|
Project SafeCom News and Updates 17 October 2005
|
Project SafeCom
|
Oct 16, 2005 07:41 PDT
|
Project SafeCom News and Updates 17 October 2005
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
¤ - In this Edition - ¤
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
1. AJ Johnson: Dim & DIMIA
2. Petro Georgiou: Human Rights in a Global Era
3. Libs waver on terror laws
4. ACT chief: I won't be led by the nose
5. Police state fears over terrorism laws
6. Bruce Haigh: the Fox and the Farmer are both Responsible
7. CANBERRA: The Siev X Memorial Event
8. Mohsen Soltani: launch of 'Australian Dream'
9. Le Dernier Caravanserail
10. Close Nauru for good: Brown
11. Greens MEDIA: Australia's offshore experiment fails
12. DEMOCRATS MEDIA: Nauru releases: abolish TPVs
13. Massive search for missing Immigration boat continues
14. Search continues for missing boat
14. No sign of missing Immigration boat
15. Project SafeCom at The Pandora archive
-||+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
-|| This is the Project SafeCom Newsletter - also published
-|| as the RAC-VIC Newsletter (Racvicnews) since July 2004 by agreement
-|| with RAC Victoria, which endorsed that their news service be
-|| managed by Project SafeCom. More information about us below.
-||+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
====================
1. AJ Johnson: Dim & DIMIA
====================
New Matilda
By AJ Johnson
Wednesday 12 October 2005
I was an employee of the Department of Immigration (now DIMIA) for 12
years. It was a sick system when I joined in 1985, and it hasn't got better.
In writing this I am not taking the lathe (as in Latham) to the wonderful
creatures I worked with. Some people were very kind, some were tolerant,
many were patient, others super-supportive. We had many laughs, generated
great ideas and there was a lot of fun, friendship and even some work
satisfaction. But I feel it's time to speak out about the Department as I
knew it.
The immigration program itself is made up of a migration and refugee
stream. The theory is that these are different breeds -- migrants
positively choose to come here; whereas refugees are propelled from their
countries by negative forces. The Department is also pretty much a
reflection of this -- many people choose to migrate into the public service
for positive reasons like job security, 'making a difference', even serving
the public; whereas others are driven there by personal problems or the
inability to survive in the outside world.
For a short but sweet six weeks in 1986, I was seconded to another
department, processing applications from graduates wanting to work in the
Commonwealth public service. Graduates in the humanities often wanted to
join (as I did in my ignorance) for reasons related to improving people's
lot, and possibly Australia's multiculturalism.
Once employed, some of us semi-humanists tried speaking up about what we
thought was amiss with the 'culture' of the Department. But before long,
most of us learned to keep quiet. For some, fatty degeneration of the
conscience set in and gradually smothered any urges, while drowning the
inner voice resulted in cirrhosis of the soul.
If few of us were brave enough to speak out about the inhumane things being
done to our fellow workers, then we certainly weren't going to say much
about the unconscionable things that were done in the name of 'protecting
our borders'. Almost anything seemed to be excusable on the grounds of
keeping the country 'a local shop'. I heard one officer say to an applicant
who wanted to stay in Australia because it was peaceful and harmonious:
'That's because we don't let your sort in here.' The League of Gentlemen
crossed with The Ministry of Fear.
Until some tricky government minister thought of designating places like
Outer Mongolia 'inside the migration zone', Australia's borders used to be
mainly pre-ordained by geography and girt. This side of the border, what
exactly were we protecting? A country where even people who had permanent
employment were afraid to speak out? 'Border protection' encouraged us to
be borderline sociopaths.
As in other organisations, many evils were attributable to bad management,
and I became a union delegate to try and support my fellow workers. In
those days, before I grasped that there is bad will in the world, I naively
thought that if workers were treated more humanely some goodwill might
trickle down to the Client.
Ah, the Client!
They may be called Clients but their 'business' is certainly not valued.
Many DIMIAns wished fervently that the Clients would all get lost. Those
who worked in Compliance (or Enforcement, as it was called when I first
started there) were in the unenviable position of being able to help the
Clients on their way. This could be done by spiriting them out of Australia
to some country they had never lived in, or worse, to one they were
desperate not to revisit. Some DIMIAns would listen, apparently unmoved, to
dreadful tales of how a Client had suffered: house bombed, children killed,
etc. Same officer would later pass an hour complaining about their personal
tragedy, such as having caught a cold or lost a bet.
Still, a person without a visa is not a person.
Besides, us DIMIAns were so busy with the snags and ladders of survival
within the Department that we didn't have much time for dealing with the
actual public. Our days were well occupied with the scrabbling of claws on
the slippery slope of the 'career path', the scribbling of endless job
applications, and other aspects of selection processes including currying
favour with people we hoped had influence. To me, Yes Minister was no
longer funny.
There were some admirable Departmental officers but I was often appalled at
the attitudes, ignorance and prejudice of some decision-makers. Surely, to
make an informed decision it is necessary to consider more than one side of
the issue. These people were making decisions on other people's lives and,
by extension, on the future of Australia while having no clue that people
who thought, lived or behaved differently from themselves could still be
human.
Periodically, the media notices that immigration officers have more power
than the police in being able to enter and search premises, haul off
suspects, and eventually deport them. Imagine the effect of possessing such
power on someone who is not very mature or compassionate. If you can't
imagine it read The Position of Her Power by Fauzia Rafiq, a Canadian
author. Perhaps it's only a minority of people with power who abuse it, but
far too many others are silent, and condone by their silence.
