|
Project SafeCom News and Updates 13 March 2006
|
Project SafeCom
|
Mar 12, 2006 18:29 PST
|
Project SafeCom News and Updates 13 March 2006
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
¤ - In this Edition - ¤
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
1. Our Common Cause: Don’t forget the asylum seekers
2. Denmark and Refugees: Extreme designs
3. Warning as coal front approaches
4. Terror laws unused and 'unjustified'
5. International Muslim group denounces Western 'double standards'
6. Labor hits 'gross incompetent' handling of Jovicic case
7. Our bloody Department of Torture
8. Report slams indigenous health standards
-||+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
-|| This is the Project SafeCom Newsletter - published since 2001
-|| as the 'Project SafeCom Daily News and Updates'.
-||
-|| To subscribe to this Newsletter or to manage your subscription, visit
-|| http://www.safecom.org.au/newsletter-subscribe.htm
-||+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
=========================================
1. Our Common Cause: Don’t forget the asylum seekers
=========================================
Green Left Weekly
March 15 2006
Tony Dewberry
“You can judge politicians by how they treat refugees; they do to them what
they would like to do to everyone else if they could get away with it.” —
Ken Livingstone, lord mayor of London
It seems the Howard government wants to prove Livingstone’s claim true,
going by its so-called anti-terror laws that give the state vast new powers
over the life and liberty of everyone in this country. We know from its
treatment of refugees that this government is not restrained by any
considerations of inviolable human rights, and it cannot be trusted with
these new powers. In fact, a key element in defending our own civil
liberties must be to strip the government of those powers it has misused
against asylum seekers.
Pauline Wright, vice-president of the NSW Council for Civil Liberties, says
the new laws’ provisions on control orders and preventative detention
orders “are completely inconsistent with the rule of law as it should exist
in a democracy like Australia”. She refers here to the power to detain
people secretly, indefinitely and without laying criminal charges.
The government will be able to detain and disappear witnesses, and other
people who have not committed any crime. There will be a penalty of up to
five years’ jail for telling anyone about the detention. Wright points out
the government is overturning important norms of the justice system such as
presumption of innocence, the need to establish guilt beyond reasonable
doubt, the right to a fair trial and rules of evidence fair to all parties.
Resistance to these attacks on our rights is emerging, but the struggle
does not start with a clean slate. Human rights abuses are being committed
here and now against asylum seekers. What they do to the refugees they
could do to any one of us. After all, the first attorney-general to oversee
the new laws will be Philip Ruddock.
Imprisonment without trial is not something to fear in the future — we have
it already with mandatory detention, to which the government remains
committed. The fate of the recently arrived asylum seekers from West Papua
shows this.
The government is building new detention centres. This is especially
frightening now that Howard and Peter Costello have initiated public debate
on stripping people of their citizenship on national security grounds. In
this they were abetted by Labor leader Kim Beazley, who said anyone who
supported a revolutionary cause, be it communist, Nazi or Islamic, should
not be allowed into this country.
Secrecy around detentions will ensure the anonymity of the disappeared and
detained, undermining public sympathy for them. Who are more anonymous in
Australia today than asylum seekers? Under Liberal MP Petro Georgiou’s
“reforms”, hundreds of men, women and children were released to grinding
poverty, unable to access adequate social welfare benefits.
Living under “removal pending visas”, in fear of deportation, they are
unable to protest any aspect of their mistreatment because of the terrible
power the government holds over them. Even children born here have no legal
hold on their country of birth. This is social apartheid, acceptable
because the government has kept it invisible. Now Howard and Ruddock want
the same kind of secrecy for those detained under the “counter-terrorism”
laws.
What the government gets away with in its mistreatment of asylum seekers is
a threat to us all. In the fight for our civil liberties and human rights
we must not forget the asylum seekers. Everyone concerned about human
rights should support the protests at Villawood detention centre this
Easter (see <http://www.racnsw.net>).
The protests will run from April 14-17. There will be rallies outside the
detention centre, a multicultural concert and a conference. Get yourself to
Villawood at Easter and demand freedom for the refugees. Stand up for your
rights!
