'Dropstitch Dot' attempted to arrest Nationals MP for Page Kevin Hogan who "fled the scene"

According to The Northern Star on 25 October 2016:

“Nanna Dot Moller, known to many as 'Dropstitch Dot' performed the 'arrest' handing a Kevin Hogan impersonator the warrant along with a list of the charges as the man himself had fled the scene.”

The police did not look amused after being called to the protest event at the Nationals MP’s Lismore office on 24 October 2016.

The very, very threatening Northern Rivers contingent of the Knitting Nannas and a NSW police officer in imminent danger of ‘hardware’ overload on his uniform

“According to Nanna Twomey the protest is related to off-shore processing and protecting the environment.

"We are protesting against the children in detention as well as the way that they've treated our land," she said.

She also claims that MPs no longer represent citizens.”

Essential Research vs Morgan Research on Australian support levels for "Muslim immigration"

Image from 4plebs.org thread of

The Australian 21 September 2016

Roy Morgan Research, 26 October 2016:

In stark contrast to the widely reported Essential Research Poll in mid-September that claimed Australians opposed Muslim Immigration 49% cf. 40%, independent research by Roy Morgan shows Australians continue to support Muslim immigration (58% cf. 33%) as well as Asylum Seeker Immigration (66% to 25%).

Five weeks ago, Australians were bombarded with the news that we, as a nation, or the majority of us, did not want Muslims coming into the country – based on a poll by Essential Research.

I said at the time, in several interviews (Listen to radio interview with 2SER), that we believed it was highly unlikely that these results were true.  Roy Morgan surveys over several years from 2010 to 2015, showed majority support for Muslims, refugees and others immigrating to Australia. We believed it highly unlikely that sentiment would have changed so dramatically. The latest Roy Morgan Research showed indeed Australians continue to support Muslim Immigration, albeit with a reduced majority.

It is crucial that public opinion surveys on such important issues as this are independent and conducted with a sample which is truly representative of the Australian population.

The increasingly prevalent use of internet surveys using ‘Commercial panels’ of respondents is extraordinarily dangerous. ‘Commercial panels’ are typically recruited in a variety of ways – opt-in, competitions, acquired email lists etc. The size of the ‘Commercial panel’ can never make up for the unknown and unknowable biases.

We see it as a little like the ‘sub-prime’ fiasco in the US that was at the heart of the Global Financial Crisis. Combining large quantities of ‘high risk’ mortgages into packages and re-labelling them didn’t make them any less risky.

When it comes to sampling the Australian population – combining ‘highly skewed’ lists of people doesn’t magically create a representative sample representing a cross-section of Australians.

Roy Morgan conducted this latest survey, and previous waves of the research, at our own cost because we believe it is important the people of Australia are accurately represented on an issue of such social, human and moral importance.

Click here to see the full results of the latest Roy Morgan survey on attitudes to immigration and population.

Roy Morgan Research, 25 October 2016:

Muslim Immigration

Support for Muslim immigration is down 7% from a year ago (65% support in October 2015), although it is up 4% from July 2010 (54% support).

Importantly, a majority of L-NP supporters (51% support cf. 36% oppose), ALP supporters (67% support cf. 25% oppose), Greens supporters (88% support cf. 5% oppose) and supporters of Independents/ Others (58% support cf. 34% oppose) all support Muslim immigration.

However, the overwhelming majority of One Nation supporters are opposed to Muslim immigration (87% opposed cf. 4% support).

Immigration Levels & Population

Now 40% (up 3%) of Australians support immigration remaining about the same and a further 21% (down 11%) want to see immigration levels increased; this constitutes a clear majority of Australians 61% (down 8%) who support immigration remaining the same or increasing while 34% (up 8%) want immigration levels reduced and 5% (unchanged) can’t say.

Australians are split on the effect of immigrants on Australia’s culture and way of life: However, there has been a negative shift in the last year – back to lower than recorded in 2010. 32% (down 5%) of Australians believe immigration has a positive effect on Australia; 32% (up 1%) believe immigration has a negative effect while 25% (up 6%) believe immigration has little effect and 11% (down 2%) can’t say.

