natural events such as tropical cyclones, volcanic eruptions, tsunami and earthquake. In addition, the region is characterized by the vast ocean mass, small and scattered population numbers on vulnerable small islands and national and local response capacity that can be quickly overwhelmed by forces of nature.

As the leaders of more than 140 states recently converged in Copenhagen, the voice of affected Pacific Island States, notably Tuvalu, graphically told the world that this is a problem faced by the region ‘here and now’ and not in the future. To draw attention to the likely displacement of some Pacific Island peoples, UNHCR co-hosted a side event at the Pacific Leaders Forum Cairns in August. There, we argued that although mitigation and adaptation might help those most affected, contingency planning for forced displacement – based on the protection and humanitarian needs of the victims themselves – needs to be undertaken without delay.

Land rights lie at the heart of any displacement and need to be seriously addressed if workable solutions are to be found.

To date, a victim-centred and protection focus has been largely absent from much of the discourse on natural disasters. To address this in the region, UNHCR and the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) have agreed to Co-Chair a new Pacific Humanitarian Protection Cluster (PHPC). We will report further on this initiative as it gains momentum.

Despite the many challenges we face to improve refugee protection, UNHCR is always encouraged by the wonderful work done by service providers and refugee communities themselves in their search for self-sufficiency in their new homes. During UNHCR’s annual consultations with NGOs and refugees in both Australia and New Zealand in October and November, we heard again the challenges faced by newly-arrived refugees as they look to integrate through employment, education, housing, and improved health care. We also heard of the painful separation of families and their struggle for family reunion with loved ones left behind in countries or regions of origin. These are real issues that we need to address if the generous resettlement programmes of both Australia and New Zealand are to be even more successful.

We hope that the Discussion Paper in this Newsletter will shed light on some of the challenges for refugees in settling into a new country – a task made more difficult by the prevailing economic conditions in both countries.

Richard Towle Regional Representative

Refugee Newsletter No. 1/2010 3

UNHCR’s Regional Office Canberra made numerous submissions and consulted with governments and NGOs in most countries in the region as changes to legal and asylum systems were proposed and implemented.

Some significant events and change are outlined in this roundup.

AustraliaAustralia signed the United Nations Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture in May.

second and third reports of its Inquiry into Immigration Detention in Australia in May and August respectively.

Vulnerable Persons, which aims to ensure they are supported during the review process and recognize and respect the inherent dignity of vulnerable persons.

to the ‘45-day rule’, which had operated to restrict work rights and healthcare access for asylum-seekers.

regulator of the migration advice profession, a role previously undertaken by the Migration Institute of Australia.

seeks to implement the Government’s New Directions in Detention policy, was

UNHCR submitted comments to the Legal and Constitutional Committee in August.

abolishes the charges imposed on immigration detainees and waives all existing debts for current and former detainees, passed the Parliament in September.

was introduced into Parliament in September, seeking to bring Australia’s

non-refoulement obligations under the

into the protection visa framework. UNHCR submitted comments to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Committee in September.

(Citizenship Test Review and Other

Parliament in September, codifying the recommendations of the Citizenship Test Review Committee which included an exemption from sitting the test for persons who have a physical or mental incapacity as a result of having suffered torture or trauma outside Australia.

Migration’s inquiry into the Migration Treatment of People with a Disability.

& Status Resolution was established to provide independent advice on the implementation of measures associated with the government’s immigration policy initiatives, including New Directions in Detention and the national rollout of the Community Status Resolution Service. The Council, which succeeds the Immigration Detention Advisory Group, first met in October.

New ZealandThe Immigration Advisers Licensing Act 2007 entered into force in May, requiring anyone providing immigration advice to be licensed, with the intention to protect migrants (including asylum-seekers and

unethical behaviour of unscrupulous immigration advisers.

released the Plan of Action to Prevent People Trafficking, a cross-government strategy to deal with people trafficking in New Zealand. The Plan follows the preparation of a discussion paper by the Interagency Working Group on People Trafficking on the proposed approach, development and implementation of a plan of action, and formal submissions by relevant stakeholders.

through Parliament in October and came into force in November, making significant changes to the refugee status determination review process and codifying a complementary protection system, among other changes.

Review of the Legal Aid System during October.

Papua New Guinea

Constitutional Law Reform Commission

and Human Smuggling in Port Moresby in March, providing a global perspective of the interaction between the issues of trafficking in persons and people smuggling and the international refugee protection system.

Pacific Island Countries

technical advice to the Government of Samoa in respect of its draft Refugee

establish the process by which refugee status may be determined in Samoa to give effect to its obligations under the

Protocol.

notwithstanding the prior possession of nationality to another country, and measures to prevent statelessness.

provided advice to the Government of Vanuatu in respect of its draft Immigration

status determination process.

For information or copies of UNHCR submissions on these issues please visit www.unhcr.org.au or email [email protected]

roundup


From Walpurga Englbrecht UNHCR PNG Country Representative The refugee settlement of Iowara-East Awin became the centre of Western Province for two days in October, with the celebration of World Food Day and World Rural Women’s Day.

The event provided a unique opportunity for refugees and the local population to show off a variety of skills and trades to their many visitors, with demonstrations of sago and peanut butter making, rice milling, traditional weaving, fi sh net mending, rubber budding, and fl ower arranging.

As always, events and activities in Iowara-East Awin also provide opportunities to highlight the needs of refugees and the wider community to government authorities.

Discussions with representatives from district, provincial and national authorities centred around raising awareness of issues such as violence against women and children, child protection and birth registration, law and order, agriculture and livestock, and business development.

Among the dignitaries present were the Provincial Administrator, Provincial Police, District Administrator and offi cers

responsible for the different sectors, as well as representatives from UNHCR and the Diocese of Daru and Kiunga.

Like any good event in Papua New Guinea, singing, dancing and delicious food were central parts of the two-day event.

One fi nal issue of great importance to the community was highlighted as the visitors drove off down the bumpy dirt track between Iowara and Barramandi.

Those visitors, like the community, might have wished that the long-delayed road repairs had been completed before the event.

Iowara the centre of attention on World Food Day and Rural Women’s Day

A traditional welcome to Iowara-East Awin.

Building on Fiji’s long tradition of humane treatment of asylum-seekers and refugees was the focus of a workshop jointly hosted by UNHCR and the Fiji Immigration Department (FID) in October.

The two-day workshop looked at deepening the understanding among offi cials of how to identify and act on the protection needs of people seeking international protection, and to provide technical advice on the development of Fiji’s national refugee determination system.

UNHCR’s Regional Representative, Richard Towle, thanked the Department for co-hosting the highly successful workshop, and said it was evidence of the strong working relationship which

has developed over many years between UNHCR and the FID.

Minister of Defence, National Security and Immigration, Ratu Epeli Gavidi Ganilau, said that, as a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention, Fiji was keen to play its part in ensuring that those people who are in need of international refugee protection receive it.

“Despite Fiji’s isolated location in the Pacifi c, we live in a globalized world where people are very much on the move”, the Minister noted.

Mr Towle said the workshop was an opportunity for UNHCR to offer a global perspective and outline the complex factors relating to insecurity and confl ict around the world that lead to

people fl eeing their homes and seeking international protection and to make sure people needing protection were able to fi nd it, even in the small Pacifi c Island States of this region.

Fiji is a leader in the Pacifi c as a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention and through its adoption of a national refugee legislation and refugee status determination system.

“We encourage it to continue on this positive path”, Towle said.

Through this workshop, UNHCR and FID have recommitted themselves to working in a cooperative way to build on and strengthen the systems by which Fiji upholds its international refugee law and humanitarian obligations.

Refugee protection the focus of Fiji workshop

Participants during the workshop on Fiji’s Coral Coast.


vi. To understand internally displaced persons (IDPs): who are they, where are they, why are they of concern, their rights, and who is responsible for their protection;

The course is a step in the implementation of the work programme agreed to in February 2009.

Capacity building on refugee protection in the Solomon Islands as with other Pacific Islands countries essentially includes as a starting point the strengthening of the decision-making process on refugee protection as a central part of immigration functions. For the purpose of refugee determination the decision-making process is divided into four levels, namely: Political (Minister/Cabinet); Strategic (Permanent Secretary); Operational (Director of Immigration); and Technical (Immigration Processing Officers).

As the levels are mutually linked, the level of understanding on refugee matters at one level determines largely the shape of the decision at the next. Existence of knowledge gaps can hold back progress in implementing the purpose of the Convention. It can cause the types of actions that delay refugee determination decisions or, worse, remove altogether the protection of refugees as required under the Refugee Convention. Further, ignorance of the necessary elements of the Convention’s protection regime can lead to unnecessary discrimination, negative decisions and refoulement. Solomon Islands is aware of its obligation to the various human rights conventions.

The course focused on the strategic level, where in the structure of MCILI, the Permanent Secretary is likely to be the RSD Officer. The Permanent Secretary needs to be well versed with the Convention as well as the RSD procedures. An additional important reason for these is that he/she is the principal advisor to the political level. Findings and advice of the operational and technical levels are submitted to the Permanent Secretary.

The strategic level is the key point in the first part of the refugee determination decision-making process but has hitherto not been included in the training programme. The important issue though is that this is a critical level and it needs

training as much as the operational and technical levels. The arming of the strategic level with appropriate knowledge and skills on refugee matters leads to a more principled, consistent leadership and management of the RSD framework. Importantly it also enables Solomon Islands to make lawful decisions at the border.

Much of the focus at the political level is influenced by the strategic level advice. Training of the strategic level on refugee matters is in the best interests of Solomon Islands as a State Party to the Refugee Convention.

It was on the above premise that UNHCR developed and conducted the course for senior executives in Solomon Islands. Participants included: the Permanent Secretary and Under Secretary (Technical) responsible for Immigration, Director and Deputy Director of Immigration, Principal Legal Officers from the offices of the Attorney General and the Director of Public Prosecution, and senior officers from the Royal Solomon Islands Police Force – key persons that the Permanent Secretary, as the RSD Officer, is likely to consult with.

The content of the course, while strictly focused on RSD process, also incorporated persons of concern that exist or have the likelihood of existing in Solomon Islands in view of the islands’ vulnerabilities. In this respect protection of internally displaced persons and addressing security concerns without undermining refugee protection were also covered, two areas of particular importance to Solomon Islands. Ensuing discussions drew out clear separation of refugee protection and security concerns. Clear and deep insights into both areas put to rest concerns and stereotypes arising from national security issues in relation to how the Refugee Convention was hitherto perceived. While examining the circumstances surrounding countries of origin and refugee movement, areas like mixed migration and sexual and gender-based violence were focused on as elements within the key thrust of the course.

