Government forced to release child prisoners

Peter Mac

Many of the hundreds of children held in the Howard Government's 
infamous immigration detention centres have been released, after 
the government was finally forced into a humiliating reversal of 
its previous policy.

There are still, however, 42 children in mainland detention 
centres and 20 detained on Australian islands. Another 27 are 
currently being held under virtual house arrest in "residential 
housing projects" and motels.

Last May the Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission 
(HREOC) released a damning report on the holding of children in 
detention under the government's unlawful policy. The report 
stated that children held in detention were highly likely to 
suffer serious mental harm.

With no apparent sense of the ridiculous, the government 
described the report as "backward looking" and "unbalanced" while 
the Minister for Immigration, Senator Amanda Vanstone, declared 
that the report would send a dangerous message to people 
smugglers.

The number of children held in detention centres reached a peak 
of 842 in 2002. Nearly 200 children remained in custody at the 
time of release of the HREOC report. However, with an election 
looming the government realised that the electorate would see its 
whole unlawful immigration policy as not only backward and 
unbalanced but also very cruel. They therefore issued orders that 
the remaining "boat children" held in custody in mainland centres 
should be released.

Last week, in a carefully timed announcement, Senator Vanstone 
proudly informed the nation that the government had released all 
but one of the children who had arrived by boat, or whose parents 
had.

The good Senator carefully avoided dwelling on cases of other 
children who are still imprisoned in detention centres, declaring 
herself to be "very pleased that we're now down to one child in 
detention centres". She also carefully avoided any hint of an 
apology when she stated that she was "very conscious of the fact 
that this wasn't possible in 2001 and 2002".

Children who arrived by means other than by boat remain in 
mainland centres, and so far the release policy has not been 
applied to those held in island detention. As Democrats Senator 
Andrew Bartlett noted, in these cases "kids only get released 
after they have developed psychological conditions, which are a 
direct consequence of detention".

Moreover, most children and their family members who have been 
released on bridging visas find themselves penniless, disoriented 
and with minimal government welfare support. As Senator Bartlett 
has pointed out: "the minister has merely granted them the right 
to live in the community while their claims are being processed. 
The families are mostly dependent on local charities for their 
food, clothing and medical needs. Frankly, wild animals get a 
better controlled release program in Australia than asylum 
seekers".

And finally, the case of the one "boat child" who does remain in 
custody highlights a further agonising dilemma for the detainees. 
The child's mother refused to be separated from her husband. In 
other cases the release of children has been conditional on the 
father (if present) remaining in custody. For these people the 
cost of the release of the children has been the splitting of 
their families. As Bartlett commented: "it is inhumane to force 
mothers to choose between their husbands and older sons, and 
getting their children out of the unsuitable environments of the 
detention centres".

Some family values!

So much for the government's much vaunted policy of encouraging 
stable and united two- parent families! Not only do the families 
suffer separation, but the mothers and children whose 
applications for refugee status are pending have to live in the 
residential housing projects (RHPs), which in many cases are only 
a slight improvement on the detention centres. Except for once a 
week shopping trips (for which they receive the magnificent sum 
of $56) they are kept indoors.

In describing the Port Augusta RHP, one detainee recently stated: 
"We cannot go out into the community, there are cameras 
everywhere. All the windows and doors have alarms. After 11 
o'clock at night we are locked in, you cannot open any window. If 
you do, the alarm goes off and (the guards) come running."

The decision to release detainee children is welcome. However, 
let's get things in proper perspective. The move constitutes 
electoral expediency, and does not stem from any deeply seated 
human convictions. We still have a long road to travel before we 
can say as a nation that we treat asylum seekers in a humane 
fashion. And we will not get there as long as the present 
government is in power.