Most Australians want relatively moderate population growth – 34% (up 2%) want a population under 30 million in 2046, and only 24% (down 6%) want a population of 35 million or more. This is a shift away from growth levels that were seen as acceptable a year ago – but nowhere near the 2010 levels when 56% wanted a population under 30 million in the year 2040.

Our silence supports this..................

Fifty-one pages of February-March 2016 incidents reports from the Nauru Regional Processing Centre created and funded by the Australian Government with the implied consent of the Australian people.

Nauru incident reports by paulfarrell on Scribd

https://www.scribd.com/document/324190212/Nauru-incident-reports

Refugee children need protection now

The Lancet, editorial, 17 September 2016:

Amel Emric/AP 

In a new report—released on Sept 7, UNICEF paints a grim picture. Worldwide, an estimated 50 million children are refugees or migrants, with the number of child migrants having doubled and the number of refugees having increased by 21% in the past 10 years. The most vulnerable of these children are unaccompanied, and have often fled war, insecurity, and poverty under harrowing circumstances. They might be alone or they might have lost or become separated from their family during their journey.

In one terrifying account, published on Sept 9 (Why are you keeping me here?) Human Rights Watch describes how unaccompanied migrant children are detained in police custody in Greece in unsanitary and degrading conditions. Germany's national investigative police agency, the Bundeskriminalamt, has admitted in new figures that by the end of August almost 9000 unaccompanied children who were registered entering the country are officially missing. And while some of these children may be safe with relatives somewhere, there is the very real danger of exploitation and abuse. The UK has only managed to extricate 50 of 220 unaccompanied children stranded in the camp in Calais and who have a legal right to be reunited with families in the UK. This delay and inaction is unexplained and shameful.

We agree with Zulfiqar Bhutta and colleagues' strong plea in a Correspondence letter, published online on Sept 5, that it is now time “to take the strongest action possible to protect children”. The UCL–Lancet Commission on Migration and Health, announced in this week's issue, promises to tackle key issues that affect the health and wellbeing of migrants, including unaccompanied children. Children not only need safe environments and access to health care, they need education and special psychosocial attention to mitigate the atrocities of war and persecution, including experiences of being uprooted into different cultural environments. Outrage about the plight of migrant and refugee children is not enough. Childhood is a precious and important time that strongly influences what happens in the future. We must act now.

The Turnbull Government is just not listening to those who have experienced the immigration detention camps first-hand

The Guardian, 18 August 2016:

The Guardian can reveal that the offices of senior members of the Australian government – including prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, attorney general George Brandis and Dutton – all received an extensive dossier in May 2016 that outlined the ongoing harm to children held on Nauru and the “numerous child rights violations” that had occurred.

Save the Children correspondence Peter Dutton by paulfarrell on Scribd

https://www.scribd.com/document/321431649/Save-the-Children-correspondence-Peter-Dutton

Australian child sexual abuse royal commission choosing its words carefully

Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, media release, 15 August 2016:

Statement on immigration detention centres

15 August, 2016

The Royal Commission does not ordinarily comment upon operational matters. However, because of the level of public discussion in relation to immigration detention centres the Commission indicates the following.

The Royal Commission has an ongoing investigation in relation to the Department of Immigration and Border Protection’s response to allegations of child sexual abuse in detention centres. Whether or not a public hearing is warranted has not been determined.

The Royal Commission is conscious that a Child Protection Panel was established by the Secretary of the Department of Immigration and Border Protection in May 2015. The Panel’s terms of reference indicate that ‘a final report will be provided to the Secretary by mid-2016 covering both better practice and a comprehensive sample of reviews.’ The Royal Commission anticipates that the report will deal with the Department’s response to, among other matters, allegations of child abuse in detention centres. The Royal Commission will have regard to that report in the course of its investigation into immigration detention issues.