An important component of the course was the RSD role play exercise. The exercise adopted real-life functions and subjected the participants to on-the-job-

Senior Executives take lead: Course on refugee determination in Solomon Islands

From Barnabas AngaPermanent Secretary, Ministry of Commerce, Industry, Labour & Immigration

Solomon Islands has signed five of the eleven international human rights conventions. One of these, the 1951 Convention on the Status of Refugees (Refugee Convention) was adopted by succession on 25 February 1995 and followed by the signing of the 1967 Protocol on the Status of Refugees on 12 April 1995.

In February 2009 UNHCR and the Government of Solomon Islands (GSI) through its Ministry of Commerce, Industry, Labour and Immigration (MCILI) co-facilitated a refugee stakeholder awareness workshop in Honiara.

The workshop established basic understandings of key provisions of the Refugee Convention, an essential first step for the relevant agencies to progress towards implementing the humanitarian purpose of the Convention. The GSI with its stakeholders put together a process to guide its work in the development of a legal framework for refugee protection.

On 20 May 2009, through the continuing cooperation of UNHCR and the MCILI the Senior Executives’ Course on refugee protection was held in Honiara.

The course objectives were:i. To understand refugee status

determination: its purpose, legal basis and process;

ii. To understand what are ‘fair and efficient’ refugee status determination (RSD) procedures;

iii. To understand the key elements of the Refugee Convention in determining who is a refugee;

iv. To examine complementary forms of protection;

v. To understand that international law enables States to address their security concerns without undermining refugee protection;


From UNHCR eCentreThe Pacifi c Islands Emergency and Disaster Management Workshop in May 2009 in Honiara, Solomon Islands was the UNHCR eCentre’s fi rst training event in Melanesia.

Humanitarian assistance in the Pacifi c has proven complex, as the region is prone to a range of disasters including cyclones, earthquakes, tsunamis, fl ooding, volcano eruptions and landslides. Moreover, the vast Pacifi c Ocean mass and the presence of small and scattered populations on vulnerable and remote small islands create daunting logistical challenges for responders. Large natural events can quickly overwhelm local and national capacities and resources, and even comparatively small-scale of disasters can have huge impacts on the affected people and countries.

To confront these challenges, the UNHCR eCentre, in conjunction with the Solomon Islands National Disaster

Management Organization (NDMO) and the UN Offi ce for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UNOCHA) organized the fi rst-ever Pacifi c Islands Emergency and Disaster Management Workshop. The event brought together a total of 36 emergency responders primarily from the Melanesian nations of Fiji, Vanuatu and the Solomon Islands, as well as others from Australia, New Zealand and Papua New Guinea, with the goal of raising standards and sharing best practices in responding to humanitarian emergencies.

The workshop was designed to improve response to emergencies by exploring problems, standards and best practices in key areas of emergency and disaster management. Areas explored in detail included protection of the rights of affected people, emergency assessment, food and nutrition, emergency shelter, logistics, water and sanitation, coordination in emergencies and coping with the effects of global climate change.

The workshop featured presentations from experts from both within and outside the region, and numerous interactive demonstrations and exercises. In the end, the participants reported leaving with a greater understanding of international standards used in dealing with emergencies. Equally important, they parted with a greater familiarity with colleagues facing similar challenges in neighboring countries, and new approaches that can be applied to respond more effi ciently and effectively when the next crisis occurs.

The Pacifi c Islands Emergency and Disaster Management Workshop was organized by the UNHCR eCentre in cooperation with the Solomon Islands National Disaster Management Organization (NDMO) and UNOCHA. Further support was provided by partners RedR Australia, RedR New Zealand, InterWorks L.L.C., and the UNHCR Representation in Canberra, Australia.

Preparing to respond to disasters in the Pacifi c Islands

situations and on-the-job-requirements, issues, considerations and decisions. The role play exercise was indispensable as it provided the opportunity to apply the knowledge acquired in the earlier sessions and enabled the confi rmation of our understanding, confi dence in dealing with such situations and crystallised our understanding of the weight of responsibility in determining life and death situations for those escaping from persecution and seeking international protection.

The knowledge and skills acquired through the course have set the foundation for the senior executives and these will be continuously built upon as our knowledge

base. There has been no asylum seeker or refugee in Solomon Islands to date. However, the course was held at an opportune time as Solomon Islands was putting together its draft refugee policy and with the legislation to follow. The course was a necessary impetus in Solomon Islands’ preparation to provide the humanitarian space to deal with one of the most vulnerable groups of people in the world. Acquiring the knowledge and skills enabled the participants and eventually Solomon Islands to make alive the Convention and to build and own the RSD procedures.

The Ministry of Commerce Industry, Labour and Immigration and the participants on behalf

of the Government of Solomon Islands are grateful to UNHCR, and Dr Lesi Korovavala in particular, for having related the RSD procedures to government and decision-making structures in Solomon Islands. Their understanding of the relevant processes and having put together and run the course for us are appreciated. The issues involved are real; many are emotive and culturally sensitive. The manner with which the course was run allowed us to address these issues and venture into our cultural space while maintaining focus on the course objectives. As the Permanent Secretary of the line Ministry the confi dence that the Solomon Islands team gained from the course is invaluable.


The Carteret Islands of Papua New Guinea are a three-hour boat ride from the much larger, and higher, island of Bougainville. But for the 2,500 islanders, who have lived a carefree life of fishing and small-scale agriculture, the reality of a changing climate means plans are now under way to make the trip to Bougainville a permanent one.

On the Carterets, like elsewhere in the Pacific, a number of complex and interrelated factors – environmental, climatic, geological and demographic – are at play, and these are creating uncertainty about the ability of people to remain in their traditional homelands.

UNHCR Regional Representative in the Pacific Richard Towle says the protection of people affected by these factors must be part of a broader, human rights-focused response to human security and ensure social and economic development for all people in the region.

“Most of all, finding solutions to these challenges means listening, consulting, and responding to the specific needs of affected populations – whether they be coping mechanisms and adaptation or eventual relocation,” Towle says.

For the Carterets, coastal erosion, destruction of sea walls and inundation by salt water means that most of the small gardens of swamp taro and vegetables upon which families depend for food are no longer fertile. Emergency food supplies are running low, and relocation increasingly looks like the only option.

After several unsuccessful attempts to move the islanders over the past few years, the authorities have identified a plantation on Bougainville as a future resettlement site and anticipate bringing families from the Carterets and other threatened atolls this year.

The Papua New Guinea government is also planning continuing services for families and individuals who remain on the atolls and is putting in place a contingency plan in anticipation of future severe climate events.

Sister Maryanne Loughry, from the Jesuit Refugee Services Australia, was on the Carterets late last year to talk to

Pacific Islanders face the reality of climate change

On Fiji’s largest island, Viti Levu, for example, an innovative coral gardening project is under way to help reduce coastal erosion and sand loss, which are considered to be major impacts of sea level rise. The project is a joint initiative of the local community, a national NGO and a holiday resort and is an example of how adaptation strategies can protect the environment and the economy.

Meanwhile, Kiribati is looking towards the development of skilled migration programmes that may be able to reduce overcrowding in the short term, while developing skills and building up communities abroad should larger-scale resettlement be required in the future.

And to help prepare for the possibility of a rise in the frequency of natural disasters, UNHCR has joined with other agencies to form a Pacific Humanitarian Protection Group to help map and analyse the protection needs of people who face risks from the elements.

These examples show the combination of approaches – disaster preparedness, mitigation and adaptation, and possible relocation – that will be needed to assist people facing climate and environmental challenges in the region. For the Carteret Islanders, relocation appears to be the only choice left.

residents about the relocation process. “While appreciating the assistance from Bougainville, many residents say they are worried about losing their culture and traditions and are uncertain as to how they will be received by the host community,” Loughry reports.

Such dilemmas highlight the difficult choices faced by island communities under threat from rising seas, with relocation often seen as the option of last resort.

Although people displaced by climate change and environmental degradation are not classified as refugees under the 1951 Refugee Convention, UNHCR’s experience has shown that they are clearly people who face great challenges and whose rights and protection needs have to be addressed.

Indeed, many communities reject the “climate refugee” label saying it gives a false sense of hopelessness, preferring to focus on adaptation and mitigation strategies to help them stay in their homes. “Many people from Pacific Island countries have told us their preference is firstly to try to mitigate the worst effects of rising sea levels such as depletion of fresh-water supplies, flooding, disease, and loss of traditional food sources, livelihoods and housing,” Towle says.

A sea wall made of wire and clam shells can’t hold back the rising tide on the Carteret Islands. ©JRS/M.Loughry

United NationsHigh Commissioner for RefugeesRegional Offi ce for Australia,New Zealand, Papua New Guineaand the Pacifi c

No. 1/2010 Discussion Paper

Settlement services a vital part of refugee protection

conference for over 180 delegates from

settlement service providers in order to map settlement service provision, and to consult on the future role and direction of

the Refugee Council of Australia, the

Councils and the National Multicultural

The Offi ce of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, with the generous

UNHCR RO Canberra

From the Settlement Council of Australia

of Australia (SCOA) received a grant from the Department of Immigration and Citizenship, in recognition of its role as the

the National Council of Migrant Resource and Settlement Agencies (NCMRSA),

of settlement service providers.In the short time since receiving

funding, SCOA has achieved a

milestones include:

around settlement issues for refugees

the Department of Immigration and

Feedback from the First National Settlement Conference

The fi rst national settlement conference

Building a Future for Social Inclusion”. The

showing the various countries of origin of the students.

Settlement services in Australia: an overview

10 Discussion Paper No. 1/2010

organisations and workers across the sector and from all corners of Australia, whether working as policy makers, practitioners or researchers was indicative of the very real interest, commitment and need for the sector to come together, to share their experiences, practice and achievements to date.

Over 180 participants registered for the conference to listen to presentations, participate in good practice workshops, and most importantly through roundtable discussions, to develop strategies and recommendations that will drive the national settlement agenda into the future.

As importantly, the current members of the SCOA as well as prospective members and allied settlement organisations confirmed their commitment to support the SCOA’s work as the peak body that will represent the many and varied efforts of settlement services through advice to government, research, information sharing and assisting the development of national standards. Many organisations have already demonstrated their commitment through application for formal membership.

Through roundtable discussions, conference delegates identified a number of key recommendations. The recommendations from the conference covered the following themes:

development;

planning;

as the most successful pathway to independence and integration;

settlement services and allied services.These recommendations will be prioritised and forwarded to relevant stakeholders in accordance with SCOA’s key areas of work and resource capabilities, including DIAC

and other Commonwealth agencies, the Australian Social Inclusion Board, Australian Multicultural Advisory Council, Refugee Council of Australia, Refugee Resettlement Advisory Council, Australian Human Rights Commission, and other national peak

National Women’s Consultative Council. A copy of the conference report is available on SCOA’s website.

Responding to Key Settlement Issues

SCOA has produced a number of papers on key settlement issues, in response to government discussion papers and consultations on issues of importance to SCOA’s member organisations. These include:

Australia’s Refugee and Humanitarian Program;

the Integrated Humanitarian Settlement Strategy (IHSS);

for Multicultural Youth Programs Based on Best Practice Initiatives;

of consultations by the Australian Multicultural Advisory Council (AMAC).

