Pacific Solution - Case For The Pacific Solution

Case For The Pacific Solution

The Pacific Solution was introduced as a deterrent to asylum seekers travelling by boat to Australia without the authorisation of the Australian government. In support of the policy Prime Minister Howard stated that "We will decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come."

By redefining the area of Australian territory that could be landed upon and then legitimately used for claims of asylum (the migration zone), and by removing any intercepted people to third countries for processing, the aim was to deter future asylum seekers from making the dangerous journey by boat, once they knew that their trip would in most likelihood not end up with a legitimate claim for asylum in Australia.

Arrivals dropped from a total of 5516 people in 2001 to only 1 arrival in all of 2002 after implementation of the policy. This may be partly due to the removal of the Taliban from power in Afghanistan. The low level of boat arrivals continued throughout the Pacific Solution period. Since the abolition of the policy there has been a sharp increase in the arrivals of so-called "boat people", with over 2700 arriving in 2009 alone.

During the Pacific Solution period, the Howard Government began to close detention centres. Baxter, Woomera and Curtin detention centres were all closed during the Pacific Solution. The Labor government opened Christmas Island detention centre in late 2008, and has since expanded facilities and accommodation there.

The number of asylum seekers assessed as genuine refugees via the Pacific Solution process was lower than onshore processing. Less than 40% of Asylum Seekers sent to Nauru received resettlement in Australia. A 2006 Report by the Australian Human Rights Commission showed that of the 1509 Asylum Seekers sent to Nauru by that time, 586 were granted Australian resettlement(39%), 360 resettled in New Zealand(24%), 19 resettled in Sweden(1.2%), 10 in Canada(<1%) and 4 in Norway(<1%). A total of 482 Asylum Seekers (32%) were deemed not genuine refugees and sent home.

In May 2011, the Gillard government announced plans to address the issue of asylum seekers arriving by boat with an asylum seeker 'swap' deal for long-standing genuine refugees in Malaysia. Refugee lawyers asked the High Court to strike down the deal, arguing that the Immigration Minister did not have the power to send asylum seekers to a country that has no legal obligations to protect them.

There were calls on the government to revisit the Pacific Solution by re-opening the detention centres on Nauru. Several of these came from former outspoken critics of The Pacific Solution. Refugee lawyer Marion Le, who had demanded the facility be shut down in 2005, said that it was "time for Labor to bite the bullet and reopen Nauru", while human rights lawyer Julian Burnside agreed, saying "asylum-seekers would receive better treatment in Nauru than Malaysia." This echoed the sentiment of Independent MP Andrew Wilkie who several days previously, while stopping short of calling for a return to the previous arrangement, noted that "John Howard's Pacific Solution was better." The Australian Government now has an increased urgency of finding a processing centre solution after the Malaysian people swap deal was deemed unlawful by the High Court.