Human Rights Law Centre advice to Australian Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual...

https://www.scribd.com/document/321201052/Human-Rights-Law-Centre-advice-to-Australian-Royal-Commission-into-Institutional-Responses-to-Child-Sexual-Abuse

Law Council of Australia calls for independent oversight of immigration detention in wake of Nauru leaks

Australian Dept. of Immigration, Border Force and Federal Minister Peter Dutton damned by these findings

A ministerial portfolio, government department, contractor and officers medically negligent and/or corrupt…….

The Guardian, 28 June 2016:

Australia’s immigration department failed to appropriately oversee the multinational that provides healthcare for asylum seekers and was unable to cope with the “commercially aggressive practices” that led to numerous failures to meet medical benchmarks, a series of damning internal reviews have found.

The findings substantiated a number of key allegations published by Guardian Australia in July 2015 about the relationship between International Health and Medical Services and the immigration department.

Leaked documents showed IHMS failed to meet medical targets, deliberately included incorrect data in reports and admitted it was “inevitable” fraud would occur as it tried to meet government standards. The documents also revealed that IHMS failed to undertake working with children checks and police checks on Manus Island.

Three reviews were commissioned by the immigration department to examine the allegations. Two were internal and one was to be conducted by KPMG.

IHMS, a subsidiary of the global healthcare giant International SOS, has received more than $1.6bn in government funding to provide asylum seeker healthcare in Australia and on Manus Island and Nauru.

The detention assurance review team report, released under freedom of information, which drew together findings from the KPMG audit and the first initial internal audit, said: “Through the review processes, both internal and external reviews agree that IHMS took an approach of seeking to maximise profits, including through actively reducing opportunities for the department to seek contract abatements.”

It later continued: “There is a fundamental conflict between contractual and clinical objectives where profit and cost dictate clinical operations.”

ABC News, 27 June 2016:

Australian Border Force staff have been referred for investigation over more than 100 cases of alleged corrupt activity in Australia's skilled and student visa program.

A 7.30-Fairfax Media investigation has discovered that in the last 12 months, Australian Border Force chief Michael Pezzullo has referred 132 cases of suspected corruption inside the department to the national corruption watchdog, the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity (ACLEI).

It comes as a former immigration official claims that a focus on boat arrivals has allowed migration crime involving people arriving by plane to flourish unchecked.

"In the border security debate, it has been easy to deflect the public's attention to boat arrivals," said Joseph Petyanszki, who worked at the Department of Immigration for 27 years and was joint head of the Department's investigation office between 2007 and 2013.

"But this fear-mongering has totally ignored where the vast bulk of real fraud is, most significantly undermining our immigration programs."

 The man responsible for this shocking state of affairs.....

Peter Craig Dutton former police officer, current Liberal MP for Dickson and Minister for Immigration and Border Protection.

Immigration Minister Peter Dutton never lets facts get in the way of a good dogwhistle about demmed furriners

This was Australian Immigration Minister Peter Dutton quoted in The Sydney Morning Herald on 18 May 2016:

"They [refugees] won't be numerate or literate in their own language, let alone English," Mr Dutton said.

"These people would be taking Australian jobs, there's no question about that.

"For many of them that would be unemployed, they would languish in unemployment queues and on Medicare and the rest of it so there would be huge cost and there's no sense in sugar-coating that, that's the scenario."

This is a copy of a Peter Dutton media release published by My Sunshine Coast  on 18th of May 2016:   

Labor and Greens jeopardise refugee outcomes

Labor and Mr Shorten's arbitrary doubling of Australia's Refugee and Humanitarian Programme is all about politics and was a crass attempt to win over the left on boat turn backs.

About 70 per cent of Australia's migration programme is made up of skilled migrants and Australia's annual net migration figure is approximately 190,000.

In addition under the Refugee and Humanitarian Programme we accept 13,750 people per year. We provide services to applicants who by definition come from war-torn countries and situations where people face persecution.

Our Government provides significant funding on settlement services to help people within the humanitarian and refugee programme with services such as education, training, accommodation, English language lessons and trauma counselling.

