This week's 10th anniversary of the Tampa incident sees a number of related issues converge.
Firstly, the High Court is considering a legal challenge to the declaration of Malaysia as a safe place to send asylum seekers, and whether the Minister as guardian of the unaccompanied minors should be party to such an arrangement. The judgment will be highly significant for the 'Malaysian solution'.
Secondly, there is an inquiry to examine suicide and self-harm in immigration detention. In 2010–2011 alone there were more than 1100 reported incidents of self-harm or threatened self-harm in immigration detention. That is significantly higher than in previous years. Some see prolonged detention as one factor causing this.
Concerns about healthcare in detention were recently raised by the AMA. And Parliament's Joint Select Committee inquiry into Australia's detention network commenced hearings this month. Over the years there have been several similar inquiries, but sadly there was little reform from so much paperwork.
In this context, a new report from the Centre for Policy Development (CPD) is welcome. Two of its authors, John Menadue and Arja Keski-Nummi, have long histories of senior level work in the Immigration Department. The third, Kate Gauthier, has a history in the advocacy and policy sectors.
They have drafted a document which hopes to change the direction of the debate on refugees, from one aimed at the lowest common denominator, to one based on the 'better angels of our nature' as President Lincoln said in his inauguration speech. Hopefully they will have better fortune than Lincoln.
The report proposes restructuring the debate on national security and asylum as well as engaging with other countries in the region; increasing resettlement numbers; delinking onshore and offshore processes; and introducing limited periods of detention for health and security screening only.
The significant savings from such policies could be more usefully spent on the settlement services that are needed by populations who have experienced trauma, than on interdiction and detention.
Written in the context of the world-wide movement of people, rather than a domestic political cycle, the report states that there are realistic alternatives to mandatory detention and excision of territories. The recommendations will contribute to an informed discussion on refugees.
Currently, this policy area is dominated by slogans (e.g. 'Stop the boats') that avoid complex