Some of the key recommendations to come out of these papers include:1. The need for greater recognition and

valuing of the specialism and expertise upon which effective settlement services need to be based. Such expertise is built upon a variety of experiences, including:

multicultural services;

for cultural differences;

organisations to develop cultural competencies;

services involves far more than providing information and referral, and linking clients to other services.

information and referral services promotes a “tick box” approach, and also over simplifies the high level of skill

casework. More emphasis should be placed upon the development of “settlement life skills”, based on a client-focused, competency-based approach to adult learning, rather than a “tick box” approach to information delivery.

3. Flexibility is another key element to the delivery of settlement services across Australia. There is no “one size fits all” solution, especially when it comes to finding solutions to complex issues such as housing and health service provision. It is important to learn from innovative approaches to settlement service delivery, and explore ways that these models can be replicated and/or adapted.

4. With regard to multiculturalism in Australia, we do not believe a minor makeover on current policy without program development and resource commitment will make much difference. Indeed it will reinforce some of the disappointment and cynicism that already has grown in relation to the current government. SCOA is happy within our limited resources to contribute in a continuing way to this process of stakeholder engagement in the formulation of policy.

With the momentum gained over the last few months, SCOA will continue to work to support the development of the settlement services sector, and to take forward the issues which have been identified as priorities by our members.

To find out more about the Settlement Council of Australia, or to inquire about membership, visit our website at www.scoa.org.au or email SCOA’s Executive Officer, Andrew Cummings at [email protected].

From Catherine ScarthGeneral Manager, Community and Policy, AMES

The challenges facing refugees are never more evident than when they are looking for a job, with workforce participation rates significantly lower for newly arrived refugees and migrants than for many other Australians.

The Department of Immigration and Citizenship (DIAC) Longitudinal Survey of Immigrants to Australia (2007) showed that 75% of humanitarian entrants (HE) and refugees were unemployed 4-5 months after arrival and only 16% were participating in the labour force. By 16-17 months after arrival, 43% of HE were still unemployed and only 32% were participating in the labour force. This low workforce participation rate contributes to significant individual distress and impacts on social cohesion.

Via Commonwealth Government settlement programs including the Integrated Humanitarian Settlement Strategy (IHSS) and the Adult Migrant English Program (AMEP), AMES works with recently arrived refugees in Victoria from a wide variety of work backgrounds ranging from skilled professionals and trades people to those with limited work skills relevant to the Australian labour market.

Research undertaken in Victoria in 2008 identified a number of barriers facing refugees attempting to enter the labour market in Australia. These include:

and

experiences (Brotherhood of St Laurence

Typically these barriers to employment are collapsed to: “lack of English, lack of local work experience and lack of qualifications”. AMES experience and research show that the barriers are more specific, subtler within a number of identified areas, inter-connected, and involve a number of affective (or personal) factors as well as external factors.

While in some respects refugees, skilled and unskilled, share similar experiences of engaging with the labour market to other migrants, their migration experience is very different.

Pre- and post-arrival experiences set them apart. The effects of torture and

industrialised society after long periods in

domestic responsibilities for family members who themselves are trying to cope with

absence of an already established ethnic community, all shape or exacerbate the standard employment barriers faced by other migrants (RCOA, 2008).

In addition, many refugee job seekers experience institutional discrimination and racism on arrival (VMCC & VEOHR 2008).

Discriminatory practices impact on employment opportunities for these groups in

underemployment and lack of recognition

behaviours of small and medium enterprises

In 2006, the Victorian Employers Chamber of Commerce and Industry (VECCI) found that employers with a skill shortage had not considered the possibility of recruiting a skilled migrant or refugee. The VECCI survey indicated that many skilled arrivals are taking up jobs in un-skilled and semi-skilled occupations such as aged care, sales and taxi driving.

Other studies also show these migrants suffer substantial occupational downward mobility and loss of occupational status, even many years after arrival (Colic-Peisker & Tilbury, 2007). Many refugees are at risk of becoming an underclass of workers in Australia – median incomes for migrants from Sudan, Iraq and Afghanistan, for instance is between $228 and $234 per week as opposed to $488 for Australian-born

Breaking down Barriers to Employment

Rep

rod

uced

with

per

mis

sion

from

AM

ES

(c)

2009

.


residents and $431 for the whole Australian population (DIAC 2007).

AMES experience is that a ‘one size fits all’ approach to employment assistance is neither appropriate nor adequate for most refugees. People with complex settlement needs require settlement support that is individualised and integrated with labour market participation – and as soon after arrival as practicable.

For example, the AMES Intermediate Labour Market (ILM) Program, one of AMES Transition to Work strategies, enables refugees to secure their first job in Australia, to learn about Australian workplace culture, and to gain local work experience in a time-limited and real job. Hopefully, this leads to permanent employment in the mainstream labour market.

Through this coordinated program refugee job seekers benefit from:

methods and practical application of this in relation to specific opportunities;

workplace behaviours and communication in situ and receive constructive feedback on performance;

placements and securing a job (i.e. the opportunity to demonstrate skills to a prospective employer led to subsequent employment); and

and managing the transition into sustained employment.

At the same time, AMES has worked to shift understanding by employers of the special needs and particular benefits that refugee employment can offer.

Employers need to consider the manner and method of attracting job seekers.

This extends from where jobs are advertised through to the types of questions asked in interview situations to elicit the appropriateness of the candidate. Upskilling of managers to mentor employees and the positive contribution that new cultures can bring to the workplace are additional benefits delivered through refugee employment recognised by ILM employer participants.

When approached many employers are willing to offer work placements and

From the Asylum Seeker Resource CentreHousing and homelessness are amongst the greatest challenges facing asylum seekers in Australia. Asylum seekers who have applied for protection can live for years in the community without stable accommodation and without access to any mainstream housing services.

Homelessness is a challenge not only for asylum seekers but for many Australian citizens and permanent residents, with the Australian Bureau of Statistics reporting over 105,000 homeless people in Australia each night.

Australia wide, there are a number of not-for-profit support agencies who work with asylum seekers to address their basic welfare needs. Collectively, not-for-profit services meet the legal, health, social and basic welfare needs of asylum seekers, but all of this well-integrated support comes undone when an asylum seeker has no place to live. For all of these services, access to appropriate housing is the missing link.

During the refugee determination process, people seeking asylum are arguably the most marginalized of all groups of homeless people. This is due largely to the fact that they are denied access to public housing and Centrelink and have no safety net to ensure ongoing income to pay rent. In addition, current housing policy renders asylum seekers ineligible for many mainstream services leaving them reliant on the support of charities to avoid homelessness whilst awaiting an outcome of their protection claim.

Key housing issues faced by asylum seekers The process of seeking asylum is neither instantaneous nor a permanent state. It is transitional and asylum seekers need transitional housing during this time.

Housing & homelessness

vacancies to refugees; particularly through an ILM program that enables them an opportunity to test a refugee job seeker’s capacity before proceeding to a longer-term contract.

With incentives, such as liaison staff who speak the first language of the worker and assist with work training, employers concerns about potential risks are alleviated and a good match between business requirements and individual skills can be achieved.

AMES research shows that where there is a good match, work experience may lead to ongoing employment.

A recent business roundtable of employers participating in such programs noted that there had been ‘sensational’ outcomes for the business and participants with ‘performance levels on a par or better than peers’.

There was agreement that the risk of hiring a refugee was not less or greater than hiring anyone else.

Promoting the values and unexpected benefits of refugee employment will begin breaking down the perceptions and barriers that employers fear when confronted with a refugee job seeker.

The resulting employment will lower the hurdles the refugee must jump before feeling they are settling properly into their new home.

It will ensure that Australia continues to benefit socially and economically from the contribution of people from refugee backgrounds.

References Brotherhood St Laurence 2008 Social Inclusion:

Economic Imperative Migration Action Issue 1, May 2008Department of Immigration and Citizenship (2007) New

Migrant Outcomes: Results from the Third Longitudinal Survey of Immigrants to Australia. AGPS, Canberra

Constable, J, Wagner R, Childs M, & Natolia A, (2000) Doctors Become Taxidrivers: Recognising Skills – not as easy as it sounds, Office of Employment Equity and Diversity, Premier’s Department of NSW, 2000

McDonald, B., Gifford, S., Webster, K., Wiseman, J. and Casey, S., 2008. Refugee Resettlement in Regional and Rural Victoria: Impacts and Policy Issues. Report commissioned by Victorian Health Promotion Foundation, Carlton North.

Refugee Council of Australia (RCOA) (2008) Submission to the Australian Government on the 2008-09 Refugee and Humanitarian Program, February 2008

Val Colic-Peisker and Farida Tilbury (2007) Refugees and Employment: The Effect of Visible Difference on Discrimination. Final Report. Murdoch University, Western Australia

Victorian Employers Chamber of Commerce (VECCI) Skills Survey 2006

Discussion Paper No. 1/2010 13

Key issues faced by asylum seekers needing emergency and transitional accommodation include:

agencies for emergency and transitional accommodation;

adequate emergency and transitional accommodation response;

accommodation options;

accommodation is allocated predominantly

guidelines do not disqualify asylum seekers from accessing emergency accommodation,

not true.

recurrent funding to assist asylum seekers

is not suitable or sustainable for ongoing tenancy. Currently asylum seekers are

programs.

recently responded to asylum seekers

The impact of homelessness on settlement of on-shore refugees

destitution and uncertainty for a prolonged

once being granted permanent residency

Once granted a permanent protection

Asylum seekers’ homelessness needs to be included in a national response

including asylum seekers.

‘The Road Home’

accommodation for all in need by 2020

‘The Road Home’ is a

“There should be no wrong doors for people who are homeless when they seek help”.

and transitional accommodation.


From the Hon Laurie Ferguson MPParliamentary Secretary for Multicultural Affairs & Settlement Services

The promise of protection only begins with a refugee visa. Disembarking at a crowded airport, often with no English, no understanding of the world you have entered, and no idea where you are to be taken, is both a point of desperation and an act of trust. Leaving everything that is familiar would send fear and trepidation through most of us.

Protection should mean security and safety; it should also mean a chance to build a new life. Refugees have remarkable resilience and a great willingness to contribute. Settlement services are our commitment to provide a means – a path – to achieve full participation and to help them begin their new life.

Australia’s refugee program is an expression of humility and compassion; it is about a fair go.

Organisations and dedicated individuals that form Australia’s settlement sector have worked tirelessly

to make us a world leader in settlement services.

This year, our Government undertook to consult extensively with the sector as a basis for forming the new model of settlement services. The public response was inspiring.

In total we held 17 community and Government consultations and 11 focus groups with refugees. 460 individuals representing 210 community organisations and more than 80 Government agencies participated and shared their views. Most importantly we met with 195 refugees from 18 different nationalities.

