40
since the re-establishment.
163
Morrison warned the government about the use of Bridging Visa.
164
Bridging Visa could not worked as deterrence. Instead it ruined the government, since it tempted more asylum seekers to try to reach Australia by
boat.
165
More likely, the Labor‟s asylum policy failed to slow asylum boats.
C. Critiques from international human rights organizations
The re-establishment of offshore processing facilities drew condemnation from human rights groups. In November 2012, Amnesty International inspected
the Nauru Offshore Processing Centre OPC and then visited Manus Island OPC in November 2013.
166
During these inspections, Amnesty International found that detention at both centers constituted „cruel, inhuman and degrading
punishment.‟
167
There were appalling conditions and a lack of adequate basic needs such as access on water and electricity. Those findings were similar with
the previous conditions of offshore processing in 2001. Apparently, the re- establishment continues to breach Austra
lia‟s international obligations on human rights.
Amnesty International also echoed huge concerns relating to the adequacy and propriety of child asylum seekers. On the offshore processing facilities, many
children were separated from their families. The separation from a parent or
163
Australia‟s Ship Wrecked Refugee Policy. The Monthly. Available at: http:www.abc.net.aunews2012- 11-21first-asylum-seekers-arrive-on-manus-island4383876, accessed in the 23
th
of October 2014.
164
Ibid.
165
Australia‟s Ship Wrecked Refugee Policy. The Monthly. Available at: http:www.abc.net.aunews2012- 11-21first-asylum-seekers-arrive-on-manus-island4383876, accessed in the 23
th
of October 2014.
166
Submission to Australian Human Rights Commission National Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention. Amnesty International Australia. May 30, 2014. Availablet at:
https:www.humanrights.gov.ausitesdefaultfilesSubmission20No201572020Amnesty20Internati onal_Redacted.pdf. Accessed in the 7th of December 2014.
167
Ibid.
41
family member had caused severe mental health impacts of immigration detention on children and their families.
168
They were mentally suffering from anxieties and lack of security. Amnesty International also claimed that the cases of
family‟s separation were unclear. Children have been separated from their families without
reasons and proper explanations to the family involved.‟
169
At the same time, the Australian government removed the asylum seekers rights for family reunion.
Somehow these circumstances ruled asylum seeker on a very difficult situation. In the following statement
was Graham Thom‟s response from Amnesty International to the situation:
„....the government has sacrificed the rights of asylum seekers for political gain.
170
....this announcement the reopening of offshore processing facilities in Nauru and PNG sends a resounding message to
the region that protecting refugee rights is something to be avoided at all costs.‟
171
After Gillard plan to set out the punitive Malaysia Solution was failed, desperate Gillard eventually succumbed to the recommendation of revisiting once
she called „inhumane policy‟ of Howard‟s offshore processing facility. Gillard, whose party had argued against the establishment of the policy, hoped to process
asylum seekers to PNG and Nauru immediately.
172
In addition, her government
168
Ibid.
169
Submission to Australian Human Rights Commission National Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention. Amnesty International Australia. May 30, 2014. Availablet at:
https:www.humanrights.gov.ausitesdefaultfilesSubmission20No201572020Amnesty20Internati onal_Redacted.pdf. Accessed in the 7th of December 2014.
170
Ibid.
171
Australia Asylum: MPs Debate Nauru and PNG Centers. BBC. August 14, 2012. Availablet at: http:www.bbc.comnewsworld-asia-19251958, accessed in the 24
th
of October 2014.
172
Ibid.
42
would also spend millions of dollars in aid to both Nauru and PNG in exchange.
173
In her response to harsh critics that entailed the re-establishment decision, Julia Gillard was persistent that her plan was different from John Howards
„Pacific Solution.‟
174
Gillard on the Asylum Seeker‟s Expert Panel Report promoted,
„
…it is a new approach from the panel. Its actually different to what has happened on Nauru and in PNG in the past.
‟
175
With Labor‟s „no advantage test‟ policy, refugees processed in Nauru or PNG entry into Australia would spend longer time in detention or processing.
176
Although the policy turned harsher , if „boat people‟ carried their refugee claim
through normal United Nations channels, it would be quicker.
177
In addition, Chris Bowen, Gillard‟s Minister for Immigration and Citizenship defended, „Sometimes
what you might say might not be entirely consistent with everything youve said in your political career, but the
Australian people want this sorted out.‟
178
Despite of Julia Gillard‟s commitment to her party constituent, her decision to return to
Howard‟s offshore facilities in Nauru and PNG made her politically vulnerable.
173
Ibid
174
Julia Gillard Revives Plans to Deport Australia‟s Boat Refugees. The Independent. November 19, 2014. Available at: http:www.independent.co.uknewsworldaustralasiajulia-gillard-revives-plans-to-deport-
australias-boat-refugees-8038721.html, accessed in the 24
th
of October 2014.
175
No Advantage? Nobody Knows What that Means. Crikey. September 13, 2012. Available at: http:www.abc.net.aulatelinecontent2012s3567006.htm, accessed in the 24
th
of October 2014.
176
Ibid.
177
Ibid.
178
Ibid.
43
CHAPTER IV THE DRIVING FACTORS CONTRIBUTE
D TO THE AUSTRALIA’S POLICY SHIFT ON ‘BOAT PEOPLE’ ISSUE
This chapter analyses the driving factors that lead to Australia‟s policy shift under Julia Gillard government on „boat people‟ issue. During her political career,
Gillard was notorious with her opposition on offshore processing facilities in Nauru and Papua New Guinea PNG. However, when Gillard became the
Australia Prime Minister on 24 June 2010, she changed her position on the issue. In 2012, to respond to „boat people‟ rapid flow, Gillard decided to re-establish the
offshore processing facilities in Nauru and PNG. The Gillard government ‟s
decision to return to the offshore processing facilities in Nauru and PNG created a paradox. Therefore, Foreign Policy Analysis of domestic influences will be
applied to investigate the factors that drive Gillard‟s decision in re-opening offshore processing facilities in Nauru and PNG, these are; 1 Legislatures, and
2 public opinion.
A. Legislatures
Julia Gillard was very dependent on the role of Senate to pass her government‟s legislation on boat people issue. In 2010, although the Australian
Labor Party ALP appointed to be the majority government in the House of Representatives, with 72 votes from ALP and additional 3 votes from
