Refugee Resettlement In Australia Today
Refugee resettlement is a very important and debated issue in Australia today. A refugee is a person who has fled their country of origin and is unable or unwilling to return because of a well-founded fear of being persecuted because of their race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion. (Amnesty 2012). This is an issue that is extremely relevant, especially with large outflows of refugees from countries such as Syria, Afghanistan and Somalia (UNHCR 2015, p.4), with people who are left with nowhere to go. Australia is built on immigrants and refugees, and it is what has built our nation today. However, refugees are shone in a very bad light, especially through the media, and are often seen as a burden
…show more content…
and danger to a new society. This essay argues that the benefits of refugees exceed the cost. It will discuss the unjust laws put into place to deal with refugee asylum seekers, and how the positive economic and social effects of refugees counteract with these laws. According to the Refugee Council of Australia (2015), there are “65.3 million displaced persons worldwide,” and Australia takes 11,766 of those. Australia’s intake is only a small percentage compared to other countries such as Turkey who hosted up to 2.5 million refugees in 2015. Australia has a heinous past of racist, discriminatory laws, such as the white Australian policy, where immigrants had to assimilate to the dominant White Australian culture. It is no surprise then, that these ideals are still clung on to by policy makers and individuals today (Casimioro S, Hancock P, & Northcote J 2007, p. 57). Exceedingly post 9/11, fear was thrown around by politicians and the media, to create the idea that refugees are invaders who are responsible for terrorism and a threat to the national security (Casimioro S, Hancock P, & Northcote J 2007, p. 58). Australians tend to sympathise with those who are treated poorly in other countries, but how they are treated under the Australian government tends to be a different story. In response to Australians sovereignty not being exploited, asylum seekers who arrive by boat are sent to offshore islands, that are not under official Australian territory (Makinda, SM 2014, p. 31). Under Australian law, they are detained in offshore detention centres. They are referred to as ‘queue jumpers’ who remain there for long periods of time in poor conditions, who can’t receive any advantage over those waiting in camps (McKay 2013, p. 26). These policies have been condemned by many human rights groups and the UN (Millar 2015). According to the Refugee Action Coalition Sydney (2016), “Detaining a single asylum seeker on Manus or Nauru costs $400,000 per year. Detention in Australia costs $239,000 per year. By contrast, allowing asylum seekers to live in the community while their claims are processed costs just $12,000 per year...” Not only is it more expensive to keep them offshore, it also has proven to be more inhumane. Recent cases have been leaked about the horrific conditions refugees are encountering in Nauru. Over 2000 files reports were leaked to the Guardian, that children had been abused physically, sexually and mentally, with many committing to self-harm and attempted suicides (Farrell, Evershed, & Davidson, 2016). These laws and conditions are proving to not only violate refugee’s human rights, but place Australia under a bad light across the world.
Perceptions of refugees are often shown as taking peoples jobs, and causing a financial problem.
It is true they cost short term economically, however the long term benefits show to outweigh the short term, as they begin working and placing money into the Australian economy. For example, German economists Fratzscher and Junker predict that Germany’s economy will improve greatly in 4-5 years after the resettlement of refugees (Sola 2016, p. 1). They also help resettle regional areas. According to Dunlop (2015), Karen refugees from Burma, who settled in the western town of Nihl in Victoria, have bought success both economically, and socially, to a town that was suffering. He argues that, “Part of the problem is we have surprisingly little data about the economic effects of humanitarian immigration to really be able to make informed decisions”. By placing refugees in regional areas they are increasing the working population and investing money into businesses in that area, also with their generations to follow. Socially, refugees have also made positive contributions through donations to their original homeland, and with volunteering within their own, and the wider community (Fozadar & Hartley 2013, p. 29). They show a willingness to get straight into the workforce in order to provide for their families, rather than relying on the welfare of the government. However, it can be very difficult to obtain and find work due to lack of Australian workforce experience and often …show more content…
institutionalized racism (Fozadar & Hartley p. 30). Therefore, how can people say they are taking our jobs when the refugee employment outcome is low? It is often refugees who take the work that people do not prefer. For example, many go into “low-paid, low-skilled, low-status, niche labour markets such as security, meat processing, child/aged care, and taxi-driving” (Fozadar & Hartley p.32). But numerous refugees who have had qualifications or jobs in a field, are often not recognized in Australia. For example, an Iraqi woman who was a fully qualified engineer in Iraq was told by an employer in Australia "I can’t believe you have such qualification.” But she cannot afford further study at university. (Casimioro S, Hancock P, & Northcote J 2007, p. 58, p. 63). These kind of situations show how discrimination can leave many feel hopeless, whereas they could be beneficially contributing to the Australian society and economy. It has also been found that entrepreneurs are more likely to stem from refugees with their willingness to take bold risks and the low opportunities they have in the general workforce (Fozadar & Hartley 2013, p. 33). In these kind of cases, it seems that people tend “…to focus on the needs of refugees rather than their contributions” (Fozadar & Hartley 2013, p. 29).
