Login / Join
An uncompromising legacy etched in the Budget.
Will job losses, fee hikes, a compromise on service standards and a dilution of Australia’s humanitarian commitments be the legacy of the new budget and the potentially departing immigration minister, Scott Morrison?
It has come as no surprise that the Budget has taken a tough stand on matters connected with illegal immigration. It is a culmination of Immigration minister Scott Morrison’s tough stance that has become steadily bolder and more uncompromising. But the new super-agency for border protection should not and cannot be allowed to be shaded in secrecy.
Noticeably, the Budget has hit illegal immigration hard. Unfortunately, it may also hit hard genuine refugees. For one, the Immigration Advice and Application Assistance Scheme (IAAAS) which largely helps pay for legal advice for protection visa applicants has been axed. In addition to this, some 4000 places in the family stream allocated to illegal maritime arrivals have been removed. These together have sealed a life-saving avenue for genuine refugees.
Of particular concern is the establishment of the Australian Border Force (ABF). Clearly emboldened by the success of 'Operation Sovereign Borders', the government has now decided to merge customs and immigration border operations into one unit with purportedly an uncompromising focus on border protection. The United Nations High Commission on Refugees and Amnesty International have criticised this suggesting that the Coalition government is plumbing new depths in international relations and obligations.
The Migration Alliance is particularly concerned that the Minister has suggested that such an agency will put its operational priorities above transparency. Given the damaging secrecy that shrouded Operation Sovereign Borders, the Migration Alliance would like to see the ABF act openly with the Australian media and the Australian public for that matter. The Migration Alliance believes that transparency is the cornerstone of trust and credible law enforcement.
The new super-agency for border protection should not and cannot be allowed to be shaded in secrecy. It is not a worthy legacy to leave behind.
Immigration blog
Secret agent blacklists and secret border operations, hmm...? The morphing of an administrative department to a "force" is alarming - can you imagine how it might embolden case officers if they were given military-like ranks? There is a fundamental difference between a military-style organisation based on strict chain of command, orders, duty, loyalty and command & control operational tactics and an administrative department where nobody gives "orders" and the law and the rights of those under the law must be paramount above all else.
Well, at least "ABF" is easier to say/read off than "DIBP". But the militaristic tone this new name sets is alarming.
Will be interesting to see if the suggestion made last week to roll the MRT and RRT into the AAT (where migration agents who are not also lawyers have an extremely limited role) is acted upon - no doubt the lawyers who want to corner the market on immigration advice and have argued that only a lawyer should be allowed to give migration advice will be cheering if that happens!