Minister Vanstone is promoting the idea of a training college for DIMIAns.
During my time, there were waves of training. In the positive periods, we
had enjoyable 'generic' courses such as Negotiation Skills. At other times
we would get Document Fraud and Dealing with Difficult Clients.
On occasion there were attempts by top management to broaden our
understanding of the world and ourselves — with courses about conflict
resolution, time management and one notable effort to analyse
'DIMIA-culturalism'. A well-known guru of human resources came to
'reculturalise' us. She asked the assembled pack who, among their
colleagues, they admired. As I recall, the hall of fame/rogues gallery
consisted mainly of compliance 'cowboys' and maybe one good State Director.
Nobody (certainly not me) mentioned someone like X — a departmental officer
who went public with his condemnation of the Department's
refugee/asylum-seeker processing as biased and racist. His career came to a
bad end and he was never mentioned again in polite company. He died not
long after.
Most of these courses were great fun because we usually enjoyed each
other's company and the break from 'real' work. But concepts like conflict
resolution, negotiation, client service, cross-cultural training didn't
really stick because they were as unfamiliar to most of us as 'Introduction
to Computing' would be to a person who's never used a computer and won't
see one again for three months.
I'm writing about the Department of Immigration as I knew it (I left in
1998), but things are the same now, as they are in many other organisations
— government or not.
I am ashamed that I have not spoken up before this, even into the void. I
am ashamed that I was and am a coward. I have a bad case of survivor guilt.
About the author
AJ Johnson is the author of The Mongrel’s Management Manual (a work in
progress), based on a wide experience of workplaces and dis-organisations.
http://www.newmatilda.com/home/articledetailmagazine.asp?ArticleID=1017
===================================
2. Petro Georgiou: Human Rights in a Global Era
===================================
New Matilda
By Petro Georgiou
Wednesday 12 October 2005
We face serious challenges from terrorist movements. But the measures we
employ to combat terrorism must not undermine our core values - due
process, civil liberties, and freedom of speech and religion. We have to
recognise the terrorist danger and we have to respond in a measured,
proportionate way.
We need to recognise that civil and political rights and freedom did not
come to us as in a single package, a gift from idealists in an ivory tower.
They evolved out of the experiences of people who lived through turbulent
and violent times, through rebellion, revolution, civil war and religious
conflict.
The commitment to protecting individual rights was a rejection of the
arbitrary use of executive power which had been justified as essential to
the security of the State and its citizens. The power was curbed because it
was recognised that its exercise was corrosive to the very order that it
purported to serve.
The treaties which governments have negotiated to protect human rights
reflect a mindfulness that certain situations might require exceptional
measures. For example, the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights provides that, in times of public emergency that threaten the life
of the nation, governments may take measures to cut back their obligations
to the extent strictly required by the situation.
But even in these circumstances there are constraints that must be
respected. The tension between the interests of security and of civil
liberties has been a recurring phenomenon in Australia organisations were
banned and native-born Australian citizens were interned during war time;
the Communist Party was almost banned in the 1950s.
Australia was not immune from terrorism in the second half of the 20th
century: in 1978, a bomb was detonated during a meeting of Commonwealth
Heads of Government at the Hilton Hotel in Sydney.
On September 11, 2001 the attacks on New York's Twin Towers gave rise to
urgent action against terrorism and great impetus to the long-standing
debate about the intersection of security and human rights.
The characterisation of these attacks as acts of war, rather than crimes,
resulted in a range of actual and proposed responses that are more commonly
associated with times of war rather than peace, including trial by special
courts; indefinite detention without charge; killing of alleged terrorists
in non-conflict situations; use of torture to interrogate suspects.
No such proposals have been considered by the Australian Government, but as
at 11 September 2001, there were around 35 federal legislative measures in
place relating to terrorism. In less than 4 years since then, there have
been around 35 new initiatives.
The concerns of MPs that some of the measures sought by the government
impacted disproportionately and inappropriately on civil liberties led to
some proposals being dropped or amended.
The evolution of counterterrorism legislation between initial proposals and
what is enacted reflects underestimated and perhaps unacknowledged
strengths in our parliamentary system. Improvements in the legislation were
brought about through the efforts of diverse sources, including Government
backbench committees and the party room, House and Senate committees and
external organisations and experts.
Among the particularly controversial provisions that remain is ASIO's power
to detain and interrogate people who are not suspected of involvement in
terrorist crimes. In my view, as I stated in the Parliament on 19 September
2002, if a murderous attack such as the one on September 11 could be
prevented only by detaining a person for a short period of time in order to
obtain vital information, it is reasonable to give the authorities that
power subject to appropriate protections against misuse or abuse.
At the end of 2004, Parliament enacted another law which punishes a person
who associates on two or more occasions with a member of a proscribed
terrorist organisation. This is a far-reaching form of guilt by
association. It criminalises people who did not intend to commit or assist
the commission of a terrorist act, and whose behaviour would have been
entirely lawful if they had not met with a member of a proscribed terrorist
organisation.
Let me reiterate then that alongside anti-terrorist measures that are
necessary and reasonable there are some that contain elements that are of
serious concern to me.
