Critically evaluate Australia’s polices towards illegal immigrants essay
Today, the illegal immigration in Australia is one of the most debatable issues. The public opinion in relation to the illegal immigration is definitely negative. However, immigration policies conducted by the government within the last decades have proved to be ineffective. The Pacific Policy conducted prior to 2007 was costly, bureaucratized and slow in decision making. The current abandonment policy is too radical since it bans any illegal immigration sending all illegal immigrants back to their home countries. In such a situation, Australia needs a new, more effective policy which could respect human rights of illegal immigrants, on the one hand, and limited the access of illegal immigrants, on the other, to meet public concerns.
1 Introduction
Today, the Australian society perceives the illegal immigration as the threat to the national interests. The public opposes to the flow of illegal immigrants arriving on boats from neighboring islands and territories. Australia has become a Promised Land for illegal immigrants in South East Asia and Pacific Asia because it is one of the most developed countries in the region with high standards of living. In such a situation, the government of Australia attempts to introduce immigration policies that could be effective enough to manage the illegal immigration effectively and to match public interests. In this regard, it is possible to refer to two approaches to the solution of the problem of the illegal immigration, the Pacific Solution, conducted by the previous government, and the abandonment policy introduced in 2007 by the government of Grudd. However, neither policy was really effective. Even thought the current policy is supported by the majority of the Australian population, this policy is questionable from legal and ethical perspectives. Therefore, Australia needs to introduce new immigration policy, which could tackle the problem of the illegal immigration effectively, limiting the access of illegal immigrants to Australia and granting them with basic human rights.
2 The Pacific Solution
2.1 The Essence of the policy
The Pacific Solution policy involved the differentiated approach to illegal immigrants, when each case of the illegal immigration was investigated and illegal immigrants were either granted with the asylum, or returned back home, or transferred to small island Pacific nations, where they could stay in detention centers. In fact, this policy aimed at the fair solution of the problem of the illegal immigration. As immigrants cases were studied, they were just sent to the detention centers outside the mainland Australia that prevented the risk of their escape and further settlement in Australia.
However, the public did not accept this policy considering it too mild and ineffective because this policy has failed to prevent the flow of illegal immigrants, while they viewed detention centers as costly institutions and the total waste of money of Australian tax payers.
2.2 Benefits of the Pacific Solution
The application of the Pacific Solution allowed the immigration service of Australia investigate cases of the illegal immigration and take decisions on the ground of facts concerning each immigrant. If the immigration was justifiable, for instance, in case of refugees, the immigration service could grant illegal immigrants with the access to Australia. In such a way, the Pacific Solution policy respected human rights of immigrants and provided them with an opportunity to obtain asylum in Australia, if their claims were just and reasonable.
On the other hand, the Pacific Solution protected the mainland Australia from the uncontrollable flow of illegal immigrants. In fact, the Pacific Solution raised barriers on the way of illegal immigrants to the mainland Australia directly. Instead, the new policy moved them outside the mainland Australia to Pacific islands. Anyway, not all illegal immigrants were admitted to the mainland Australia, while many of them were sent back home or to other countries.
Furthermore, the transfer of illegal immigrants to the detention center provided the immigration service with sufficient time to investigate each case and to take the right and objective decision on whether the immigrant should be admitted to the mainland Australia or transferred back home or another country. Therefore, each case was studied in detailed and the immigration service could take the weighed and adequate decision on each case and each application. Hence, this policy was fair in relation to illegal immigrants.
2.3 Drawbacks of the Pacific Solution
The Pacific Solution had a number of drawbacks among which high costs of this policy was the primary concern of political opponents of this policy as well as the public (Hundt, 2011). In fact, the maintenance of the detention centers and the overall costs of the Pacific Solution policy evoked severe criticism from the part of the public because the average Australians viewed this policy as the waste of their money. They believed that the government should sent illegal immigrants off without any delays, while creation of detention centers and long lasting study of each illegal immigrant case was too costly for Australian tax payers.
Furthermore, the Pacific Solution contributed to the bureaucratization of the immigration service and immigration policies in relation to illegal immigrants became very complicated (Hundt, 2011). The immigration service has developed a complex structure to detain, transfer and maintain illegal immigrants in the detention centers. Moreover, the complex system of the decision making process raised considerable bureaucratic barriers on the way to the fast decision making process within the immigration service.