As Australia’s Parliamentary Secretary for Multicultural Affairs, I meet regularly with refugee groups – Sudanese, Somali, Hazara, Sierra Leonean, and Burmese. However, it is a different experience to sit and listen to their accounts of going through the services we provide.

The consultations confirmed that the fundamentals of the Integrated Humanitarian Settlement Strategy (IHSS) program (the core services) are still relevant and appropriate. In fact these are a front on which we are an acknowledged world leader.

However the consultations also revealed gaps and issues around isolation, lack of youth engagement, problems accessing housing, employment and training and some weaknesses in cultural orientation.

In certain instances clients spoke of ‘tick and flick’ services, feeling as though they were not provided with enough tangible assistance or support beyond the first few weeks.

On a national level, IHSS does a good job in meeting the immediate needs of refugees through services such as airport pickups, household goods, health checks, Centrelink and school enrolment.

However, settlement is as much a mental and emotional re-alignment as it is a physical relocation. We are less successful when it comes to creating

sustainable settlement outcomes. By this I mean working with the client to identify their strengths and providing the necessary tools to advance them along their settlement pathway.

The Minister and I are looking to set out a new settlement framework – to provide a continuum from offshore to onshore to deliver long term sustainable settlement outcomes. This continuum covers the broad range of settlement services delivered by the Department of Immigration and Citizenship including our offshore Australian Cultural Orientation (AUSCO), IHSS, the Settlement Grants Program, Adult Migrant English Program, Complex Case Support and interpreting services.

We must ensure these programs work cooperatively to support our clients on their pathway to independence. The pathway for clients between these programs needs to be as seamless as possible.

The framework will lay the foundations for an integrated service delivery network that will support new arrivals to rebuild their lives in Australia.

At the crucial centre of the new settlement framework are our clients. We must not lose sight of this and must develop programs that are client-centred and achieve real and practical outcomes.

It is a matter of working with clients to build their capacity to deal with the many barriers they will face along the way, and equally it is about identifying their individual strengths and capacity to contribute.

As you are all aware, since the last tender of IHSS services, the complexity of the caseload has increased. We now receive many entrants who have lived in refugee camps for several years and children who may not have known any other life. Many entrants have no or low literacy in their own language and no English skills. This is a result of no or interrupted education. Equally, a significant portion have had

Strategic Settlement FrameworkLaying stronger foundations


limited opportunities for employment experience. Many arrive with health needs and have experienced torture and trauma.

So what does the future hold for settlement support?

The first step in building a new settlement framework is the redevelopment of the initial settlement services model, currently known as the IHSS.

We will provide entrants with greater hands-on support and guidance to navigate Australian systems, to understand Australian culture and to give them every chance to make it in Australia. We will be more responsive to client needs.

We will strengthen the flexible client-centred approach to case management that we currently have – working directly with clients, tapping into their strengths, building on them, and developing their capacity in other areas. Emphasis will be placed on tailoring case management to individual needs.

During a client focus group in Brisbane one client told us that he had been a bus driver for more than 20 years in his home country of Burundi. He said he would love to work as a bus driver but he did not know how to get a licence or how to get Australian workplace experience – experience that would mean Australian bus companies would hire him. This story too often resonated throughout the consultations, with clients stuck in a vortex of ‘no Australian experience – no Australian jobs’.

Along with English proficiency, and participation in community life, employment is a key settlement marker. Effective case management is about working with clients to identify their path to meaningful and appropriate employment.

Part of a client-centred approach lies also in the capacity to be flexible in the

intensity of support provided. We are exploring options for innovative housing solutions – including group housing and other community housing models. For select clients, initial group housing allows for services to be concentrated and structured around their needs.

Vulnerable clients will benefit from increased contact time, intensive case management, comprehensive cultural orientation, group based learning and collective support structures. For clients who may face issues of isolation it will create opportunities to form friendships and links which are the basis of a new life.

However, group housing will not work in all places or for all clients. For many clients, settling directly into a new community and locality and connecting to local facilities through hub-style services will deliver the best settlement outcomes.

Accommodation should be about a flexible approach based on the needs of the client.

Consultations have confirmed our views that structured onshore cultural orientation is lacking under the current program. Resounding support was received from those clients we met for the introduction of an onshore orientation program that reinforces and builds on the messages delivered through AUSCO. Many clients commented that AUSCO gave them some good basic information but they often found it difficult to contextualise and absorb.

The purpose of delivering an onshore cultural orientation program is to equip entrants with information and knowledge to assist them become lawful and participating members of our community. Such a program will present information about Australian social and cultural norms, law and order, finance and budgeting, tenancy issues, health literacy and much more.

Emphasis will be on skill development and competency-based learning rather than time-based service delivery. With

almost 70 per cent of the current intake being under 30 years of age (and this trend likely to continue), we need to ensure the needs of young people are not forgotten.

To that end there will be a stronger focus on youth – with greater consideration of the individual needs of our young refugees. The program will provide entrants with more effective links to other settlement and community programs and stronger connections with community supports such as ethnic organisations, and recreation and social groups.

A number of clients reported to me during consultations that they were not introduced to their local ethnic community and only became acquainted by chance meetings with people from their home country in the streets or shops. Connections with ethnic and cultural groups soon after arrival can often combat feelings of loneliness and isolation. I see this as an important function of an initial settlement program.

We must remember that an initial settlement program such as IHSS can only do so much. In outlining the new directions, I am not talking about guaranteeing that on exit from this program every client will be successfully settled – because realistically speaking settlement is a lifelong process.

What we are looking at is a program built around sustainable settlement outcomes, strength based case management, competency based transitions and client focused service. We recognise that not all refugees start from the same point and not all entrants settle at the same pace. To this end, the new initial settlement program will be client-centred, flexible and adaptable.

Adaptation of speech delivered 25 September 2009 in Brisbane. The contents of this article is not to be taken as documentation relating to the IHSS request for tender. Tenders must rely on information in the official tender documents. Please check AusTender for further information.


From Refugee Services Aotearoa New ZealandThe present strength of the refugee resettlement programme in New Zealand has evolved over the last thirty years and is built on a national structure that is unique internationally. All refugees arrive at the Mangere Refugee Reception Centre in Auckland, where they receive six weeks of multi-agency assessment, ESOL and orientation support, followed by placement and case management by a national resettlement NGO, Refugee Services, into six locations across New Zealand.

In the next stage of initial settlement in the community, intensive support is provided to each family through Refugee Service’s caseworkers, social workers, cross-cultural workers and volunteers, so that sustainable connections are made to local communities for housing, schools, medical care and local services.

New Zealand society has become more culturally diverse in the last decade and ethnic and language differences are no longer such a novelty. This has produced a more mature and understanding receiving community, which on the whole is positive and welcoming of refugees. This change has been underpinned by government policy on diversity, so that integration is encouraged and supported. Local festivals of celebration provide the opportunity for a wider cross section of New Zealand society to enjoy the richness of food, dance and story telling brought by former refugees, and give refugees an opportunity to proudly display their culture as part of the increasing ethnic diversity of New Zealand communities.

The strong culture of support from local communities has been captured and formalised in a volunteer programme managed by Refugee Services. Motivation for becoming involved in a volunteer support group is wide ranging, but New Zealanders’ love of travel means

that there is delight in finding the world on our doorstep, and many involve themselves in refugee resettlement. More recently the support of the receiving community has been further enhanced by regional responses to involve the ‘tangata whenua’, or indigenous population, in ceremonies of welcome for refugee groups on arrival from Mangere into the permanent settlement location.

Refugee support programmes guide towards integration, and a high level of achievement of independent functioning is achieved after the first year from those who have not been highly traumatised. The numbers of young former refugees who are emerging from tertiary education is being tracked by some ethnic communities, and numbers of graduates increase every year.

As the refugee sector has become more cohesive in recent years, respectful relationships have been built between all players, based on a national settlement strategy led by government, and developing regional strategies. However a national refugee policy is still to be developed. This would provide a more robust framework within which to develop engagement and partnership between government, NGOs and refugee communities.

What has already emerged is a strengthened information flow with settlement planning across all agencies, and communication in post-Mangere reports to the resettlement agencies, including NGOs and government departments.

The most recent addition to the refugee sector has been a national refugee network developed by former refugees themselves – the articulation of the refugee voice in advocacy and policy making.

A significant research programme is being conducted by Immigration New Zealand, the major government department managing the resettlement programme, known as “Ten Years On’. The research aims to measure the

progress of refugees after ten years of settlement, based on indicators of good integration. This principle is also implicit in a strengthening of the concept of individualised settlement planning which will be led by Refugee Services, across major settlement themes and indicators of integration.

Various NGOs and refugee communities themselves are involved in local examples of community development which bear testimony to thriving and developing refugee communities – income generation sewing projects, gardening projects to encourage the growth of local produce for economy and health, swimming projects, soccer teams becoming integrated into local soccer clubs, culturally appropriate womens’ community ESOL classes at which their babies are welcome – the list is constantly growing, and emerges from engagement between refugee ethnic groups and local funding.

Specific challenges still need to be addressed. In the wake of the global recession, how do resettlement agencies manage their budget costs effectively? One way this is being dealt with is to strengthen partnerships within the sector. Work needs to be done to identify the specific costs of various levels of support needs, and to ensure that there is a match to the provider of services – in health, social support or education. Some direct funding cuts have affected refugee entitlement to study support, especially the cessation of the Refugee Study Grants. Refugees are also affected indirectly as a small minority group, by the impact of policy cuts – cuts in community education which reduces funding for certain refugee specific benefits, more pressure on state housing from the wider community, and fewer employment opportunities.

Like all resettlement countries, New Zealand experiences limited family reunion opportunities and this is recognised as one the most significant

Settlement services in New Zealand: an overview

stressors for refugees. Although it is one

of the key components to facilitate good

settlement, requests for family reunion of

extended family members far outstrips

the mechanisms for applications within

the Refugee Family Support Category, of

300 places per annum.

Interpreting requirements from

communities also outstrips the capacity

of government agencies to provide them

– a telephone link (often to Australia)

is useful, but face to face interpreting

requires capacity development.

New Zealand has a long history of

responsiveness to UNHCR requests for

the acceptance of emergency, vulnerable

or high needs cases. However this can

result in groups where the numbers

are too small to appoint ethnic staff

from their own communities, and there

is consequent diffi culty in providing

interpreting support or a stable emerging

community.

In spite of these stresses, New

Zealand has a well connected refugee

sector, committed to fi nding capacity

solutions and ensuring that the refugee

programme remains well accepted at the

heart of our increasingly diverse society.

An early example of refugee resettlement circa 1950s. After years in a German camp, one family prepares to start life afresh in New Zealand.