[Tony Dewberry is a member of the Socialist Alliance-Green Left Weekly
editorial board and the Refugee Action Collective in Melbourne.]
http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2006/660/660p9b.htm
================================
2. Denmark and Refugees: Extreme designs
================================
Olivier Truc
Guardian Weekly
March 10-16 2006
In mid-September 2005, two weeks before the daily Jyllands-Posten published
its Muhammad cartoons, the far-right Danish People's party (DF) celebrated
its tenth anniversary. With a photo of its founder, Pia Kjaersgaard, on the
front page of a Danish weekly under the title: "I'm the one who decides",
it had good reason to be jubilant.
"The majority in parliament is 90 . . . that's the magic figure," says
Seren Espersen, a DF MP elected in February 2005, when his party polled
13.2% of the vote. After their victory over the Social Democrats in 2001,
the Liberal and Conservative parties formed a minority coalition. But they
needed the support of far-right MPs to govern. In exchange for its backing
the DF demanded that about 100 government agencies, neighbourhood groups
and NGOs working mainly for and with immigrants should be disbanded or
deprived of public funding. The ruling coalition agreed. "They stopped all
our grants," says Niels-Erik Hansen, a lawyer and head of the Documentation
and Advisory Centre on Racial Discrimination, one of the most outspoken
critics of Denmark's immigration policy. "It's true," Espersen
acknowledges, "when it comes to 'core' issues such as immigration or the
welfare state, we are the ones deciding the nation's political agenda."
The figures, since parliament passed the new act on immigration in 2002,
speak for themselves. The number of residence permits issued to refugees or
their relations, as part of family reunification, has been cut by a factor
of four since 2001 (4,676 in 2005).
"We think there are far fewer asylum seekers because they know that with
the law on family reunification it is difficult for them to bring their
family to Denmark," says Jens Berg, of the Danish Immigration Service.
"Let's say Danish legislation makes the situation pretty clear."
Bashy Quraishy, the head of the European Network Against Racism, funded by
the European commission, puts it more bluntly: "In no other EU country is
there so much xenophobia and hostility towards Islam." The UN High
Commission for Refugees and the Council of Europe have been expressing
alarm at the stricter controls for years.
The law on family reunification is Kafkaesque. It requires "both parties to
a marriage to be over 24 years of age and have greater affiliation to
Denmark than to any other country". This clause forced many couples to move
to Malmö, in Sweden, just across the water from Copenhagen. So many Danes
with foreign partners protested against the law that the government had to
amend it. It now stipulates that anyone with Danish citizenship or legally
resident for at least 28 years does not need to prove their "affiliation".
Some 60 couples are moving to Malmö every month. Katia Vesterkov, a Dane
aged 27, moved to Sweden five months ago. Her husband is Egyptian and only
19. But that was not all. Recipients of public welfare payments during the
previous 12 months do not qualify for family reunification. "As it happens,
I was on welfare for one month," she explains.
And there are other hurdles to be overcome. Couples must deposit €7,400 as
a guarantee against possible social expenses incurred by the foreign
spouse. They must also occupy a "decent-sized" dwelling, with at least 20
square metres per person. Moving to Sweden offers a way round these
obstacles. As an EU citizen Vesterkov was able to find work there and after
two years in Malmö she could apply for Swedish nationality, then go home to
Denmark with her husband. Easy enough to do, at first sight, but exhausting
and above all humiliating. Her husband is still upset. "It hurts me," she
says. "I've never been in conflict with my country. I've tried to explain
to him that it's not the people, just the government and their stupid laws.
But he is still sad at such lack of respect in his wife's home country."
In December the DF also managed to tighten up the rules on obtaining
citizenship. The Danish exam, first required in 2002, is now more
difficult. "This boils down to excluding a large number of poorly educated
foreigners," says Birthe Samuelsen, a Danish teacher.
One of the most controversial decisions affecting applications for
citizenship concerns post-traumatic stress disorder. The mental state of
many refugees is such that they simply cannot learn, and in the past they
were not required to sit language tests.
Abdul, a former Iraqi army officer tortured in prison in the 1990s, is a
typical case. He reached Denmark in February 1998 and was granted asylum
five months later. He suffers from severe attacks of migraine with loss of
memory, and has difficulty concentrating and sleeping.