Refugees are treated in a cruel manner that Australia should be remorseful of. Being locked up and put under psychological torture in the detention centres is what they came to avoid, not put back into (Costello 2016, p. 14). The Australian Green Party (2013) proposes that the most humane and economically beneficial way to deal with refugees is by closing down the off shore detention centres, and have them processed in detention within Australia for background checks, and identification, then have them integrated into Australian society imminently with full workers’ rights. This would save Australian tax payers $3.2 billion, and have refugees positively contributing to society, and the economy. Successful integration can also contribute to a more welcoming multicultural society, where different religions, cultures and people are embraced. This can also reduce xenophobia, racism and discrimination as difference becomes the new norm. (Fozdar & Harley 2013, p. 24). An example of a well-known Vietnamese refugee in Australia is Hieu Van Le. He arrived by boat during the Howard area later became governor of South Australia and was awarded for increasing multiculturalism in Australia (Stats 2015, p. 70). However unlike Hieu, refugees now do not have the opportunity to be welcomed so easily into Australia.
The benefits of refugees have shown to outweigh the costs.
Having refugees not only locked up in detention centres, but also stuck in refugee camps elsewhere is harrowing. As not only Australians, but humans, we have responsibility to protect their human rights, which is supported through Article 13 and 14 in the UN declaration of human rights, which Australia has signed onto (UN General Assembly, 1948). Through spending millions by placing them into offshore detention centres has shown to be way more costly than bringing them to Australia and positively contributing to the economy and our society. Everyone deserves a chance at life. It’s time we put away our selfish ideals and welcome refugees to Australia as we are welcoming the future of Australian people who have formed this nation
today.
and danger to a new society. This essay argues that the benefits of refugees exceed the cost. It will discuss the unjust laws put into place to deal with refugee asylum seekers, and how the positive economic and social effects of refugees counteract with these laws. According to the Refugee Council of Australia (2015), there are “65.3 million displaced persons worldwide,” and Australia takes 11,766 of those. Australia’s intake is only a small percentage compared to other countries such as Turkey who hosted up to 2.5 million refugees in 2015. Australia has a heinous past of racist, discriminatory laws, such as the white Australian policy, where immigrants had to assimilate to the dominant White Australian culture. It is no surprise then, that these ideals are still clung on to by policy makers and individuals today (Casimioro S, Hancock P, & Northcote J 2007, p. 57). Exceedingly post 9/11, fear was thrown around by politicians and the media, to create the idea that refugees are invaders who are responsible for terrorism and a threat to the national security (Casimioro S, Hancock P, & Northcote J 2007, p. 58). Australians tend to sympathise with those who are treated poorly in other countries, but how they are treated under the Australian government tends to be a different story. In response to Australians sovereignty not being exploited, asylum seekers who arrive by boat are sent to offshore islands, that are not under official Australian territory (Makinda, SM 2014, p. 31). Under Australian law, they are detained in offshore detention centres. They are referred to as ‘queue jumpers’ who remain there for long periods of time in poor conditions, who can’t receive any advantage over those waiting in camps (McKay 2013, p. 26). These policies have been condemned by many human rights groups and the UN (Millar 2015). According to the Refugee Action Coalition Sydney (2016), “Detaining a single asylum seeker on Manus or Nauru costs $400,000 per year. Detention in Australia costs $239,000 per year. By contrast, allowing asylum seekers to live in the community while their claims are processed costs just $12,000 per year...” Not only is it more expensive to keep them offshore, it also has proven to be more inhumane. Recent cases have been leaked about the horrific conditions refugees are encountering in Nauru. Over 2000 files reports were leaked to the Guardian, that children had been abused physically, sexually and mentally, with many committing to self-harm and attempted suicides (Farrell, Evershed, & Davidson, 2016). These laws and conditions are proving to not only violate refugee’s human rights, but place Australia under a bad light across the world.