Following the attacks in London of July 7 the Government reviewed the
measures in place and decided that further action is urgently required.
Early in September, the Prime Minister announced a number of proposals to
strengthen Australia's counter-terrorism laws.
They include:
• giving courts the power to impose so-called control orders on people who
pose a terrorist risk to the community, for example restricting their
freedom of movement;
• detaining suspects for up to 14 days, without charge or trial, to prevent
them engaging in terrorist acts or destroying evidence about terrorism;
• creating a new offence of inciting violence against groups in the
community, including against Australian forces overseas and in support of
Australia's enemies.
The Government acknowledges that the proposed measures will curtail the
scope of a number of rights, such as liberty and freedom of expression.
When the legislation has been drafted, the Parliament will need to
scrutinise it very closely to ensure that in the course of defending the
democratic values which terrorism attacks, we do not inadvertently betray
them. The responsibility of the Parliament in this regard is particularly
substantial.
It is worthwhile taking a look at some of the pitfalls that are manifest in
just one of the proposals adopted by the Blair Government since July 7.
An offence is proposed for publishing a statement which glorifies, exalts
or celebrates the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism.
The offence is committed where the terrorist event occurred in the last 20
years, or an older event specified by the minister responsible for the law.
The proposed offence raises fundamental issues about the curtailment of
freedom of speech. The crime is committed even if there is no evidence that
a person intended to inspire emulation or that in the circumstances anyone
was likely to be inspired to emulate the action. One needs to seriously
question whether a sweeping prohibition of this sort is going to be
effective or to bring the law into disrepute.
Since the attacks of September 11, all Australians have had their sense of
security shaken. We must recognise the fact that in this environment Muslim
Australians have become vulnerable to suspicion, victimisation and
prejudice and their commitment to Australia has been publicly questioned.
The fact that, unlike September 11, the identified individuals who
perpetrated the attacks in London were born in the UK or had lived there
since childhood was a great shock to many people. But, very quickly, and
without compelling reasons, the concern to understand the actions of a
small, particular group of Muslim men was turned into an attack on
multiculturalism in the UK.
All too predictably, there was an echo in Australia – if we wanted to avoid
a repeat of the London bombing, we were warned to end the dangerous policy
of multiculturalism. And just what did the critics suggest we needed to do
to make us safe?
The most detailed plan came from a former Senator, who, in less than a
month, published two somewhat different six-point plans, which suggested,
among other things: abolishing SBS and forbidding the public wearing of
identity-concealing garments which might cover bomb belts.
A couple of current MPs have suggested that Muslim girls be prohibited from
wearing head scarfs in public schools.
I consider such ideas to be absurd contributions to an issue of grave
importance. The assertion that the policy of multiculturalism permits and
facilitates the propagation and commission of terrorism is false.
Australian multiculturalism is an intelligent and necessary response to the
diversity of our immigrant population, to the need for equity in public
services provided to all Australians and the need to response to the
cultures that our migrants have brought.
And the policy was never without limits. Multiculturalism has always
explicitly expected all Australians, new and old, to make a commitment to
Australia and Australia's interests, to the basic structures and principles
of Australian society – the constitution and rule of law, tolerance and
equality, freedom of speech and religion, and English as the national
language.
Multiculturalism is not the problem; it is part of the solution.
I have no doubt that we have good reason to be concerned about the
activities of a small number of religious extremists who incite and commit
terrorism on the basis of strongly contested versions of aspects of Islam.
Our Federal and State Governments are entitled - and indeed are obliged -
to take action to protect the community from the threat of terrorist
violence, just as they have a duty to protect us from violence perpetrated
by people for non-terrorist purposes.
But the power of governments to protect the security of the community must
be subject to constraints that are clearly specified and its exercise
rigorously scrutinised.
I believe that while a substantial majority of the Australian public
believes that a terrorist attack in Australia is inevitable, and effective
action needs to be taken against it, many are wary of sweeping measures
that might unduly curtail their liberties and the rights of their fellow
citizens.
Above all, we need to recognise that, whatever arrangements may be made for
sunset clauses, the reality is that the legislation that is put in place
now will be with us for a very long time.
This is an edited version of a speech given at the La Trobe Politics
Society Annual Lecture, on 20 September 2005.
About the author
Petro Georgiou is Federal Member for Kooyong in Victoria, and a member of
the Liberal Party.
http://www.newmatilda.com/home/articledetailmagazine.asp?ArticleID=1018
====================
3. Libs waver on terror laws
====================
Sydney Morning Herald
By Kerry-Anne Walsh and Frank Walker
October 16, 2005
The Sun-Herald
Growing fright on the Liberal Party backbench over tough new anti-terrorism
legislation has forced the Government to reconsider extreme elements of the
laws.
As the Government continued to reel yesterday at the leak of the draft
legislation by ACT Chief Minister Jon Stanhope, sources revealed that
elements were being reviewed because of escalating alarm within Liberal ranks.
The backbench committee advising Attorney-General Philip Ruddock on the
laws, chaired by moderate Liberal Senator George Brandis, has pushed for a
raft of changes, including the length of time suspects can be held without
charge, issues around the holding of minors, freedom of speech concerns
about new sedition laws and proposed jail terms for soft terrorism charges.
In Darwin to farewell more troops heading to Iraq, Mr Howard condemned Mr
Stanhope for releasing the draft laws, branding him irresponsible.