"For people like him, it isn't just difficult, it's impossible," says Tue
Magnussen, of the Rehabilitation and Research Centre for Torture Victims.
But the DF was determined to end the dispensation. "If people are suffering
from PTSD they need treatment, not Danish citizenship," says Seren Krarup,
a party leader.
Aggressive talk of this ilk, particularly targeting Muslims, is standard DF
practice. Jesper Langballe, the party's spokesperson on immigration [and a
Lutheran pastor] called Islam "a plague on Europe". In 2001 one of his
fellows, Mogens Camre, was quoted as saying: "All countries in the West are
infiltrated by Muslims. They are nice to us while they wait until they are
enough to kill us."
More recently one of the party's rising stars, Morten Messerschmidt, said
that only by keeping the number of Muslims as low as possible, while
containing a patently backward culture, would it be possible to keep
Denmark a free, democratic and prosperous country. For many Muslims, after
years of listening to similar statements, the cartoons affair was the last
straw.
"Only 47% of immigrants have a job. It's too low. Many do not try hard
enough to find work, particularly the women. It is, in part, due to their
traditions and family structure. If they are getting family allowance but
not looking for work, we have a problem," says Rikke Hvilshoj, the Liberal
integration minister.
There is little likelihood of the government changing tack. Denmark, with
its budget surplus, ranks as the EU's star performer, and delegations are
flocking to Copenhagen to find out about the "flexicurity" model for labour
management. "Just look at the family reunification white papers on the
agenda in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and even France," says Mrs
Hvilshoj.
Mrs Kjaersgaard would no doubt be delighted if Denmark became the model for
immigration policies all over Europe.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guardianweekly/story/0,,1726294,00.html
==========================
3. Warning as coal front approaches
==========================
The Age
By James Button, London
March 11, 2006
IT WAS a frenetic week for Tim Flannery. He spoke at three public meetings
in London, met top climate change advisers to the British Government, and
launched a British edition of his book on global warming, The Weather Makers.
On Monday night nearly 2000 people packed into St Paul's Cathedral to hear
the Australian scientist talk about climate change with the natural history
broadcaster Sir David Attenborough. Meanwhile, The Times called his book an
"epic" work that was both an epitaph for the Earth and a cause for hope.
On top of a visit to Germany, Denmark and the Netherlands, Flannery's stay
in Britain fired him with optimism that governments and citizens were
serious about global warming.
Then, on Thursday, his wife, Alex, picked up a copy of The Sydney Morning
Herald. Flannery read that Opposition Leader Kim Beazley had followed Prime
Minister John Howard in announcing that energy from coal was Australia's
future.
"It's like they're in a totally different space," he said. "When you travel
the world, you realise that position cannot be sustained. In the
Netherlands people are terrified. I would not like to live there."
This is the message he wants to bring home: Australia is disconnected from
much of the world on climate change. He has seen how Denmark is using tax
incentives to induce people to drive cleaner cars.
He thinks Britain has been "fantastic" on getting industry to reduce
emissions, but could do more to reduce emissions in transport and households.
Australia, on the other hand, has "done an immoral thing" by selling coal
to the world but taking no responsibility for reducing the worst effects of
coal-burning by signing the Kyoto Protocol.
Climate change is bigger news in Britain than in Australia.
Reports of dramatic melting in the polar ice caps often appear on the front
pages.
But in Britain, as in Australia, environmentalists struggle to engage the
public. Flannery seems to do better than most. This week the American
magazine The New Republic described The Weather Makers as "riveting".
At St Paul's he spoke of a world out of joint. How within 30 years we may
have to spend billions on shoring up sea barriers against extreme weather
events.
How, "one summer, towards the end of this century", there would be no more
polar ice or polar bears.
"Our planet blazes into the night sky with frightening brilliance," he
said. From his plane seat he had looked down at the vast cities of Asia and
Europe with all their lights on, hungry to consume power.
But Flannery is a pragmatist, too.
Asked about nuclear power, he replied: "I'm afraid that I am now of the
view that it is inevitable - indeed desirable - that China and India gain
access to nuclear power for energy generation."