In fact, the slow decision making process deteriorated the effectiveness of the Pacific Solution because many immigrants were just transferred to Pacific islands’ detention centers waiting for the final solution. In such a way, the detention centers were just stuffed with illegal immigrants awaiting for the solution of their case. In addition, the maintenance of such detention centers was costly, especially taking into consideration their remoteness from the mainland Australia.
3 The Current Immigration Policies
3.1 Abandonment of the Pacific Solution and Total Ban of the Illegal Immigration
As the Australian Labor Party headed by Kevin Grudd came to power in 2007, the new government launched the new policy, which involved the abandonment of the Pacific Solution and introduction of the total ban of the illegal immigration, when illegal immigrants were just sent back home or to other countries (Hundt, 2011). The new immigration policy was totally different from the previous one and banned the access of illegal immigrants to Australia. They were and currently are sent off the country as soon as possible after their detention.
The new policy aimed at the raising unsurpassable barriers on the way to illegal immigrants as the Australian Labor Part promised before the elections (Hundt, 2011). The undisputable policy of sending illegal immigrants off the country was quite efficient in terms of preventing illegal immigrants from accessing Australia. This policy has gained the tremendous support of the population nationwide. Native-born Australians believed this policy to be fair and effective since this policy resolved the problem of the illegal immigration through the total ban of access of illegal immigrants to the territory of Australia.
The policy of the abandonment of the illegal immigration was introduced in the context of the global financial crisis and was an essential measure to protect national economic interests of Australia because illegal immigrants arrive to Australia in search of job and better conditions of living. Therefore, the government needed to cut costs spent on the immigration service (Hundt, 2011). In this regard, the abandonment policy was virtually the perfect solution because this solution was probably the most cost-efficient among all possible solutions of the problem of the illegal immigration. As a result, Australia has cut costs spent on the immigration service and stopped the flow of illegal immigrants.
3.2 Benefits of the Current Immigration Policies
The current immigration policy has stopped the flow of illegal immigrants. To put it more precisely, the flow of illegal immigrants has dropped since illegal immigrants, being caught, were just sent back home or to other countries without detailed investigation of their cases by the immigration service. In fact, the current immigration policy leaves no margin for letting illegal immigrants in Australia. If they are detained, they are just sent off the country.
The new policy has cut costs spent on the immigration service and maintenance of illegal immigrant detention centers as well as on the integration of illegal immigrants into Australian communities, as was the case, when they were granted asylum in Australia in the past. In the time of the global financial crisis and downturn in the economic development of Australia, the substantial cost cuts were extremely important for the domestic economy. Hence, the abandonment policy has gained the public approval and allowed Australia using public funds effectively.
In addition, the new policy has gained the public support and decreased the tension between the native-born and immigrant population. At this point, it is worth mentioning the fact that the global financial crisis and the uncertain situation in the domestic economy increased the tension with Australian society because native-born Australians believed immigrants were taking their jobs. As a result, the ban of the illegal immigration and the policy of abandonment were perceived by the public as the fair solution. Hence, native-born Australians became more confident in immigrants because they arrived in the legal way and had the right to stay in Australia.
3.3 Drawbacks of the Current Immigration Policies
The introduction of the abandonment policy in relation to illegal immigrants has considerable drawbacks, among which it is possible to single out the neglect of human rights and refugee rights of illegal immigrants. For instance, if illegal immigrants moved to Australia seeking for asylum, his/her return back home can threaten to his/her life and health. Anyway, the rejection of illegal immigrants without even studying their cases raises a number of legal and ethical issues. In fact, the impact of the new policy on human rights of illegal immigrants raised the criticism of Australian immigration policies at the international level. Many researchers (Wells & Martinez, 2004) point out that the abandonment policy was undemocratic in its essence.
The decision to introduce the abandonment policy in relation to illegal immigrants provoked riots in detention centers, which were costly for Australia. Illegal immigrants, who stayed in the detention centers could not afford the thought of being sent back home without even trying their cases, while some of them really escaped from repressive regimes that could threaten to their life, while their return could end up in the execution or a term in prison.
In addition, the new immigration policy of Australia caused the criticism from the international community and human rights organizations. The international community viewed such immigration policies as excessive. The violation of basic human rights of illegal immigrants was unwelcomed by human rights organizations. As a result, the public image of Australia in the world has deteriorated.
4. The Public Opinion and the Immigration Policies
4.1 The Public Opposition to the Illegal Immigration
The public traditionally opposed to the illegal immigration viewing illegal immigrants as the threat to the national security and interests of native-born Australians (Hundt, 2011).