"It's important that governments, no matter what political stances you
might take, should have the capacity to talk to each other in confidence.
And that legislation was given in confidence," he said.
"I can assure the people of Australia that the legislation finally
presented to the Parliament will reflect the agreement that was reached by
me with all the state premiers and chief ministers. No more, no less."
The leaking of the draft by Mr Stanhope on his website on Friday has
exacerbated political anger that Parliament will have insufficient time to
scrutinise the complex detail. The laws will be introduced on October 31.
Labor and the minor parties are furious that the Government used its Senate
majority to allow only one week from that date for the Senate to examine
the new laws. Labor's homeland security spokesman Arch Bevis said only one
day of investigation was possible because senators would be tied up with
estimates hearings that week.
"What is John Howard scared of?" he asked yesterday.
He said Mr Stanhope's actions had been caused by the "high-handed
arrogance" of the Prime Minister by not allowing proper debate on "these
extremely important laws, which affect every single person in Australia".
Council for Civil Liberties NSW president Cameron Murphy said he was
shocked at the powers to be given to police.
He said they would let the Government take action against anyone who simply
opposed it on issues such as the war in Iraq.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/libs-waver-on-terror-laws/2005/10/15/1128796748236.html
============================
4. ACT chief: I won't be led by the nose
============================
The Age
By Brendan Nicholson
National Security Correspondent
October 17, 2005
JON Stanhope has no regrets about releasing a draft of the Howard
Government's tough new terror laws and says he won't to be "led by the
nose" by the Prime Minister.
On Friday the ACT Chief Minister placed on his website the draft
legislation, expected to become law once the states and territories agree
to it. The bill will give police and security agencies powers —
unprecedented in Australia in peacetime — to detain people without charges
being laid.
Mr Howard said making the draft public was irresponsible. He said the bills
to go to Parliament would reflect the agreement reached with state and
territory leaders at the special Council of Australian Governments summit
on terrorism.
But yesterday Mr Stanhope said he rejected the implication that he had been
sent a version of the laws that were likely to be comprehensively amended.
"This smokescreen that Philip Ruddock and the Prime Minister are now
running, that I've in some way breached outrageously a confidence, is just
simply wrong," he said.
"And in the context of this legislation, is he seriously suggesting the
premiers were to be forbidden from seeking external advice on these
proposals before simply, dumbly signing?
"We're not the Prime Minister's lickspittles. He's not going to lead me
around by the nose and say, 'Here's a piece of secret legislation that I
want you to agree to and I'll consult on it as I see fit and I'll release
it on my timing'."
Mr Stanhope said his only regret was that it had fallen to him to make a
stand and that scrutiny of the changes was not more rigorous. "I have at no
stage regarded this as a deliberate breach of confidence or anything of the
sort."
He said it was nonsense for the Commonwealth to insist that it owned the
legislation, even though it needed the approval and authority of the states
and territories to make it law. It was also wrong for the Federal
Government to think the hands of the states and territories were tied
"because somewhere somebody used a confidential stamp thereby restricting
to the Commonwealth absolute control over the legislative process and
release of the detail".
"I find it remarkable that anybody could think for one minute that I could
put my signature on a letter to the Prime Minister endorsing this bill
without an reference to anybody outside the ACT Government," Mr Stanhope
said. He was particularly concerned about the extensive police powers to
detain.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/war-on-terror/act-chief-i-wont-be-led-by-the-nose/2005/10/16/1129401144950.html
============================
5. Police state fears over terrorism laws
============================
Sydney Morning Herald
October 16, 2005 - 4:03PM
Australia is moving towards a police state with harsh anti-terrorism laws
that could be pushed through Parliament too quickly, the Law Council says.
Copies of the sweeping new laws, made available to the public by the ACT
Government, have sparked concerns among legal experts.
The Government last week said it would introduce the laws to Parliament on
October 31, but only allow the Senate one week to investigate them and
report by November 8.
The Law Council of Australia said passing the proposed laws would push the
nation closer to becoming a police state.
"We're moving down that path," council president John North told the Ten
Network.
"The fact that the Government wanted to move these laws through Parliament
with indecent haste and without letting us as a Law Council or other
interested people have wide community consultation means that we're very
concerned about them."
Under the bill, people who support insurgents can be jailed for up to seven
years.
Australian Federal Police will also be able to carry out what are termed
preventative detention orders, effectively locking up people thought to be
involved or to have knowledge of a terrorist act.
Suspected terrorists who are detained by police will be able to ring loved
ones but not tell them where they are, while judges can stop suspects from
using the internet or telephones.
Mr North said he understood that people were frightened about terrorism,
but civil liberties had to be protected.
"We understand that the people are scared, we understand that terrorism is
the major, major issue, but we must not take away fundamental rights
without asking our Government to assure us that we are going to be safe,"
he said.
The Law Council president said he was particularly concerned about
shoot-to-kill provisions in the draft legislation, and the plan to allow
children as young as 16 to be detained without charge for up to 14 days.
Mr North said he was worried about the reaction of the Government in the
wake of the London bombings in July.
"Internationally it is really only lawyers who are trying to hold their
governments to account at this stage," he said.
"We think the people will understand as soon as they start to see these
laws misused and abused by our police and intelligence authorities."