From IMSED ResearchDuring 2008 the New Zealand government launched a new phase of research with refugees. The IMSED Research team within the Department of Labour has begun two new studies to build on the 2004 research project, Refugee Voices: A journey towards resettlement. A new three year project, Quota Refugees Ten Years On: Perspectives on Integration, Community and Identity, is designed to understand the long-term settlement experiences of former refugees in New Zealand. A smaller but unique prospective cohort study called Bhutanese Refugee Resettlement Needs, Expectations and Experiences studies short term settlement issues and outcomes by talking to refugees before and again twice after their arrival in New Zealand.

These studies continue to build on the earlier Refugee Voices, which was the first large-scale study to look at refugee resettlement in New Zealand. The methodology was highly participative yet included in total almost 400 refugees – including recently arrived refugees and those who had lived in New Zealand for approximately five years. This study gave former refugees a voice by collating their views, experiences and expectations in a broad range of areas – ranging from their backgrounds and expectations of New Zealand, through to their experiences of finding housing, getting support, learning English and settling into New Zealand life more generally. Much was learned about adaptation and settlement service provision. The research highlighted both positive and negative experiences and fed into a number of government and NGO initiatives aimed at improving the resettlement journey in New Zealand.

However, two issues remained little understood. On the one hand, we understood little about refugees’ expectations immediately before resettlement and their immediate resettlement needs and experiences. On the other hand, the long term

complex processes of integration, community capacity building and identity construction were unstudied. The current research programme addresses both these issues.

The study Bhutanese Refugee Resettlement Needs, Expectations and Experiences is an internationally unique prospective cohort study of refugees before final selection and after resettlement in a third country. A small group of 33 men and women of various ages and educational levels who have undergone long term confinement in refugee camps in Nepal are taking part in the study.

They were interviewed in Nepal about what they knew and expected of life in New Zealand, have been followed up at the end of their six week orientation programme in New Zealand, and will again be contacted 18 months after their arrival from Nepal. At this point we have begun to understand how and what refugees learn of a third country before selection for resettlement and how they

approach the unprecedented changes of resettlement to a new and radically different society. We have also heard their views on the experience of the orientation programme that is provided for the first 6 weeks of their time after arrival. These findings and future analyses will help provide a sound base for New Zealand’s selection and orientation preparations for its refugee quota programme, and to refine its supports for quota refugees after resettlement.

The three year study Quota Refugees Ten Years On: Perspectives on Integration, Community and Identity addresses the complex issues of longer term settlement. Internationally in recent years, there has been a widespread focus on the concept of integration in migration research generally and to a limited extent in recent studies of refugees. However, the concept of ‘integration’ is complex and much debated with disagreement about what constitutes integration and how best to measure successful integration. While the complexities and disagreements

Refugee research in New Zealand

Busy markets and life in camp conditions.


about the concept of ‘integration’ are acknowledged, the Quota Refugees Ten Years On study accepts the definition of Atfield et al.1

involves adjustment and participation on the part of the host society as well as the newcomer;

integration may be fractured and integration experiences in one area can sit alongside continued exclusion in other areas;

perceptions are central to the process of integration, and therefore it is important to explore refugees’ own experiences of the integration process.

The Quota Refugees Ten Years On research programme draws on a number of models of integration. One key focus of the study is to examine the dynamic

various domains of integration, such as health, employment, social networks, and discrimination, which are little understood. These analyses will help identify factors that act as barriers or facilitators to successful integration.

The Quota Refugees Ten Years On study adopts the participative approach of the 2004 study Refugee Voices to ensure the research meets the needs of refugee communities in New Zealand. A key to gaining input from a wide range of communities and organisations has been the establishment of an advisory group, which includes former refugees, NGOs and government agencies working in the refugee sector. This group has shaped both the research objectives and methods of the programme. On top of this we have also set up a reference group of interested individuals and organisations,

so that a wider range of people can have input into the study.

research approach. The main data

New Zealand through the Refugee Quota Programme between 1993 and 1999.

and Ethiopia made up 80% of all refugee Quota arrivals in New Zealand but other nationalities will also be included in the

developed through an extensive review of the literature and through interviews and focus groups with former refugees, to gain their perspectives on the areas to include.

we explored how best to empower participants to make a supported and informed decision about taking part in the study. As part of this, research participants were able to select which interviewer they wanted to work with, and were provided with choices in terms of age, gender, nationality and language. We also translated the information sheets and consent forms into the four most common

and Amharic) and participants were also

able to choose the language they would

like to conduct the interview in. This same

approach is now being used for the main

study that went into the field in December

To take into account the different

needs and contexts of these people,

interviewers have been drawn from the

main centres of refugee resettlement

in New Zealand and are speakers of

the main languages of our research

supervision. A number of the interviewers

are from refugee backgrounds themselves

and have therefore been able to bring

personal experience of resettlement to

the study. Furthermore, the hiring, training

and supervision of interviewers from the

refugee communities is intended to build

community expertise and capacity.

The research studies currently

underway are designed as research with,

rather than merely about, refugees. Not

only will the methodologies contribute

to capacity building among refugee

communities, but the analyses will provide

a strong evidence base for New Zealand

to improve its settlement services for

refugees both offshore and onshore

and delivery arms of government refugee

services. Because the study designs

allow prospective and retrospective

study of the mechanisms of both short

term and long term outcomes, the results

Zealand policy, but the research will also

benchmark New Zealand internationally

as a contributor to issues of academic

debate and significance.

Research at www.immigration.govt.nz

Refugees’ Experiences of IntegrationUniversity of Birmingham and the Refugee Council

Women continue the industrious practising of traditional crafts.

The Quota Refugees Ten Years On advisory group.


�

family reunification in New Zealand, and expressed the hope that the Government accepts this statement as a foundation for future discussions on refugee family reunification:

“The family is the cornerstone of society. A healthy society must value, support and protect families – while recognising that the concept of “family” can have different meanings in different contexts and cultures.

The forced separation of family members undermines the integrity of the family unit. It can have serious individual and social consequences – especially where separation involves children.

Refugees who come to New Zealand, whether as part of our commitment to our international obligations or through other avenues, typically suffer family separation – often in extreme circumstances. As a consequence, they often struggle to fully integrate, participate in, and contribute to, their new communities.

Our aim is to assist refugees who have settled in New Zealand to reunite with their families. This includes promoting immigration policy and procedures which recognise and accommodate the basic human need and right of former refugees to be with family.”

The four NGOs work with refugees on a daily basis, and recognise that reunification with family members is a key part of the successful refugee resettlement process. Preoccupation with the predicament of family members left behind in difficult circumstances, and the time and energy committed to seeking reunification, can be substantial barriers to resettlement. Concern for family overseas often impacts negatively on mental and physical health, and compromises the person’s ability to focus on language development, education, and employment. Wellington Refugees as Survivors Trust has found that its clients’ well-being and

From ChangeMakers Refugee Forum

Rahma is an elderly Somali woman who

came to New Zealand in 1999 under

the UNHCR refugee quota programme.

Rahma was forced to flee Somalia

in 1988 after most of her family were

killed, and she lived in Hartisheik, a

refugee camp in Ethiopia for 11 years,

caring for her orphaned nephews

and nieces. After her arrival in New

Zealand, and despite poor health,

Rahma spent every day fighting to

bring her three surviving nephews and

a niece, whom she considers to be her

children, to join her in New Zealand. In

2008, nearly ten years after Rahma’s

arrival in New Zealand, they were finally

reunited in Wellington.

Without a team of professionals to

help Rahma, this family reunion may

never have happened. A psychologist

and a volunteer lawyer met with

Rahma frequently over nearly five

years, supporting her through her

anguish over such a long separation

from her loved ones, and helping with

the complex immigration process. A

Wellington-based charitable trust paid

for the application fees and medicals

required by Immigration New Zealand,

and then for the airfares to bring these

four young adults from Ethiopia to New

Zealand.

This team approach by professionals

working with refugees in Wellington

has significantly improved the chances

of refugee families being reunited. It

was also the catalyst for four NGOs in

Wellington, with extensive experience

in refugee family reunification, joining

forces to seek to improve existing

family reunification policies and

practices.

Family reunification in New Zealand

These four NGOs are:

Wellington Refugees As Survivors Trust is the mental health service for refugees suffering from torture and trauma. Professional clinical and community staff deal on a daily basis with refugees in need of support and help to deal with responses to resettlement which includes unresolved past trauma, separation from their family members, and general resettlement challenges.

The Wellington Community Law Centre has provided free legal advice since 1997 to refugees seeking to be reunited with family members. Approximately ten refugees visit the Law Centre each week seeking advice on family reunification, and more than 140 immigration cases (mainly related to family reunification) are dealt with by volunteers and staff at any one time.

The Refugee Family Reunification Trust is a private charity providing financial assistance to former refugees living in Wellington who need help with the costs (mainly airfares) associated with bringing qualifying family members to join them. Over the past eight years, the Trust has helped reunite more than 125 refugee families, including Rahma’s family.

ChangeMakers Refugee Forum Inc is a pan-refugee development agency representing the interests of 13 refugee communities in the Wellington region. One of its key roles is to work with government and non-government agencies to ensure that the issues relating to refugee resettlement are effectively addressed.

As a first step, these four NGOs worked together to prepare a discussion document titled Refugee Family Reunification in Wellington. The following is a summary of the key recommendations and suggestions.

The four NGOs first put forward the following position statement for refugee


assimilation into their new country improves markedly once they are reunited with family. In fact, most clients no longer required their services once the family is back together again.

One of the major problems identified is that New Zealand family reunification policy narrowly defines “family”, and takes no account of wider understandings of “family” from other cultures, nor of the obligations and emotional bonds created through the consequences of war and displacement. This means that where there is an interdependent family group, such as a parent with an adult child and grandchildren, or two widowed sisters living together raising their children, only some family members may be eligible to come to New Zealand. As a result, further fragmentation of the family can occur, leaving some members behind in an even more vulnerable position. A wider definition of “family” has therefore been recommended.

The discussion document highlights flaws in existing policies applicable to refugees, and in particular in relation to the Refugee Family Support Category, and recommends that an urgent review be undertaken to ensure that:

is realistic (currently there is a two or three year wait for selection, and a further two or three years to complete

members of refugees entitled to enter New Zealand under this category each year is met.

Other key policy recommendations include the making of more strategic decisions about the composition of the UNHCR refugee quota programme, particularly the family reunion component, to assist with cases where family separation is a significant and persistent barrier to effective resettlement. To help address the current backlog of applications under the Refugee Family Support Category, the discussion document suggests that one year’s 750 places under the UNHCR refugee quota programme be applied solely to family reunification.

The discussion document notes that under current policy some former refugees simply have no avenues available to enable them to be reunited with their families. The implementation of a genuine humanitarian programme is

recommended to address refugee family reunification needs where no other policy is applicable.

The discussion document also comments in some depth on operational issues within Immigration New Zealand which seriously impact on the processing of applications from refugees seeking to be reunited with family members. It is recommended that a number of processes and procedures within Immigration New Zealand be urgently reviewed to improve standards, efficiency and customer service, within an overall context of understanding the special needs of refugees.