Both countries have nuclear programs but are planning huge expansions.
Given how fast their economies and greenhouse gas emissions were growing,
he saw no choice.
A murmur of displeasure rippled through parts of the crowd. The British
Government is considering expanding its nuclear program, highly contentious
in Britain, and Sir David reflected that in his response.
Wind and solar power - not coal and nuclear - were the answer, he declared.
People applauded, but Flannery did not back down.
"I am not suggesting that nuclear power is at all problem-free," he
replied. But an environmental disaster already loomed as China shifted back
to coal in response to the soaring price of natural gas. Coal-burning was
so devastating that hard decisions had to be made.
Now it was Flannery's turn to win applause.
Yet he believes strongly that Australia should not go nuclear. He does not
think it needs to. With its reserves of gas, geo-thermal power, sun and
wind, it could reduce its reliance on coal, avoid nuclear and solve its
emissions problems relatively fast.
But, he said: "We are going to have to sell our uranium, that's for sure."
He says people were so negative about uranium, yet a single coal-fired
power station in NSW emitted more radiation than the whole underground
French nuclear testing program in the Pacific.
Next week, Flannery goes to the US to promote his book, which has sold
36,000 copies in Australia and is scheduled to be translated into 20 languages.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/warning-as-coal-front-approaches/2006/03/10/1141701696109.html
===========================
4. Terror laws unused and 'unjustified'
===========================
The Age
By Phillip Hudson, Canberra
March 12, 2006
CONTROVERSIAL anti-terror powers rushed through Federal Parliament last
year have not been used, even though the Government said they were needed
to protect the Commonwealth Games.
Under the new law, police and ASIO can force people to wear tracking
devices, clamp a curfew on their movements, stop them using the telephone
or internet, prevent them from working, or even lock suspects up for 48
hours to prevent a terrorist attack.
With the Games just three days away, the Government confirmed to The Sunday
Age that neither the control orders nor preventive detention powers had
been used.
George Williams, a leading constitutional lawyer at the University of NSW,
said it appeared that the "rapid and over-quick process" to pass the
anti-terror laws before Christmas had not been justified.
"It does raise questions about whether these laws were really necessary or
whether they were passed as a reaction to the London bombings," he said.
"While we have to be careful, and we don't have access to the intelligence
information they do, I think it's fair to criticise the process and to
criticise the lack of sufficient justification."
The president of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils, Ameer Ali,
said it showed that the new laws were not needed. "It created unnecessary
panic and alarm in the community," he said. "Now the fact they haven't
charged anybody under these laws again proves our point that we don't have
that threat in Australia.
"The Government panicked after the Prime Minister visited England and saw
what was going on there."
Prime Minister John Howard won support from the states after "home-grown"
terrorists set off bombs on the London Underground and a bus last July.
Justifying the move, he said that while the new laws were "distasteful", he
needed them passed before Christmas to protect the Commonwealth Games.
Attorney-General Philip Ruddock said during the debate last October that he
expected authorities to take "the first available opportunity" to use the
new powers, and that it was "quite possible" that would happen before
Christmas.
Mr Ruddock said yesterday they were still an "absolutely essential" tool
for police and authorities.
Parliament approved the bill on December 7, with Labor supporting the
Coalition.
Governor-General Michael Jeffrey gave the royal assent on December 14.
Professor Williams said it seemed the Government wanted to be seen to be
responding to the London attack. "The attack provided the opportunity for
expanding powers," he said. "Prior to the London bombings neither the
Government nor its key agencies were asking for these powers.
"It is very dangerous to make such large changes to the law that erode
rights unless there is a compelling and immediate justification."
Professor Williams said control orders were not widely used in Britain and
were not seen as particularly successful.
"If we'd taken more time we might have discovered they are not a useful
thing," he said.
Dr Ali, who is also chair of Mr Howard's Muslim reference group, said the
new laws created an expectation that people would be charged. "A sense of
panic was raised in the community that there was some immediate danger and
people are there, lurking on the streets, trying to bomb this country," he
said. "There was a perception in the Muslim community this was something
that was targeting them … The community says, why was there this
unnecessary alarm and panic?"