AAP
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/police-state-fears-over-terrorism-laws/2005/10/16/1129401135040.html
=============================================
6. Bruce Haigh: the Fox and the Farmer are both Responsible
=============================================
by Bruce Haigh
Thursday, October 13, 2005
Published on Margo Kingston's Webdiary
The release of the critical report about the treatment of Vivian Alvarez
Solon by former Victorian Police Commissioner Neil Comrie has led to
considerable public disquiet. The Prime Minister, John Howard, offered a
tepid defence of his Immigration Minister, Amanda Vanstone. She has been
allowed to swing in the breeze. She has taken the hits that should have
been directed against Howard and Ruddock who established the culture in
Immigration which has now been exposed to public scrutiny. Vanstone
followed the brief. She was weak for not seeking basic changes within
Immigration.
However it was Howard who chaired the Cabinet meetings which decided that
the Labor Party policy of mandatory detention should be extended. It was
Howard who said in 2001 that Australia would decide who came here and when.
It was Howard who allowed Max Moore Wilton to turn around the Tampa. It was
Howard who put the lid on any investigation into the drowning of 357 asylum
seekers on SIEVX. It was Howard who first demonized the Australian Muslim
community and then hand picked the representatives of that community who
were allowed to put a view to government.
It has been Howard who has set the tone and direction of policy from
involvement in the Iraq war, to refugees, aboriginals, industrial relations
and Telstra.
Howard has acquired more and more power over the past ten years - let him
now accept responsibility for the outcomes which he has created.
Vanstone is dispensable, Ruddock is not. Ruddock, together with the head of
the AFP, Mick Keelty, know where the skeletons are buried. No doubt the
tactic is to allow Vanstone to be the target - in the belief that she is
sufficiently aggressive to absorb and deflect the flack. Vanstone and
Ruddock are unlovely and unloved characters. That suits Howard, it takes
media and public attention away from his ability to control the political
agenda including Immigration.
But it is not so simple. The role and responsibility of the former head of
Immigration, Bill Farmer, has been largely overlooked. Why have a head of
department if that person does not act against incompetence, cruelty and
racism? On the assumption he knew what officers in his department were
doing, the decisions they were taking and that he knew about conditions in
detention facilities he should be made to answer and should certainly not
be given further senior government appointments. The same sanctions should
apply if he did not know.
Which ever way it is viewed Farmer failed in the responsibility for which
he was charged and entrusted, namely, to properly and lawfully manage the
affairs and responsibilities of a major government department given
considerable responsibility for human lives and welfare.
If his minister and parliament would not heed his advice, he should have
resigned, sought redress or taken whatever form of action he thought
necessary in the public interest to protect the lives and mental health of
those under his administrative care. Perhaps he agreed with Tampa, children
in detention, the demonisation of asylum seekers and an out of control
compliance regime in which case he should be drummed out of public life.
As uncomfortable as it may be Farmer has to accept blame and
responsibility, for what occurred in the name of the immigration
department under his term as secretary. Tax payers and members of the
public must be able to have confidence in public servants.
There may be little faith in our feckless and flakey politicians but if the
Westminster system and our democracy is to survive our public servants must
do the right thing.
Farmer has been nominated by Howard as Australia's next Ambassador to
Indonesia, which is one of Australia's most important diplomatic posts. To
be Ambassador requires judgment and management skills of a high order.
Terrorism has created a new volatility in the relationship. A high order of
diplomatic advice and judgment to the Australian government is required at
all times.
Given the Rau and Solon cases, given Tampa and the detention regime can
there be any confidence that Farmer could perform at this level? Drug,
refugee and border protection issues, including illegal fishing, will
continue as major concerns in the relationship with Indonesia. Given the
delicate and brittle nature of the relationship with Indonesia, shouldn't
the most adroit and competent of Australia's senior diplomats be sent there?
And what of the Indonesian government? Would they want to accept the most
senior officer from a Department that has fostered racial bias and
prejudice as detailed in the Comrie report?
Farmer must be made to give a full account of the decisions he was
responsible for and provide an explanation of the reasons for the systemic
failure of the duty of care for people placed in the protection of the
Immigration Department during his time as head of that department.
Bruce Haigh is a retired diplomat who from 1972/94 worked in a number of
countries including, from time to time, Indonesia. From 1995/2000 he worked
on the RRT.
http://margokingston.typepad.com/harry_version_2/2005/10/the_fox_and_the.html
===============================
7. CANBERRA: The Siev X Memorial Event
===============================
Please come to the Siev X Memorial Event - Wed 19th Oct
Musicians, choir, powerful speakers including survivors of the tragedy will
combine in a concert/ceremony to mark the fourth anniversary of the Siev X
sinking in which 156 children died. Jon Stanhope, MLA, Chief Minister of
the ACT will open the event and exhibition. Psychologist Steve Biddulph
will announce the chosen memorial design.
Wednesday October 9th
Canberra City Uniting Church
9 Northbourne Ave
6:00 for 6:30pm
...or visit the Siev X Memorial Exhibition: Wed 19 to Sat 22nd October
...from the national high schools art collaboration, over 200 beautiful and
moving exhibits including he design chosen for permanent lakeside memorial,
now available for public comment.
10.00-4.00 each day Canberra City Uniting Church, 69 Northbourne
For more information www.ssievxmemorial.com, or email in-@sievxmemorial.com
==================================
8. Mohsen Soltani: launch of 'Australian Dream'
==================================
Iranian poet Mohsen Soltani spent four years in detention before being
given refugee status.