Our programme grows gradually from 13,750 per annum. Labor's decision to just double the figure was done solely for political purposes. There was no science in doubling the figure – it was purely done to try to win over the Left during the debate at ALP conference on boat turnbacks.

Here are the facts on people coming in through the Refugee and Humanitarian Programme:

* 44 per cent of the female arrivals and 33 per cent of males do not understand spoken English prior to arrival
* 23 per cent of female arrivals and 17 per cent of males are illiterate in their own language
* 15 per cent have never attended school
* 46 per cent have never undertaken paid work

Data from the Building a New Life in Australia study, the Longitudinal Study of Humanitarian Migrants (BLNA) which remains ongoing, indicates that humanitarian entrants face considerable economic and social challenges to settling successfully in Australia. The BNLA found humanitarian settlers fill low skill and low paid occupations.

Other studies have found that humanitarian entrants generally have poorer employment outcomes than other migrants, particularly in their early years of settlement.

The Australian Census Migrants Integrated Dataset shows that for humanitarian entrants 32 per cent are recording as being 'in the labour force' while 45 per cent were 'not in the labour force'. The Australian Bureau of Statistics found that in March the general Australian population had a Labour Force Participation Rate of 65 per cent.

The Personal Income Tax Migrants Integrated Dataset indicates humanitarian visa holders reported income of around $25,000 well below the national average of just under $50,000 for Australian taxpayers.

During the data matching period less than 20 per cent of these humanitarian migrants submitted a tax return.

What this shows is that it is vital to be able to provide the housing, employment, health and integration services that provide the base for these migrants to build a new, happy, healthy and successful life in our country – a process that can take years, even a generation.

A doubling of the Refuge and Humanitarian Programme annually as committed to by Labor would cost an estimated $2.5 billion dollars over the four year period of the Forward Estimates.

The Greens proposal to quadruple the intake to 50,000 annually would come at an estimated cost of $7 billion dollars over the Forward Estimates.

Australia is already one of the most generous nations in resettling refugees.

We rank in the top three nations for providing permanent resettlement of those most in need from around the world.

Refugees and humanitarian entrants are selected not because they have skills, but because they face persecution or serious discrimination. Many will have been denied basic services such as health and education in their own country and will have suffered trauma or torture for years.

Given those circumstances, we should not be surprised that entrants under the Refugee and Humanitarian Programme need considerable and specialist long term support to settle into our country.

That is why the Government is committed so strongly to funding settlement services, but it comes at a cost.

The size and composition of the Refugee and Humanitarian Programme is carefully considered annually to ensure sufficient resources are available to successfully process and integrate those fleeing persecution.

The Labor/Greens proposals risk jeopardising settlement outcomes.

Australians support an organised migration programme; Australia is a nation of immigrants.

But the programme needs to remain manageable and acceptable to maintain that support from the broad Australian population. Australia has proudly and successfully resettled more than 825,000 refugees and others in humanitarian needs since World War II and we have the capacity to continue this generosity in a managed process.

To assert that virtually overnight you can double (Labor) or quadruple (The Greens) – on an annual basis – this intake of vulnerable people with many special needs is the height of irresponsibility and jeopardises the current community support for the refugee programme.

One only has to look at the influx of more than 50,000 people illegally on boats during the last Labor Government to see how unrealistic both the Labor and Greens proposals are.

The Department of Immigration and Border Protection will take at least the next three years to simply process these people.

The special intake of 12,000 Syrians and Iraqis from the war-torn Middle East will take a number of programme years, simply because we cannot cut corners in regards to the various checks, but particularly security checks, that we must carry out on people before we offer them the opportunity to resettle in Australia. The Government has committed over $800 million to this special intake alone.

We live in a dangerous and uncertain world in terms of security and we need appropriate processes in place to ensure we are assisting those most in need with the least prospect of returning to their previous lives.

One only has to look at the recent events in Europe to realise that secure borders and organised migration are vitally important to the security of any nation.