Perceptions of refugees are often shown as taking peoples jobs, and causing a financial problem.
It is true they cost short term economically, however the long term benefits show to outweigh the short term, as they begin working and placing money into the Australian economy. For example, German economists Fratzscher and Junker predict that Germany’s economy will improve greatly in 4-5 years after the resettlement of refugees (Sola 2016, p. 1). They also help resettle regional areas. According to Dunlop (2015), Karen refugees from Burma, who settled in the western town of Nihl in Victoria, have bought success both economically, and socially, to a town that was suffering. He argues that, “Part of the problem is we have surprisingly little data about the economic effects of humanitarian immigration to really be able to make informed decisions”. By placing refugees in regional areas they are increasing the working population and investing money into businesses in that area, also with their generations to follow. Socially, refugees have also made positive contributions through donations to their original homeland, and with volunteering within their own, and the wider community (Fozadar & Hartley 2013, p. 29). They show a willingness to get straight into the workforce in order to provide for their families, rather than relying on the welfare of the government. However, it can be very difficult to obtain and find work due to lack of Australian workforce experience and often …show more content…
institutionalized racism (Fozadar & Hartley p. 30). Therefore, how can people say they are taking our jobs when the refugee employment outcome is low? It is often refugees who take the work that people do not prefer. For example, many go into “low-paid, low-skilled, low-status, niche labour markets such as security, meat processing, child/aged care, and taxi-driving” (Fozadar & Hartley p.32). But numerous refugees who have had qualifications or jobs in a field, are often not recognized in Australia. For example, an Iraqi woman who was a fully qualified engineer in Iraq was told by an employer in Australia "I can’t believe you have such qualification.” But she cannot afford further study at university. (Casimioro S, Hancock P, & Northcote J 2007, p. 58, p. 63). These kind of situations show how discrimination can leave many feel hopeless, whereas they could be beneficially contributing to the Australian society and economy. It has also been found that entrepreneurs are more likely to stem from refugees with their willingness to take bold risks and the low opportunities they have in the general workforce (Fozadar & Hartley 2013, p. 33). In these kind of cases, it seems that people tend “…to focus on the needs of refugees rather than their contributions” (Fozadar & Hartley 2013, p. 29).
Refugees are treated in a cruel manner that Australia should be remorseful of. Being locked up and put under psychological torture in the detention centres is what they came to avoid, not put back into (Costello 2016, p. 14). The Australian Green Party (2013) proposes that the most humane and economically beneficial way to deal with refugees is by closing down the off shore detention centres, and have them processed in detention within Australia for background checks, and identification, then have them integrated into Australian society imminently with full workers’ rights. This would save Australian tax payers $3.2 billion, and have refugees positively contributing to society, and the economy. Successful integration can also contribute to a more welcoming multicultural society, where different religions, cultures and people are embraced. This can also reduce xenophobia, racism and discrimination as difference becomes the new norm. (Fozdar & Harley 2013, p. 24). An example of a well-known Vietnamese refugee in Australia is Hieu Van Le. He arrived by boat during the Howard area later became governor of South Australia and was awarded for increasing multiculturalism in Australia (Stats 2015, p. 70). However unlike Hieu, refugees now do not have the opportunity to be welcomed so easily into Australia.
The benefits of refugees have shown to outweigh the costs.
Having refugees not only locked up in detention centres, but also stuck in refugee camps elsewhere is harrowing. As not only Australians, but humans, we have responsibility to protect their human rights, which is supported through Article 13 and 14 in the UN declaration of human rights, which Australia has signed onto (UN General Assembly, 1948). Through spending millions by placing them into offshore detention centres has shown to be way more costly than bringing them to Australia and positively contributing to the economy and our society. Everyone deserves a chance at life. It’s time we put away our selfish ideals and welcome refugees to Australia as we are welcoming the future of Australian people who have formed this nation
today.