Removes the enre mainland from the immigraon zone where asylum seekers who arrive without visas are allowed to apply for one. The UN recognises that it is oen not possible for asylum seekers to apply for visas, and so deems it a right for asylum seekers who arrive onshore to apply for refugee protecon in that country. This completely "undermine[s] Australia's sovereignty" and has not stopped the boats.

EXCISING THE MAINLAND

OFFSHORE DETENTIONCondions in offshore processing centres, which have been slammed as ‘factories of mental illness, fall short of internaonal standards. Manus Island for instance, has been deemed unfit for children and vulnerable people, such as pregnant women, people with disabilies, or survivors of torture and trauma’. [2]

INTAKEFollowing the Report of the Expert Panel on Asylum Seekers - the Houston Report in 2012, the ALP government expanded the total annual humanitarian intake from 13,750 to 20,000. The Coalion will reduce this to the original 13,750[4]. In 2012, Australia ranked 62nd [5] based in refugee intake per capita compared to the rest of the world. Australia links intake of offshore and onshore arrivals - destrucvely breeding the myth of "queue jumping".

This was policy introduced in 1992 designed as deterrent, but it has sll failed to stop the boats. It has since evolved into indefinite detenon which has caused severe mental health problems. Indeed, the prolonged and painful uncertainty of per-sonal futures has led to self-harm and depression.

MANDATORY DETENTION

SOURCES1) hp://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/f/as-det.php2) hp://newsroom.unsw.edu.au/news/law/eight-reasons-offshore-processing-failure3) hp://www.asrc.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/elecon-scorecard.pdf4) hp://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/07/australia-elecon-tony-abbo-liberal-victory5) hp://www.asrc.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Australia-vs-the-World_August-2013.pdf6) hp://www.asrc.org.au/resources/mythbusters/#1375939566-1-17) 7) hp://thehotpotato.com.au/assets/pdf/Potato_Factsheet.pdf8) hp://unhcr.org/globaltrendsjune2013/UNHCR%20GLOBAL%20TRENDS%202012_V05.pdf9) hp://www.unhcr.org/522495669.html

The recurring theme in #auspol seems to be employing former colonies to process and detain asylum seekers (read: Nauru solu-on) and subcontracng our obligaons under the UN Convenon on Refugees to developing countries (aka PNG solu-on). Refugee advocates have grown hoarse calling instead for in-vestment in a regional protecon framework. Improving human rights standards in our region, on top of increasing our resele-ment intake from Indonesia and Malaysia (which is at present very poor), is likely to see fewer asylum seekers boarding danger-ous boats en route to Australia.[6]

ASIA-PACIFIC RELATIONS

COSTCurrent policies of mandatory detenon and offshore processing are significantly more expensive than community processing. Even conservave figures from the Department of Immigraon esmate community processing costs 20% of the amount required to process someone offshore[6]. According to the ASRC’s Hot Potato factsheet, ‘On average it costs around $450,000 a year to detain someone on Nauru or Manus Island. If we gave these people the right to work and lwork and let them live in the community they’d not only be contribung to the economy, spending would drop to around $30,000 a year.’[7]

The harmful mental health effects of mandatory detenon are well-documented. Uncertainty about the future, lack of independence, the monotony of life in detenon, and frustraon at the length of detenon and access to legal services, compound past experiences of trauma and contribute to the higher rates of depdepression, anxiety, post-traumac stress disorder and self-harm witnessed in detained asylum seekers compared to those in the community. Barriers to health equity such as low-English proficiency and poor understanding of the healthcare system also exist for refugees and asylum seekers in the community. [1]

See ‘offshore detenon’HEALTH

$$$

With developing countries hosng over 80 per cent of the world’s refugees in 2012, it is apparent that the internaonal refugee burden is not equitably shared[8]. With the number of Syrian refugees passing the 2 million mark (and rising)[9], Tony Abbo’s plan to reduce our humanitarian intake by 6,250 places a year to 13,750, displays a stupendous apathy for refugee crises abroad.

OUR ROLE AS INTERNATIONAL CITIZEN

These are visas that deny recognised refugees the right to a visa and family reunificaon, thus providing an incenve for refugees to use people smugglers. Moreover, refugees on TPVs will be required to periodically renew their visa and once the country is deemed safe, will be sent back to their home country. This causes unimaginable suunimaginable suffering and hardship for all concerned, and leaves the futures of refugees indefinitely uncertain. Ended in 2008 by the ALP, the Coalion has vowed to re-introduce TPVs.

TEMPORARY PROTECTIONVISAS (TPV)

Australia's internaonal obligaons are potenally in breach if genuine refugees are found to be on board - high likely given that 90% of boat arrivals in the last year have been deemed to be refugees[3]. Breach of these obligaons jeopardises our regional and internaonal reputaon. Even the Navy as expressed its disquiet regarding this policy.

TURNING BACK THE BOATS

workshop #6 CROSSING BORDERSWhere to from here?