Finally, a lack of consistently available resettlement support services for refugees arriving under different programmes is identified, and it is recommended that all refugees should be entitled to a re-establishment grant, clear benefit entitlements, access to a social worker, housing assistance, student allowances and English classes.

One of the main recommendations of the discussion document is the establishment of a working group (including representatives from refugee communities, NGOs and the government) to address the issues and concerns raised, and to report back to the Minister of Immigration.

The purpose of the discussion document, Refugee Family Reunification in Wellington, is to help to identify, and to offer solutions to, major barriers to successful refugee family reunification in New Zealand. It is intended to provide a basis for ongoing discussion. The document has been sent to New Zealand’s Minister of Immigration, Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman. It has also been sent to Richard Towle, Regional Representative, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees for Australia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea and the Pacific.

It is available online at http://www.crf.org.nz/node/40.

UNHCR/B.Szandelszky


From UNHCR CanberraReading through the case files of the 750 refugees New Zealand takes in each year under its quota system is a stark reminder of man’s inhumanity to man, according to Auckland University of Technology (AUT) Centre for Refugee Education manager Maria Hayward.

“The stories contain details of such huge losses and tragedy; they make you cry every time,” she says.

While the extreme circumstances from which refugees have escaped leave an indelible mark on their lives, the settlement services available once they reach New Zealand are also vital in shaping their future in their new country.

In November 2009 AUT and the Refugee Council of New Zealand hosted the Looking Back & Moving Forward – Refugee Health and Wellbeing Conference to explore the last 20 years of refugee resettlement and look at issues likely to impact on refugee resettlement in the future.

Keynote speakers at the event included Minister of Immigration Dr Jonathon Coleman, UNHCR Regional Representative Richard Towle, Director of the University of NSW Centre for Refugee Research Eileen Pittaway, and Changemakers Refugee Forum Executive Chair Adam Awad.

Mr Towle presented UNHCR’s global perspective, noting that the total global resettlement capacity for UNHCR-referred refugees is currently around 76,000 places – around a tenth of the current demand.

Towle said it was critical that resources committed to the support of refugees in areas such as health, education, housing and social support are kept at an adequate level even in the current tough financial times.

He also noted it was vital that refugee resettlement intakes retained their integrity and were “racially blind” and purely about the protection of refugees.

“With such a small number of resettlement places compared to

demand, it is vital that those most acutely in need are offered those resettlement places,” Towle said.

Ms Hayward’s presentation on “a refugee-centred approach to resettlement education: power sharing, inclusivity and critical analysis” was a chance to look at policy and practice but also to look at the human face of refugees in New Zealand and address misconceptions about the country’s diverse refugee population.

Following up on the theme of inclusiveness, panels featuring refugees who have been settled in New Zealand included speakers from Somalia, Myanmar, the former Yugoslavia and Afghanistan, who shared insights into the challenges they faced both in escaping persecution in their homeland and in adjusting to life in New Zealand.

Hayward says AUT’s Centre for Refugee Education has played a critical role in the resettlement of refugees and

witnessed significant changes in the past 20 years, for instance the broadening of the ethnicities coming to New Zealand under the quota programme.

“The demographic make-up of refugees has changed dramatically. In the early years there might have been three different ethnicities in a group, now we often have as many as 12 and we need to be inclusive of that diversity,” she says.

All of these factors – worldwide demand, post-arrival services, and a more diverse group of arrivals – make settlement and resettlement an extremely complex area.

The 2009 Conference was an excellent opportunity to explore those issues through discussion with academics, service providers and refugee communities so that the next 20 years of refugee resettlement in New Zealand is even more successful than the first.

Tracking the health & wellbeing of refugees in New Zealand

Keynote speakers and organizers of the Conference (left to right): occupational therapy lecturer Shoba Nayar, Refugees as Survivors Chair Gary Poole, Eileen Pittaway, Richard Towle, Adam Awad, Refugee Council President Nagalingham Rasalingham, AUT Pro Vice Chancellor Max Abbott, AUT Chancellor Paul Reeves, and Maria Hayward.


From Walpurga EnglbrechtUNHCR Country Representative, PNG

Papua New Guinea (PNG) is host to some 10,000 West Papuan refugees and 20 non-Melanesian asylum-seekers and refugees. While the different protection regimes applicable to West Papuan and non-Melanesian refugees impact on their possibilities for settlement, so do the living conditions offered in rural and urban settings. The following article looks more closely at the situation of the West Papuan refugees in Iowara-East Awin, in the border and urban areas, as well as of the non-Melanesian asylum-seekers and refugees living in cities in PNG.

West Papuan refugees have been arriving in PNG since the 1960s, with the largest influx, estimated to be between 12,000 and 15,000 persons, occurring between 1984 and 1986. They originate from all areas of West Papua with the majority coming from Merauke, Mindiptana, Wamena and Jayapura districts. In 2000, another group of 500 West Papuan refugees arrived.

In 1996, the Government of PNG adopted a so-called “Limited Integration Policy”, granting permissive residency permits (PRPs) to those West Papuan refugees who agreed to reside in East Awin for at least six months. PRPs provide West Papuans with access to a higher standard of protection than non-Melanesians. PRP holders can engage in business activities, enrol in PNG schools and tertiary institutions, access health facilities and enjoy, albeit restricted, freedom of movement. Restrictions include not residing in the border areas of Western and Sepik Provinces, not engaging in political activities, not having voting rights and not having the right to membership of political parties. PRPs are valid for three years. Naturalisation is available to those PRP holders who have established presence in PNG for eight years, and to the second generation of children born in PNG.

But how does this Limited Integration Policy affect the daily lives of the West Papuan refugees in PNG? At this stage, some 2,300 refugees live in East Awin, some

5,000 in the border areas between PNG and Indonesia and another 2,700 refugees in urban areas.

West Papuan refugees in Iowara-East Awin (East Awin)East Awin is a 6,000 hectare piece of land in a remote part of PNG’s Western Province allocated by the PNG Government which allowed for the relocation of West Papuan refugees from the initial makeshift camps near the border where they had crossed. The location of the East Awin refugee settlement is one of the most remote refugee settlements in the world, only accessible by boat from Kiunga town to the Rampsite, about one hour upstream on the Fly River followed by a strenuous six to twelve-hour ride (depending on the weather and road conditions) by agricultural tractor-trailer or trucks to the camp. East Awin’s administration centre is located approximately 120 kilometres from the Indonesian/PNG border and 46 kilometres from the Fly River.

There are 13 major settlements – 12 settlements housing refugees, one hosting local residents – located along a 30 kilometre section of the Kiunga to Nomad road. The Government has bought the land and based on a land survey which is currently being undertaken, will provide the land to the families on a 99-year-lease basis.

Land provides a foundation that allows refugees to earn an income by cultivating rubber, fruits and vegetables. However, the rubber trees will only be ready for harvest in four or five years. Meanwhile, the residents have to see how the nascent fruit and vegetable delivery project and the peanut processing project can flourish. The success of the two projects depend on a functioning road and the availability of transportation means, both which are challenges due to the remoteness of the villages, harsh weather conditions and lack of maintenance structures at this stage. Other factors limiting productivity are the poor soil conditions and limited arable land which often forces the refugees to establish gardens outside

Iowara’s boundaries creating tensions with the local population.

While conditions in general in terms of shelter, education, and health are equal to the standards enjoyed by the local populations living nearby,1 access to safe water and adequate sanitary facilities remains a concern. Further, the lack of justice services, protection structures to prevent and respond to gender-based violence, shortfalls in child protection systems and limited support to vulnerable households are areas which need further attention.

Where refugees after residence of eight years in PNG would like to apply for PNG citizenship, the high fee of Kina 10,000 (approximately USD 4,000) makes this option only available for very few refugees.

West Papuans in border areas

West Papuans at the border have never relocated to East Awin for at least six months, as required by the Limited Integration Policy. Therefore, their stay has never been regularized, they are not supported by the Government and do not hold PRPs which would provide them access to services and assistance.

Consequently, these settlements in the border areas have only limited health and education services available as provided by various church groups. Where elementary schools exist, they are not registered with the authorities. Aid posts are existent but health staff has only very basic knowledge and drugs are often not available because of delivery delays. Refugees have basic stilt housing available made out of bush materials. Given the pollution resulting from the Ok Tedi copper mine, access to safe water is a major concern. Further, the lack of proper sanitary facilities combined with flooding of the majority of the settlements turns the area into sewage and makes housing, aid posts and schooling inaccessible. The refugees do not have a regular income because of limited access to land coupled with infertile soil and the pollution of the Fly river (from the Ok Tedi river).

Realities of settlement in the context of Papua New Guinea

West Papuans in urban settingsWest Papuans who live in urban areas but never relocated to East Awin for the required six months do not hold permissive residency permits and are registered. In addition, there are other refugees in urban areas who held permits but never renewed them, not fully understanding the legal implications. While there is the general understanding that they are in principle refugees, the authorities do not feel responsible for them in providing them with proper documentation, necessary services or other support. With no offi cial access to the labour market they have to rely on subsistence farming, but as land is scarce in urban areas refugees are often subject to exploitation.

For example, one particular group bought land but it turned out that the person from whom they bought the land was not the real land owner. There is a culture to rely on verbal agreements as for the use of land. However, where land disputes are brought before courts, titles as recorded in the registry count and not what has been verbally agreed. This resulted in their eviction and they are currently living in a makeshift accommodation – basic fl oor on stilts and tarpaulin as cover which does not provide adequate protection against the elements. Sanitary conditions are also inadequate. While the Government has named some other locations, actual allocation of land has never happened.

Non-Melanesian asylum-seekers and refugeesBy end of August 2009, there were 20 asylum-seekers and refugees registered with UNHCR, living in urban settings (Port Moresby, Daru and Vanimo). But the possibilities for settlement are limited and negatively impacted by the lack of a proper legal and regulatory framework and the upholding of seven reservations to the 1951 Convention. While the “Limited Integration Policy” allows for the regularization of West Papuan refugees and their access to documentation and services, non–Melanesian asylum-seekers and refugees remain without any government protection and assistance. At this stage, asylum-seekers and refugees rely entirely on the assistance provided by UNHCR (basic shelter, modest fi nancial subsistence allowance and support for access to health services). Furthermore, non-Melanesian asylum-seekers and refugees are particularly vulnerable to xenophobia and racism amongst the local population, heightened after the start of attacks against Asian shop owners in April 2009.

Successful settlementCreating conditions for successful settlement is paramount to assist refugees to integrate into society. Refugees need a clarifi ed legal status and proper documentation. They need access to land and the labour market and should be given economic opportunities, as well as ensured availability of education, health, protection (including for women, children and groups with specifi c needs) and justice services. Comparing the four refugee groups, it becomes apparent that

only the refugee group in Iowara-East Awin and those in urban areas who hold PRPs have an option to settle successfully.