Australian Dream, his second CD of poems, is a breathtaking achievement: a
collection of 27 hauntingly beautiful poems read by dozens of Australians
committed to the cause of justice for refugees. Many of the contributors
will join Mohsen at the launch to read the poems and play live music
Mon Oct 31, 7-9.30pm
Leichhardt Town Hall, NSW
Entry by donation
Funds raised will go to Bridge for Asylum Seekers Foundation
Double CD $30, available on the night or online from www.stickylabel.com.au
The CD will be launched by Tom Keneally and Rosie Scott, Australian writers
and members of PEN International.
Live music by Sandy Evans (saxophone), Linsey Pollack (Lyrebird WX5),
Kirsten Whalley (flute), Sarah Stephen (violin), Mohsen (santor), Linda
Janssen (singer), Greg Johns & Blair Greenberg (drums), Chris Miller (PA).
Poetry readers include Jo Gow (ChilOut), Tom Keneally, Rosie Scott, Zach
Steel (psychologist), Suzanne Tzannes, Zal Shabazi (Iranian refugee),
Andrew Bartlett (Democrats Senator), Linda Cropper (actor), Jeffrey Kamins
(Temple Emanuel rabbi, Woollahra)
====================
9. Le Dernier Caravanserail
====================
October 14, 2005
Page 1 of 2
Interviews with asylum seekers inspired a powerful production, writes Bryce
Hallett.
Le Dernier Caravanserail (Odyssees)
Theatre du Soleil
Royal Exhibition Building Melbourne Festival
October 11, 12
Ariane Mnouchkine's fast-flowing epic begins with the startling sound and
fury of a wild river on which precarious rescue bids are made and the less
fortunate vanish from sight.
It is a potent opening, as much about the fragility of life as it is about
cruel fate and struggle. Theatre du Soleil conjures a vast, grey "ocean" of
dreams and despair, as it charts the perilous, deep-yearning journeys of
refugees and asylum seekers mainly from Afghanistan, Iraq, Iraq and
Kurdistan. They call themselves "voyagers".
The simplicity and transparent magic-making of Mnouchkine's collective
enterprise affirms the imagination. There is an almost unrelenting flow of
vignettes set and performed on modest wagons or caravans with sundry props,
including trees and birds, used to enlarge the frame before each scene
withdraws from view in a frenzy as they are engulfed by a wave.
The performers glide and drift across the stage on mobile platforms, pushed
by actors who crouch at their feet. Each apparently random, intimate, often
desolate scene is manipulated into being, then casually tossed aside for
the next. Evil lurks at every carnivalesque turn.
Ironically, the world of Le Dernier Caravanserail is always in motion yet
constrained as it depicts the dread and longing among a great many people
displaced by war, famine and persecution, then pushed further adrift by
regimes that detain or shut them out.
Australia's policy of incarcerating asylum seekers inspired the epic,
informed by interviews that Mnouchkine and members of her ensemble did at
Villawood Detention Centre when they came to Sydney to perform The Flood
Drummers in 2002. At the time the director was so upset by the Howard
Government's manipulation of the Tampa affair that she considered
boycotting the Sydney Festival.
Instead, she used her time to gather personal stories and learn directly
about the experiences and aspirations of the refugees, as she had done
earlier in the French Red Cross camp at Sangatte, and in camps in Indonesia
and New Zealand.
The result of the interviews, and about 100 hours were taped, is not
verbatim theatre as such but an interpretive, poetic, graceful and
near-operatic work that is moving and grim.
The production is divided into two parts. The first, The Cruel River,
recounts departures, fleeting romance, promise and peril; the second,
Origins and Destinies, looks at the reasons for the departures, its
thrillingly realised opening tableau titled On the Way to Australia. Here
the refugees fall prey to a cavalier bureaucracy, ineptitude, poor
conditions and deep yearning. There are no happy endings, only fleeting
promises.
Mnouchkine's deceptively simple and greatly resonant work is passionate and
caring. It doesn't have to preach because what it shows speaks volumes
about human depravity, immeasurable suffering and intolerant systems that
reinforce or breed the very things they claim to abhor.
Le Dernier Caravanserail is enriched by the expressive music of
Jean-Jacques Lemetre, while the soundscape and lighting contribute
enormously to the swirl of lives.
Almost 40 actors play a multitude of roles, some a few, many 10 or 12 in
which the stories are spoken in many languages with English surtitles. Most
moving of all are the letters of loss and yearning projected on the back
curtain from the refugees who have left their families and fled their homeland.
The second part seems darker and more dangerous than the steady, sombre
first. The music is melancholic, foreboding, majestic and urgent.
Mnouchkine's canvas may be vast but the cumulative force of its tiny
stories of miserable fortune is powerful and deeply affecting. It holds a
light to the world's brutal shadows while rarely losing sight of the
fundamental question: what will become of us?
By any measure, it is a stunning achievement - a collaboration that makes
much of today's theatre look timid and trite or diverting at best. It forms
a courageous centrepiece in director Kristy Edmunds's first Melbourne
Festival, and is among the very best productions I have seen.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/arts-reviews/le-dernier-caravanserail/2005/10/14/1128796684837.html
=======================
10. Close Nauru for good: Brown
=======================
The Herald Sun
14oct05
THE Nauru detention facility should be permanently closed and all the
remaining asylum seekers brought to Australia, Greens leader Bob Brown said
today.