Shadow attorney-general Nicola Roxon said the Government had used the laws
to create fear among voters.
"I think the language Mr Ruddock was using was intentionally provocative,
and we now know misleading," she said. "The Government has got to start
being honest with people about why it wants new laws. They can't keep going
back to the well to say new powers are needed when down the track it
doesn't look like it was credible."
Mr Ruddock returns to Australia today after a week in Europe which included
security talks in London. A spokeswoman said Mr Ruddock regarded the
terrorism legislation as "absolutely essential".
"It was always the case that it would be the competent authorities and
police who would determine their own priorities about when and if the laws
were needed," she said.
The Government denies rushing the legislation, saying it was the most
widely debated security-related legislation before Parliament, was approved
by state and territory leaders and scrutinised and changed by backbenchers.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/terror-laws-unused-and-unjustified/2006/03/11/1141701735263.html
==================================================
5. International Muslim group denounces Western 'double standards'
==================================================
ABC ONLINE NEWS
Saturday, March 11, 2006. 1:00pm (AEDT)
The head of a grouping of 57 Muslim countries has condemned Western
governments for having "double standards" on a wide range of issues that he
says are exploited by Islamist radicals.
Organisation of the Islamic Conference's (OIC) secretary General Ekmeleddin
Ihsanoglu says global tensions could be eased if Western nations applied
their professed values universally.
Their defence of freedom of expression and human rights were undermined by
the US prison camp at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, the US-led occupation of Iraq
and Israel's occupation of Palestine, he said during a visit to London.
He urged moderate Muslim leaders to speak out against radicals who praise
the bombers, adding, "nothing can justify this (attack) in the name of any
religion, any ideology, any belief".
Mr Ihsanoglu says extremists do not represent the true nature of the Muslim
faith.
"Why are some people supporting them? Because they tell them: 'There are
double standards - look what is taking place in Palestine, look what is
taking place in Iraq'," he said.
"They ask the people: 'Do you like this?' and they say 'No, we don't like
it', and then they get the support, financial, spiritual and moral.
"What is going on in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib and Basra, this is obviously
seen as double standards.
"This is a Western and European problem which should be addressed properly."
The wave of protests over the publication of caricatures of the Prophet
Mohammed in European newspapers were not merely an angry reaction to what
many Muslims regarded as insulting blasphemy, he says.
"The cartoons were the reason for it - the drop which made the whole thing
come out, but behind this there are so many other factors," he said.
"If we are talking about human rights as universal, how can one say there
are islands on which human rights are not applied? We have a problem here,"
he said.
Mr Ihsanoglu says the OIC is not satisfied with the European Union's
response to the cartoon row and that he believed Brussels could take
further action.
Mr Ihsanoglu, who was meeting with British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw,
Prince Charles and British Muslims, says he believes conditions for Muslims
in Britain are better than those in other European countries.
He described as "inexplicable" the July 7 bomb attacks in London in which
four presumed Islamic militants set off bombs on London Underground trains
and a bus, killing themselves and 52 commuters.
- AFP
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200603/s1589357.htm
=========================================
6. Labor hits 'gross incompetent' handling of Jovicic case
=========================================
ABC ONLINE NEWS
Saturday, March 11, 2006. 10:44am (AEDT)
Opposition immigration spokesman Tony Burke has accused the Federal
Government of gross incompetence in its handing of Robert Jovicic's
deportation.
Mr Jovicic returned to Australia from Serbia on Thursday after being
deported in 2004.
His lawyer, Michaela Byers, had expected his status as a permanent resident
of Australia to be reinstated shortly after he arrived in Sydney, but
instead Mr Jovicic has been given a four-week special purpose visa.
During that time, the Federal Government will give further consideration to
Mr Jovicic's status.
It has encouraged him to seek citizenship of Serbia, as an act of good faith.
Mr Burke says that is ridiculous.
He says he believes Mr Jovicic is undeniably Australian and Mr Burke has
sharply criticised the Government's handling of the case.
"It's just gross incompetence. There's no justification, even when you
forget the human misery that is being involved in this, even simply on the
cost issue," he said.
"There is no justification for handling this the way the Government has and
if they're seriously intending to get him to apply for Serbian citizenship
so they can send him back again, why on earth we have in this madness of
people flying back and forth in the first place."