In the time of the global financial crisis, the opposition to the illegal immigration and the criticism of immigration policies of Australia has grown stronger.
The illegal immigration is one of the main causes of tension between native-born Australians and immigrants both legal and illegal.
4.2 Socioeconomic Effects of the Illegal Immigration
In fact, the illegal immigration has a number of negative effects. First, illegal immigrants reduce employment opportunities for those with permission to work in Australia (Burnley, 2002). Second, illegal immigrants place an additional burden on the taxpayer in terms of costs associated with locating and removing illegal workers, uncollected taxes and fraudulently claimed government benefits (Betts, 1997). Third, they disadvantage employers who employ legal workers because they may not be able to compete with those who employ and under-pay illegal workers (O’Farrell, 2001). Illegal immigrants may be subject to exploitation and organized criminal activity (Jupp, 2007). Furthermore, illegal immigrants may not meet the stringent health and character tests undertaken by holders of a visa with work entitlements (Foster, 1998). Thus is why the public opposed to the illegal immigration fiercely.
4.3. The Government Immigration Policies and the Public Opinion
The government immigration policy in terms of the Pacific Solution evoked a strong criticism from the part of the public and had rather negative publicity.
In contrast, the public supported the decision of Grudd’s government to launch the policy of abandonment in relation to illegal immigrants because Australians did not want illegal immigrants in Australia.
However, there was a weak opposition to the policy of abandonment within the Australian society, which stands for human rights of illegal immigrants and attempt to resist to the neglect of immigrants’ right to asylum.
5 Recommendations
In actuality, Australia has several options to choose from. In this regard, the current policy of the abandonment is questionable from the legal and ethical standpoint, but it is quite efficient in economic terms.
Alternatively, Australia can introduce more tolerant policies and take decisions on each case either to admit or to reject illegal immigrants.
In actuality, the public opinion is rather negative in relation to illegal immigrants. On the other hand, Australia cannot ignore human rights of illegal immigrants. At any rate, they should be granted with a chance to obtain asylum, unless their return to their home country will be save.
In such a way, Australia should look for an alternative solution to the policy of Pacific Solution. The new policy should admit illegal immigrants and investigate each case before taking the decision on the admission or rejection of the access to the illegal immigrant. However, the decision making process should be taken fast that means that the decision making process should occur at the local level. The time of considering each case of each illegal immigrant should be limited to seven days, for instance. After the end of this term, the immigrant should be sent to his/her home country, unless he/she was granted with admission to the mainland Australia.
In such a situation, the new immigration policy should admit the possibility of the admission of illegal immigrants to Australia, if they match the refugee status or, when their return to their home country threatens to their life and health. At the same time, the new policy should eliminate bureaucracy and slow decision making as was the case of the Pacific Solution policy. Instead, the new policy will offer an opportunity to take decisions faster and at the local level. As a result, the decision making process will be fast, while the shift of the decision making process to the local level will prevent the risk of the bureaucratization of the immigration service.
6 Conclusion
Thus, the current immigration policy of Australia focuses on the abandonment of illegal immigrants and their return back to their home countries. This policy has gained the wide support of the public because Australians view illegal immigrants as the threat to the national security and economic interests of native-born Australians. At the same time, it is obvious that the current policy is controversial from the legal and ethical standpoint. The abandonment policy raises criticism from the part of the international community and human rights organizations, which consider such policy offensive and violating basic human rights of illegal immigrants. In fact, the current policy deprives illegal immigrants of the possibility to obtain asylum in Australia. As a result, they are just rejected and expelled from the country, if caught.
In this regard, the previous policy of the Pacific Solution was not very effective too because this policy was costly and time consuming. The slow decision making process was aggravated by the bureaucratization of the immigration service. As a result, the effectiveness of the policy was low, while the public opposition to the new policy contributed to its replacement by the abandonment policy. Hence, neither of the policies conducted by Australia within the last decade in relation to illegal immigrants was effective.
In such a situation, the alternative to both policies may be a new policy grounded on the principle of admission of illegal immigrants, in case their life and health in their home country is under a threat. All other immigrants should be sent back home. The new policy should take decisions fast, while cases of immigrants should be considered and studied within a seven days term. Finally, decisions will be taken at the local level. Such policy will be effective due to the fast decision making process at the local level and the lack of bureaucratization, while basic human rights of illegal immigrants will be respected.