Access to land is a real challenge in the PNG context. 97 per cent of the land is owned by the community and unless the Government is able to buy land, as has been the case for the group in East Awin, refugees do not have access to it. While many West Papuans have integrated into their communities in urban areas, the lack of written agreements on the use of land make them vulnerable to evictions.

Some of the current obstacles to successful settlement also lie in the current legal framework in PNG which actually creates three different refugee groups: a) West Papuan refugees who relocated to East Awin and therefore have access to PRPs and services; b) West Papuan refugees who did not relocate to East Awin and whose status has not been regularised with no access to documentation and basic services; and c) non-Melanesian refugees who do not have access to most basic rights (e.g. legal status, labour market).

To allow for the successful settlement of the different refugee groups, it would be vital for the PNG Government to create a comprehensive protection framework2 and thus create, for all refugee groups, the same status and rights and eliminate discrimination.

1. It is important to note that the service delivery is quite in a poor state in Papua New Guinea.2. The creation of an adequate protection framework would include: adoption of PNG refugee policy; withdrawal of the current seven reservations to the 1951 Convention; broadening of the Limited Integration Policy; revision of the Migration Act, coupled with creation of refugee status determination and reception procedures; and waiver or reduction of the fee of Kina 10,000 for the grant of PNG citizenship.

The entrance to Iowara-East Awin in PNG.


From UNHCR Communications ServiceIn recognition of his achievements as a life-long advocate on behalf of the world’s most vulnerable people, the recipient of the 2009 Nansen Refugee Award is the late Edward Kennedy.

Senator Kennedy’s work in establishing US refugee admissions, resettlement, and asylum programs directly helped millions of persecuted individuals to fi nd protection and start new lives in the United States. He was the chief sponsor of more than 70 refugee related measures and was instrumental in codifying international refugee obligations into US law.

In announcing the Nansen award in September 2009, UN High Commissioner for Refugees António Guterres said: “Senator Kennedy stood out as a forceful advocate for those who suddenly found themselves with no voice and no rights. Year after year, confl ict after confl ict, he

put the plight of refugees on the agenda and drove through policies that saved and shaped countless lives.”

From his election in 1962, Senator Kennedy adopted a comprehensive approach in his fi ght for refugee protection. He effectively utilized his infl uence in the United States Congress to advance refugee and asylum-related legislation and to raise awareness of refugee crises.

Senator Kennedy met with governments at the highest levels, encouraging them to welcome refugees seeking protection in their territories. His work helped to raise public awareness of the challenges refugees face around the world. He also regularly met with refugees themselves, visiting refugee settings around the globe as well as in local US communities. Throughout, he demonstrated a level of compassion and empathy for individual refugees and their communities unrivalled in the US Congress.

Senator Kennedy’s interest in refugee protection did not stop at the US border – he was the voice and the hope of persecuted and uprooted individuals worldwide. He brought attention to refugee crises in Africa, Asia, the Middle East, Eastern Europe, and Latin America. Most recently, he played a critical role in drawing attention to the needs of Iraqi refugees.

UNHCR is grateful it was able to inform Senator Kennedy of the Nansen Committee’s decision in June 2009, and is deeply saddened by his passing.

The Nansen Refugee Award is given annually to an individual or organisation for outstanding work on behalf of refugees. It includes a $100,000 prize that the winner can donate to a cause of his or her choice. It was created in 1954 in honour of Fridtjof Nansen, Norwegian explorer, scientist and the fi rst UN High Commissioner for Refugees.

Edward Kennedy receives the 2009 Nansen Refugee Award

Senator Edward M. Kennedy has a smile and a handshake for an unidentifi ed young refugee in an eastern Sudan camp in 1984. Many of the refugees had walked for a week to reach the camp from Eritrea. AP Photo/Robert Dear

UNHCR staff take part in a mission to assess the needs of internally displaced people in north-eastern Democratic Republic of Congo.UNHCR/M.Fawke

From UNHCR Communications Service

Donors have committed an initial US$

477.5 million towards the UN Refugee

Agency’s US$ 3 billion funding appeal for

2010, its largest ever such request and

aimed at meeting the basic needs of a

growing number of persons under its care.

The commitments came in December

during UNHCR’s annual pledging

conference in Geneva, where High

Commissioner António Guterres asked

donors to fund a US$ 3.007 billion

requirement.

The 2010 funding appeal is based on

the most comprehensive assessment

to date of the needs of persons under

UNHCR’s care. The budget is to help

more than 34 million refugees, asylum-

seekers, stateless and internally displaced people in 118 countries.

Donors commended UNHCR on this new approach.

“In the present circumstances and taking into account the extremely complex fi nancial environment that we have around the world, I think we need to feel very happy with the level of support that these pledges have shown, and I would like to express my very, very strong appreciation for that”, UN High Commissioner for Refugees António Guterres told delegates at the conference.

These early pledges are particularly critical for ongoing operations in Afghanistan, Chad, Colombia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, Sri Lanka and Sudan.

Of the requested US$ 3 billions, US$ 2.1 billion will be devoted to refugee

programmes, with the aim of providing protection and for activities including adequate housing, ensuring suffi cient clean water, proper sanitation facilities, as well as to upgrade and widen access to health and education services. The rest of the 2010 budget will be to meet the needs of a growing number of internally displaced people and stateless persons as well as for reintegration projects.

While acknowledging the initial contributions, Mr. Guterres added: “We will be counting a lot on your generosity during the year to be able to come as close as possible to the global needs assessment indications that we had”. He also welcomed progress made in 2009 in increasing donations from the private sector, as well as from States in the Persian Gulf whose fi nancial support was essential to funding many operations this year.

UNHCR encouraged by US$ 477.5 million initial donor response to 2010


From UNHCR Communications ServiceAs many as 50 per cent of the world’s 10.5 million refugees under UNHCR’s mandate are now living in cities and towns across the globe. At least twice that number of internally displaced people and returnees are believed to be in urban settings.

“We need to abandon the outmoded image that most refugees live in sprawling camps of UNHCR tents,” UNHCR High Commissioner for Refugees António Guterres said. “What we are witnessing is that more and more refugees live in cities.” Guterres was speaking ahead of the annual “High Commissioner’s Dialogue” in Geneva from 9-10 December with a focus on protection challenges in the context of urbanization.

Like 3.3 billion other people in the world, refugees have been steadily moving to cities, mostly in developing countries, a trend that has accelerated since the 1950s. The number of city-dwellers has grown fourfold over the last 60 years, from 730 million in 1950 to over 3.3 billion today. Eighty per cent of urban-dwellers will soon live in towns and cities of the developing world.

“The rights of refugees travel with them wherever they fl ee,” Guterres said, “and they are entitled to the same protection and services in cities and towns that they have traditionally received in camps.”

According to recent estimates, the Afghan capital of Kabul has grown sevenfold since 2001, and many of the new arrivals are former refugees who have returned from the Islamic Republic of Iran or Pakistan, or displaced people who are escaping violence in rural areas of the country.

In the Middle East, both Damascus in Syria and Amman in Jordan are providing a sanctuary for hundreds of thousands of Iraqis who have been forced to fl ee their country.

In Asia, urban settings for refugees range from sprawling mega cities such as Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia, to refugee communities on the edge of conurbations that over time have become permanent settlements.

UNHCR experience on the ground paints a graphic picture of refugees struggling to survive in urban environments. Forced to live in overcrowded slums and shanty towns, with little or no access to health and social services, most are obliged to eke out a living in the informal sector of the economy, where they are subject to exploitation. Many individuals stay under the radar, preferring to remain “invisible” for fear of deportation. This makes registration and identifi cation diffi cult.

The arrival of large numbers of forcibly displaced people to cities places additional strains on scarce public resources such as health and education, and may lead to increases in the prices of basic needs such as food and accommodation.

Refugees in cities will typically live alongside nationals and migrants who have migrated to urban areas in pursuit of higher living standards. These different groups all contend with diffi cult day-to-day circumstances in communities that will lack even the most basic welfare support. More pressure on infrastructure and environment, on housing and social services in communities already struggling can create tensions between local and refugee populations – and in worst cases, can fuel xenophobia with catastrophic results.

Within this volatile and shifting context, UNHCR is faced with the most basic of challenges – how to identify and reach out to refugees.

“While the issue is global, conditions vary greatly from region to region and so much depends on a local response. That’s why, as well as working at government level, we are highlighting the role of mayors and municipal authorities as pivotal. We look to them in particular to help build understanding and cooperation between refugees and the local population on the ground. They can make a big difference,” said Guterres.

UNHCR’s new “Policy on Refugee Protection and Solutions in Urban Areas” calls on states, municipal authorities and mayors, humanitarian agencies and civil society to recognize this new reality and to join forces to meet the challenge raised by a growing refugee population living in towns and cities worldwide.

Half of the world’s refugees now live in cities

In this fl at in Malaysia, 50 refugees form a ‘village’ where communal cooking and cleaning are done and the members support and assist each other. Those who are able to earn an income help support those who can’t. UNHCR/Zalmaï


From Maureen CollinsDevelopment Manager Australia for UNHCR

Last year I was fortunate enough to work with Pricewaterhouse Coopers to raise funds to help educate children from Darfur. The fundraiser was to celebrate the company’s tenth anniversary and globally raised a staggering US$4million in ten working days.

At the end of September 2009, I travelled with Rick Millen (Senior Partner in charge of Global CSR, PWC) and Kathryn Wightman-Beaven (CSR Director, PWC) and colleagues from UNHCR to visit the project in Eastern Chad.

After arriving in the capital N’Djamena, it took us a further five days to reach our first refugee camp, Mile, on the north eastern border with Sudan. Due to a combination of bureaucracy, security and the remoteness of the location, to say nothing of the 48 degree temperature, you began to understand how difficult life is here in what appears to be the edge of existence.

Over the next few days I began to understand the enormity of what had been achieved. In four of the most

northern camps; Mile, Kounoungou, Touloum and Iridimi, a new PWC funded school had been built. The schools, as well as traditional classrooms, had space for vocational training and community meeting rooms. In the harshest environment, soaring temperatures, 100 kilometre per hour winds, no water and no resources, these buildings were nothing short of a miracle.

One of the Sheiks in Touloum told us “Never when we were in the war in Darfur could we have imagined a school like this. In Darfur it would have been a University.”

As well as building the schools the project has included training teachers and supplying them with ‘Teacher Kits’ including a dictionary, atlas, chalks, hurricane lamp and a uniform. School children have received new books and school materials, many of them sitting at a desk for the first time. 39 per cent of girls in school in these four camps have babies.

The vocational training centre offers youth who have finished primary education a variety of training opportunities that might help them create livelihoods focusing on such areas as electronics, journalism, the environment,

juice making, hair braiding, and henna hand painting.