The Federal Government today said 25 of the 27 people being held on the
Pacific island would be flown to Australia, with 13 to be granted refugee
status.
As a result, the Nauru Offshore Processing Centre – the centrepiece of the
Government's Pacific Solution for processing asylum seekers offshore – will
no longer hold large numbers of refugee hopefuls.
Two detainees will remain at the centre after receiving "adverse security
assessments".
Refugee advocates praised the outcome, saying it marked the end of the
Pacific Solution.
But Prime Minister John Howard said the Nauru facility had been an
"outstanding success" and would still be used to process asylum seekers if
it was needed.
Mr Brown today called on the Government to shut the Nauru facility down for
good.
Mr Howard's statement indicated there would be a continuation of the
"terrible process" in which the Australian Government "deprives people of
their human rights", he said.
"It's too early to say it's the end of the Pacific Solution," Mr Brown said.
"Thank goodness for the Australian people, whose pressure on the Government
has seen now the Nauru asylum almost depopulated of prisoners, people who
are effectively in jail," Mr Brown said in Sydney.
"But it's very important that the two remaining asylum seekers there be
brought to Australia and have access to everything Australia has to give
them and that we close those camps and never lock people up again," he said.
http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,16916794%255E1702,00.html
========================================
11. Greens MEDIA: Australia's offshore experiment fails
========================================
14 October 2005
Greens Senator Kerry Nettle
Senator for NSW
Greens Senator Kerry Nettle today welcomed the news that all but two of the
asylum seekers remaining on Nauru would be brought to Australia and called
for all offshore detention centres to be closed.
"I am very disturbed that it has taken the government four years to
acknowledge that 13 asylum seekers from Afghanistan and Iraq are genuine
refugees.
"Offshore detention centres are creating disastrous consequences for the
mental health of refugees who are now living in the Australian community.
These 13 men now face the challenge of rebuilding their lives in Australia.
The government has provided with no certainty about their future as they
seek to address their mental health needs while living on temporary visas
that will be reviewed in several years time.
"Evidence to the current Senate Inquiry into the Migration Act has shown
how locating detention centres in isolated places exacerbates the problems
associated with mandatory detention by further limiting access to health
and legal support.
The Greens are calling on the government to not only close the Nauru
detention centre but also to cease building a new detention centre on
Christmas Island.
"Leaving two asylum seekers in Nauru is a sure-fire recipe for despair and
mental illness. The government is seeking to create a new Manus Island
situation minus the cat.
"The vast majority of the asylum seekers taken to Nauru and Manus Island
were found to be refugees and have since settled in Australia or New
Zealand. The whole operation was an enormously expensive and cruel
political tactic designed to help the Liberal Party win the 2001 election.
Contact: Max Phillips 0414 338 526
=========================================
12. DEMOCRATS MEDIA: Nauru releases: abolish TPVs
=========================================
DEMOCRATS
MEDIA
fridAY 14 October 2005
SENATOR ANDREW BARTLETT
AUSTRALIAN DEMOCRATS
spokesperson for immigration
OUT OF NAURU BUT STILL IN LIMBO
The Australian Democrats have welcomed a decision by the Minister to allow
25 out of 27 detainees on Nauru to arrive in Australia.
Spokesperson for Immigration, Senator Andrew Bartlett said, "This is an
indeed a positive step with 13 being recognised as refugees. The remainder
are still being processed but they will be transferred to Australia while
this happens.
"This result has been made possible by the tireless efforts of Marion Le
and her staff, and the many refugee and community support groups who have
continually given hope to detainees through letters of support,” Senator
Bartlett said.
Senator Bartlett is the only federal politician to have visited Nauru three
times to meet and speak with detainees about their experiences.
"The fact that a majority of these people have been granted visas goes to
show that they have been refugees all along. They have been unnecessarily
detained and damaged as consequence of the Government's policy of mandatory
detention.
"The physical and emotional suffering that they have endured is palpable
with most having fled tyrannical regimes and been victims of torture, only
to find themselves in indefinite limbo on Nauru.
"While I welcome the granting of visas to these 13, the fact that they have
been only been granted TPVs will only further add to the sense of
uncertainty they have been feeling.
"The Democrats call on the Government to grant all refugees permanent
protection visas and to abolish TPVs,” concluded Senator Bartlett.
==========================================
13. Massive search for missing Immigration boat continues
==========================================
ABC ONLINE NEWS
Sunday, October 16, 2005. 12:49pm (AEST)
A huge air and sea search is continuing for five people missing in an
Immigration Department boat in far north Queensland.
Rescuers are searching an area in the Torres Strait.
The boat was travelling from Saibu Island to Badu Island on Saturday
morning when it reported engine trouble.
Tracy Jiggins from the Australian Maritime Safety Authority says 13 fixed
wing aircraft, three helicopters and three boats, including a Navy work
boat, resumed a search this morning over an area of 2,000 square kilometres.
She says the boat was travelling in thick fog and conditions are still bad.
"When the water's choppy it makes it a little bit more difficult for your
aerial searching, but we're very lucky today that the weather isn't
hampering the aircraft getting up into the air," she said.