Mr Jovicic was deported to Serbia in June 2004 on character grounds, after
a series of drug-related burglaries.
He had lived in Australia for 36 years and thought that when he returned,
his status as a permanent resident would be reinstated.
"I'm angry, I'm in a state of shock and back in limbo," Mr Jovicic said.
Mr Jovicic says the Australian Government has been paying for his
accommodation and medical treatment in Serbia since November last year.
But now he is not entitled to Medicare or Centrelink benefits under the
Special Purpose Visa.
"They've taken everything off the table, I've got no aid whatsoever, to any
medical care, they've applied all these reporting conditions on me,
treating me once again like a criminal," he said.
In a statement released yesterday, Acting Minister for Immigration Julie
Bishop said the Government has funded and facilitated Mr Jovicic's return
to Australia on compassionate grounds.
His lawyer says she is bewildered by the Government's latest decision.
"Yes, they've bought him home on compassionate grounds but has exercised no
compassion as far as I can see and the Minister may make a further
consideration in the next four weeks," Ms Byers said.
Mr Burke says the Government should act quickly in the case of Mr Jovicic.
"Even though he has not been a good member of our community, he is
undeniably Australia's responsibility," he said.
"They should allow him to apply for Australian citizenship and try to make
sure that this time that it goes more positively than his time in Australia
has gone previously."
Neither Immigration Minister, Senator Amanda Vanstone, nor the Acting
Immigration Minister, Julie Bishop, were available to comment on the case.
In a statement, Ms Bishop says the community will expect that Mr Jovicic
takes this opportunity to show he is willing to change the ways that caused
his deportation almost two years ago.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200603/s1589306.htm
==========================
7. Our bloody Department of Torture
==========================
Letter to the Editor
The Age
March 13, 2006
TWO young men from Iraq are deemed to be refugees but dangerous to
Australia, so they are stuck on Nauru at the cost of $6 million a year
each. Robert Jovicic, who has lived in Australia for all but two of his 39
years, is sent to Belgrade, dumped at the airport, left to rot on the
streets and finally brought back to Australia only to be told to become a
Serbian and "go home" (The Age, 11/3).
Torture is defined as "causing severe pain or mental anguish" - and I think
we need to call the Department of Immigration the "Department of Torture".
Over the past five years we have seen: Tampa; children not thrown
overboard; SIEV-X; the Pacific Solution; inside Woomera, Curtin and Port
Hedland; and the horrors inflicted on Shayan Badraie and the small
Bakhtiyari children. Then we have had the monstrosity of Cornelia Rau,
followed by Vivian Alvarez Solon; then word of 247 others unlawfully
detained; nearly 300 Australians deported like Jovicic; Ms Hu; 13 deaths in
custody; 360 drownings; Nak and Ali Tastan; students illegally having their
visas cancelled; little children having their throats cut in Kenya because
DIMIA is too slow; Richard Niyonsaba dying virtually on arrival; and
refugees left without food, housing or support. And most of all, thousands
and thousands of ordinary Australians being driven to the point of insanity
by the Immigration Department.
Stop, enough already. Australia has never, ever been so bloody cruel, but
now that we have proved we can be the harshest bastards on earth, we can
call it a day.
Marilyn Shepherd, Kensington, SA
--------------------------
Practising and preaching
Letter to the Editor
The Age
March 13, 2006
What sort of government have we that could leave two young Iraqis to wither
away on Nauru for nearly five years? There is a terrible irony in the fact
that they fled from a country where we are still involved in trying to
overcome the disastrous consequences of invading. And the latest action -
to have them adapt to "independent living" - is a nonsensical solution, if
that is what it is meant to be. Who will be there to undertake autopsies
after the suicides?
Governor-General Michael Jeffery, in his Australia Day address to the
nation, urged us to be more "caring". Let this start by example from the
top downwards. This sort of talk without action is just sanctimonious.
Lois Green, Dingley
--------------------------
Vindictive and cruel
Letter to the Editor
The Age
March 13, 2006
This is the first time I have been galvanised into writing to a newspaper -
but I cannot not put pen to paper about the plight of Robert Jovicic.