The most valuable personal lesson from the trip was that this funding had not only helped the 30,000 children in these four camps who would gain eight years of education. It has also had a huge impact on all 80,000 refugees living here. Freeing up mothers and teenage girls from looking after children and younger siblings allowed these women to learn their own skills, giving them a sense of hope and alleviating boredom. The schools gave the men in the camps a sense of purpose and the opportunity to get involved in school and education committees, no longer feeling they had failed to protect and provide for their families. PWC will continue to fund this program now known as ‘Educating the Children of Darfur’ and will raise additional funds early in 2010.

So whilst these people have suffered unimaginable horrors and are very much in limbo their time is no longer wasted. They will have the benefit of returning home with new skills and educated children, something they can keep for life.

To support the vital work of UNHCR in Darfur, visit www.unrefugees.org.au

Australia for UNHCR & Pricewaterhouse Coopers mission to Eastern Chad

Children in their new school at Kounongou Camp, Eastern Chad. Australia for UNHCR/M.Collins

World Refugee Day commemorations around the region culminated in a special community gathering of around 200 people hosted by UNHCR on 20 June 2009 in Canberra, featuring colourful cultural presentations, music, poetry and speeches from local resettled refugees.

In line with the World Refugee Day theme, Real People, Real Needs, the participation of refugees and former refugees helped to highlight the human stories behind the ever increasing number of people forcibly uprooted around the world – a statistic which now stands at 42 million.

“On this World Refugee Day, we have the opportunity to look behind the statistics to see and hear the real people in our communities, the many former refugees who are living, working and making real contributions to our society,” UNHCR Regional Representative Richard Towle said at the Canberra community gathering.

Two former refugees from Myanmar gave compelling accounts of the challenges they overcame as refugees and their experiences since being resettled to Australia.

Shin Thu Gay of the Karen community told of her appreciation to the Australian community for the opportunities given to her and her seven children for a new life after more than 20 years in a refugee camp on the Thai-Myanmar border.

Din Pla Hongsar, a local Mon community leader, explained his feeling of respect at being called “sir” for the fi rst time in Australia. He said he was surprised when a taxi driver asked him, “sir where do you want to go?” – a feeling of real respect that was impossible to fi nd for him in his home country.

These stories were just two of the many being told at community events all around Australia, New Zealand and Papua New Guinea marking World Refugee Day 2009.

In PNG, UNHCR organized a successful exhibition and auction of refugee artwork which raised much needed funds for services in the East Awin refugee camp.

Football matches involving former refugees were held in Wellington, Canberra, Melbourne and Sydney while cities including Auckland, Perth

and Brisbane hosted major community celebrations to mark World Refugee Day.

In all, over 100 local events were held on and around World Refugee Day by UNHCR, community groups, government and municipal authorities, former refugee groups, schools and universities.

UNHCR pays tribute to all the enthusiastic groups who organized and participated in these events, notably the Refugee Council of Australia and Refugee Services New Zealand.

UNHCR’s community gathering was a fi tting end to a week of activities in Australia’s capital which included fl ying World Refugee fl ags (with the support of the ACT Government) along the main avenues of Canberra and having iconic national buildings lit up in UN blue each night in the week leading up to 20 June.

It is UNHCR’s hope that all of these activities contributed to a better understanding of refugee issues among the public and a sense of inclusiveness and welcome for refugees and former refugees in our communities.

Communities gather to highlight Real People, Real Needs on World Refugee Day 2009

Canberra’s Old Parliament House lit up in blue to highlight World Refugee Day.


From Naomi SteerNational Director, Australia for UNHCR

UNHCR’s national association, Australia for UNHCR, remains on track to raise its goal of $7.5 million for 2009 to support vital UNHCR humanitarian programmes. This is despite the global economic downturn and the resulting impact on donations to charities. Australia for UNHCR is currently the third largest private donor to UNHCR globally.

This is due to the commitment of more than 20,000 Australian individuals who give to UNHCR on a regular basis as well as contributions from a number of international industry leaders, including PricewaterhouseCoopers, Microsoft and law fi rms Corrs Chambers Westgarth and Freehills.

Australia for UNHCR was also delighted to welcome the appointment of Her Excellency the Governor-General Ms Quentin Bryce AC as its new Patron who helped launch World Refugee Day 2009 activities at A4U’s eighth

annual World Refugee Day Breakfast at Sydney’s Westin Hotel.

The Breakfast, which was supported by the UNHCR Regional Representative Richard Towle and former Wallaby Captain Mr Phil Kearns, was attended by more than 400 guests who heard the story of former refugee Aminata Conteh and her dramatic escape from Sierra Leone with the support of UNHCR.

As well as giving fi nancially, Australian supporters are generously donating their free time too. In 2009 we launched a new initiative – fundraising through Sydney’s City2Surf – which raised over $6500. Other events such as talks by journalist and author Paul McGeough about his experiences in Iraq and a special exhibit and sale of textiles from the ancient Silk route were well attended and continued to draw both funds and interest.

Youth for UNHCR is another new initiative launched this year. Youth for UNHCR aims to engage young Australians by spreading the message

about UNHCR’s work. It is the brainchild of Special Youth Representatives Sophie Weldon and Adut Dau Atem, and seeks to use the power of social networking to raise awareness and funds for refugees around the world.

In response to the humanitarian crisis in the Dadaab Refugee Settlement in Kenya, which is currently supporting a population of almost 300,000 refugees, Australia for UNHCR launched a public appeal for Christmas. Supporters were asked to add their gift to the “World’s Biggest Relief Package for the World’s Biggest Refugee Camp”, with the goal of raising $400,000.

A Channel Nine team travelled with A4U to Dadaab in December, raising both awareness of the crisis and extra funds through a donation hotline. The appeal is still ongoing, but to date more than $300,000 has been raised.

Australia for UNHCR will be celebrating its 10th anniversary in 2010, and aims to raise $10 million throughout the year.

From the National Association

Makeshift shelters and new tents in a section for new arrivals at Ifo, one of the three refugee camps at Dadaab in north-east Kenya.UNHCR/E.Hockstein


UNHCR Regional Offi ce Canberra extends its sincere thanks to the Australian and New Zealand Governments for their support. UNHCR has so far received the following funds for its work around the world to 1 September 2009

Australia 2009Source Programme Amount (USD)

AusAID Core Contribution 9,761,415

AusAID Iraq – Consolidated Appeal 6,041,108

AusAID Pakistan – IDPs/Floods 1,993,139

AusAID Democratic Republic of Congo – SGBV 1,569,859

AusAID Myanmar – Rohingya population in the Northern Rakhine State 1,294,964

AusAID Afghanistan – Humanitarian action plan 1,294,964

AusAID Democratic Republic of Congo – the Eastern Province of North Kivu 1,137,885

AusAID Kenya – International Refugee Fund 1,079,137

AusAID Sri Lanka – Common Humanitarian Action Plan 1,079,137

DIAC Syria – Displaced Persons Programme 984,614

DIAC Indonesia – Long-term strategy for protection capacity building 704,252

AusAID Sri Lanka – Internally Displaced Persons 681,199

DIAC Pakistan – Displaced Persons Programme 669,344

DIAC Pakistan – Registration/Profi ling of Afghan refugees 639,640

AusAID Bangladesh – International Refugee Fund 503,597

DIAC Malaysia – Enhanced Social Protection 414,552

AusAID Syria (Iraq CAP) 412,882

DIAC Sri Lanka – Displaced Persons Programme 408,918

AusAID Nepal – International Refugee Fund 359,712

DIAC Bangladesh – Displaced Persons Programme 337,050

DIAC Thailand – Displaced Persons Programme 308,473

DIAC Malaysia – Refugee Status Determination 272,252

DIAC Nepal 243,563

AusAID E-Centre Project 203,962

DIAC ICMC Deployment Scheme – Iran, Nepal & Kenya 198,000

DIAC Pacifi c – Building protection in Pacifi c Islands 163,814

DIAC Junior Professional Offi cer Programme 68,994

DIAC India – Women’s Protection Clinic 47,080

Total 32,873,505

New Zealand 2009 Amount (USD)

NZAID Core contribution 3,500,583

Total 3,500,583

Thanks to our donors

Responding to the increasingly complex pattern of forced displacement worldwide has required UNHCR to increase emergency spending more than fourfold and its overall global expenditures by 50 per cent since 2006.

In tough economic times donors, partners and benefi ciaries expect effi ciency and effectiveness. UNHCR is transitioning to a results-oriented organization that is more responsive and accountable to donors, partners and benefi ciaries.Since reforms were initiated in 2007, UNHCR has reduced the size of its staff in Geneva to 767 and increased the share of UNHCR’s

funds spent on benefi ciaries.2009 has seen a major push to roll-out the next phase of our reform process – Results-based Management, the Global Needs

Assessment, and our Focus software.Through these reforms, UNHCR aims to ensure our donors have full confi dence in the effi ciency and effectiveness of the use of funds. With this confi dence, and with the clear picture of refugee needs generated by the Global Needs Assessment, we hope to generate the

increased support that will be necessary to meet those needs.For more information on the Global Needs Assessment, funding issues and UNHCR’s work with refugees and others around the world,

visit www.unhcr.org

Global Appeal & ReportThe Global Report and

The Global Appeal offer

a comprehensive view of

the agency’s operations and annual

requirements.

Convention & Protocol Text of the 1951 Convention

Relating to the Status of

Refugees & Text of the

1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of

Refugees.

Refugee Convention Q&AThe most frequently asked

questions about the key

treaty on the protection of

refugees around the world. Published

September 2007.

Protecting RefugeesAnswers to some of the

most commonly asked

questions about refugees

themselves and how the agency

attempts to help them.

Protecting Women & GirlsThis Handbook describes the

protection challenges faced

by women and girls and the strategies

to tackle these challenges.

UNHCR resources

UNHCR REGIONAL OFFICENEWSLETTERNo. 1/2010(Published January 2010)

A publication of the Regional Offi ce

for Australia, New Zealand, Papua

New Guinea and the Pacifi c.

3 Lyons Place,

Lyons ACT 2606

Tel: +61 (0)2 6260 3411

Fax: +61 (0)2 6260 3477

E-mail: [email protected]

Web: unhcr.org.au/unhcr.org.nz

Editors: Ben Farrell and Alex Donato

Handbook for Emergencies A reference tool which

serves to reinforce a

common understanding

among the many key actors in

emergency situations.

Statistical Yearbook 2007Provides data and trends

on refugees, asylum-

seekers, returnees, IDPs,

and stateless people in more than 150

countries.

Human Rights & RefugeesThis educational kit,

including the popular series

of “Lego posters” is great

way to stimulate discussion about

refugees.

Global Trends 2008The 2008 Global Trends

report refl ects many of the

major developments in

forced displacement between January

and December 2008.

Asylum Trends 2008Summarizes patterns and

trends in asylum claims made

in industrialized nations, including Australia

and New Zealand, during 2008.

The above resources are available online at www.unhcr.org and in some cases in hard copy via UNHCR Regional Offi ce Canberra. Email [email protected] for details.

Date post:	07-May-2015
Category:	Education
Upload:	christina-parmionova
View:	1,910 times
Download:	2 times