Two Immigration Department officials were on the boat along with three
other people, including a young child.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200510/s1483342.htm
===========================
14. Search continues for missing boat
===========================
news.com.au
From: AAP
October 16, 2005
Rough seas are hampering a search for an immigration department boat,
missing in the Torres Strait with five people, including a child, aboard.
The vessel was travelling the 90 km between Saibai Island and Badu Island,
off the Torres Strait, on Friday, Queensland police said. Its last known
location was off Mabuiag Island.
The immigration department said today it was concerned for "the safety and
well being of those on board".
Authorities managed to contact the vessel via satellite phone in the early
hours of Saturday morning.
Some time later the vessel experienced engine trouble and an EPIRB was
located, but there was no sign of the vessel.
Yesterday's fruitless search covered an area of more than 6,000 square
kilometres.
Today, 13 fixed-wing aircraft, three helicopters and three boats, Customs,
Queensland police and navy vessels, were searching 2,500 square nautical
miles, west and northwest of Badu Island and also nearby Turu K island.
A spokeswoman for the Australian Maritime and Safety Authority (AMSA) said
the wind was south to south easterly, so not ideal searching conditions.
"The winds are making the sea a little choppy so that obliviously reduces
visibility and there is some patchy rain around," she said.
"However the weather is not hampering the ability of the aircraft; there is
enough visibility up in the air."
The DIMIA staffers had been attending a meeting on an island in the Torres
Strait and were returning to their homes on Badu Island, carrying three
passengers.
"The boat was on official business and was returning from a meeting on a
different island," the spokeswoman said.
The DIMIA pair was employed to monitor the movements of "traditional
visitors" from villages in Papua New Guinea who frequently travelled to
islands in Torres Strait.
It was not known whether the four adults and the child on board had
sufficient food supplies.
It is the second time in a little over a year that Badu Island has been at
the centre of national attention.
Last July, three children, aged 15, 10 and 12,swam for hours through rough
seas to Matu Island after the Badu Island family's fishing vessel capsized
in the Torres Strait.
The three children survived on coconuts and native fruit for six days until
being rescued.
Their parents and three-year-old brother did not survive.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,16935666-29277,00.html
=============================
14. No sign of missing Immigration boat
=============================
ABC NEWS ONLINE
Sunday, October 16, 2005. 6:27pm (AEST)
By Glynn Greensmith
A massive air and sea search in north Queensland's Torres Strait has failed
to find an Immigration Department boat that has been missing since Saturday
morning.
Two immigration officials and two women and a four-year-old girl from Badu
Island are on board the six-metre boat.
It reported engine trouble in the early hours of Saturday but has not been
heard from since.
Thirteen planes, three helicopters and three boats searching a large area
of water north-west of Badu Island found an emergency beacon but no sign of
the boat.
Beverley Atkins from the Australian Maritime Safety Authority says the
search will resume again at first light.
"Unfortunately the weather conditions in the area aren't really conducive
to night searching," she said.
"The seas are still quite choppy so it would be very difficult to spot anybody.
"It's very disheartening in fact, it does not necessarily mean that they're
not still out there, it's a very large area they're searching."
Badu Island Community chairman Jack Ahmat says the boat is missing in a
notorious stretch of water and the families of the missing people are
becoming increasingly concerned.
"That area, people travelling, you've got to be very careful," he said.
"It's pretty rough over there."
He says islanders will assist authorities when the search continues.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200510/s1483397.htm
================================
15. Project SafeCom at The Pandora archive
================================
National Library of Australia
Pandora: Australia's Web archive
"This title was selected for preservation by the State Library of Western
Australia and is archived regularly. The publisher's site may provide more
information."
See http://pandora.nla.gov.au/tep/34316
-||+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
-|| This is the Project SafeCom Newsletter - also published
-|| as the RAC-VIC Newsletter (Racvicnews) since July 2004 by agreement
-|| with RAC Victoria, which endorsed that their news service be
-|| managed by Project SafeCom. More information about us below.
-||+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
-||+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
-||- Project SafeCom info
-||+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Online archives of our News & Updates:
http://lists.topica.com/lists/safecom/read
Project SafeCom has operated a "virtually full-time" operations office
since TAMPA. At Project SafeCom, an Incorporated Association in Western
Australia, we exist from donations, the sale of some items via our website,
and from memberships. You can make a donation by transferring funds to our
account at Bendigo Community Bank Kulin, BSB Number 633-000. Account name:
Project SafeCom Inc., account 115643900, or by sending a cheque or money
order to our address below.
P.O. Box 364 - Narrogin WA 6312 - Phone 0417 090 130
+-+-+-+
LINKS:
+-+-+-+
ROYAL COMMISSION Petition: download it, print it, put it out - everywhere
around town: http://www.safecom.org.au/royal-commission.htm
The bLog - FIXING AUSTRALIA: http://www.safecom.org.au/fixing-australia.htm
What's New - this page lists all the new additions to the website -
hundreds of pages: http://www.safecom.org.au/whatsnew.htm
Project SafeCom events page: http://www.safecom.org.au/events.htm
The Reading Room: http://www.safecom.org.au/readings.htm
The Project SafeCom shop: http://www.safecom.org.au/products.htm
Our Baxter page: http://www.safecom.org.au/baxter.htm
Project SafeCom's No War position: http://www.safecom.org.au/no-war.htm
.
|
|
 |
|