Forgive me if I have understood incorrectly, but I was sure that he was
being allowed back to Australia permanently. To bring him back and then
play this game with him is nothing short of vindictive and cruel. He should
be given permanent status.
Yes, I know he was not the most upstanding of citizens, but he deserves to
stay and pay for his wrongs here in Australia and then be given the chance
of becoming a reformed and useful individual. I would urge the Immigration
Department to quickly stop playing games with this man and give him what he
and, I would think, lots of others thought was going to be permanent
residency status.
Ellen Marsh, Lara
--------------------------
He's our problem
Letter to the Editor
The Age
March 13, 2006
The Howard Government must accept the facts in the case of Robert Jovicic.
He arrived in Australia as a two-year-old, and all that has happened in his
life is a result of his growing up in an environment provided by various
Australian governments and their education systems. This makes him, in any
meaningful sense, a true "Australian citizen".
Robert Ness, Middle Park
http://www.theage.com.au/letters
=================================
8. Report slams indigenous health standards
=================================
Nine News
Sunday Mar 12 05:53 AEDT
Living standards for Australia's indigenous people are falling behind those
in Canada and New Zealand, a new study shows.
A report by Oxfam Australia says that while New Zealand and Canada have
made great strides in improving the life expectancy and infant survival
rates of their indigenous people, Australia is falling behind.
"While most Australians are living longer than ever before, one in every
three indigenous Australian males can expect to die before they reach the
age of 55," Oxfam Australia's Andrew Hewett said.
Mr Hewett said infant mortality rates for Aborigines and Torres Strait
Islanders were close to double that of New Zealand Maoris and Canadian
First Nations people.
The Australian Medical Association has said Australia is underfunding
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander primary health care by at least $400
million a year.
Mr Hewett said the solution lay in a major injection of funds into health
services and a strategy to link health with broader issues of human rights
and social justice for indigenous people.
"The visible improvements in indigenous health in New Zealand and Canada
show us that success is possible if we invest properly in comprehensive
primary health care for indigenous people," Mr Hewett said.
The study shows Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders can expect to live
17 to 18 fewer years than other Australians.
Life expectancy for an indigenous man is 59 years and 65 years for women,
compared to 77 years for non-indigenous men and 82 for women.
The figures for Maori men and women are 69 and 73 years respectively, with
Canadian indigenous men and women living for 69 and 77 years on average.
Death rates from diseases such as diabetes, heart and lung diseases and
cancer are well above the non-indigenous population in Australia and three
times that of Maoris and Canadian indigenous people.
The mortality rate for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander infants is
11.4 per 1,000 births - compared with 6.8 amongst New Zealand Maoris, 6.4
amongst Canadian First Nations people and 8.6 amongst Native Americans.
While the report paints a largely bleak picture of indigenous health, it
does include some success stories.
In the Tiwi Islands, north of Darwin in the Arafura Sea, a renal disease
project reduced rates of illness and saved up to an estimated $3.1 million
on dialysis over three years.
The key to successful projects is local community control and involvement
in decision making, the report says.
©AAP 2005
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=60407
-||+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
-|| This is the Project SafeCom Newsletter - published since 2001
-|| as the 'Project SafeCom Daily News and Updates'.
-||
-|| To subscribe to this Newsletter or to manage your subscription, visit
-|| http://www.safecom.org.au/newsletter-subscribe.htm
-||+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
-||+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
-||- Project SafeCom info
-||+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Old (and hopefully current) online archives of our News & Updates:
http://lists.topica.com/lists/safecom/read
Current (and new) archives of our News and Updates:
http://lists.perthimc.asn.au/pipermail/safecom-announce/
To subscribe to this Newsletter or to manage your subscription, visit
http://www.safecom.org.au/newsletter-subscribe.htm
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:
+-+-+-+
HOME OF TERROR? - the hub page for our NEW Australian Anti-terrorism
legislation and our "seditious" section:
http://www.safecom.org.au/terror-home.htm
ROYAL COMMISSION Petition: download it, print it, put it out - everywhere
around town: http://www.safecom.org.au/royal-commission.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
|
|
 |
|