Only the Coalition is committed to strong border protection policies to keep Australia as safe and secure as is possible.

THE HON. PETER DUTTON MP
MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION

So what are voters supposed to conclude from this election campaign spiel?

Apparently it’s that we are all supposed to be concerned that refugees will take our jobs or become a burden on the welfare system because they are illiterate and unemployed.

What Peter Dutton is careful not to say about the incomplete longtitudinal study he is quoting is that it is examining the lives of 2,399 recently arrived humanitarian migrants – 64 per cent of whom had been in Australia less than six months and 83 per cent less than one year.

Anyone fleeing from war-torn countries to an essentially monolingual country (where unemployment is running at 5.8%) who finds permanent full-time employment in under a year is likely to be an exceptional person, so it is hardly surprising that in those first months on Australian soil a number are unemployed.

However, when it comes to looking at humanitarian refugees 15 years of age and over with labour force status recorded in the 2011 Australian Census, what Dutton does not mention is that (using New South Wales as the example) 79.34% of Iranians, 78.6% of Iraqis, 78.4% of Afghans and 66.3% of Sudanese were in employment.

Nor does he draw attention to the fact that those refugees classified as 'not in the labour force'  would include children under 15 year of age. Of those recent humanitarian refugee units arriving in Australia 50% contained children.

As for recent humanitarian refugees having incomes of around $25,000 a year – well so do an est. 1.365 million other people according to Australian Bureau of Statistics published data.

One would have to be profoundly stupid to take Peter Dutton’s demmed furriners spray at face value.

Australian Federal Election 2016: it couldn't happen to a more deserving multinational

The Australian, 28 April 2016:

Broadspectrum has entered a trading halt this morning as it seeks to clarify the impact of a potential closure of the Manus Island detention centre.

The detention centre operator’s Manus Island contract is highly lucrative and investors fear it may be taken away after the PNG Supreme Court labelled the detention centre “unconstitutional and illegal” this week.

That ruling preceded PNG Prime Minister Peter O’Neill’s assertion on Wednesday that the centre would “now be closed”, but there remains little clarity on the way forward with the Commonwealth insisting the asylum seekers will not come to Australia.

“The trading halt is requested following press speculation in relation to developments following the PNG Supreme Court decision and their possible impact on Broadspectrum,” the firm said in a statement.

It said it intended to release an update on Friday, April 29.

The action has come as an $800 million takeover offer for Broadspectrum appeared likely to fall over before Monday’s deadline.

In May 2016 Broadspectrum (Australia) Pty Ltd formerly Transfield Services (Australia) Pty Ltd has barely ten months left to run on its $2.189 billion contract with the Australian Government to provide operational, welfare and security services to asylum seekers on Nauru and Manus Island, so it is highly likely that there will be relatively low compensation payable to this multinational corporation flowing from the closure of the both Nauru and Manus Island off-shore detention centres.

Perhaps this is the moment that the federal government can finally begin to rid itself of a corporation plagued by allegations of human rights violations and violence.

Australian Federal Election 2016: is there an ounce of humanity left in Liberal, Nationals and Labor politicians? *WARNING: GRAPHIC IMAGE*

Enough is enough. It’s time cease off-shore detention on Nauru as well as close the centre on Manus Island and face up to our collective responsibilities under international law.

The Sydney Morning Herald, 27 April 2016:

Pregnant asylum seekers detained on Nauru could be exposed to the Zika virus, with the Department of Immigration and Border Protection confirming there had been cases of the mosquito-borne disease on the island nation.

The revelation was made in the department's submission to the Senate inquiry into the treatment of asylum seekers at Australia's regional processing centres on Nauru and Manus Island.

Detainees have been issued with heavy-duty insect repellent in order to fend off the virus, which has been linked to a serious birth defect of the brain called microcephaly.

The Australian government's smartraveller website currently recommends women who are pregnant or trying to get pregnant should consider postponing travel to any area where Zika virus is active.

"If you do decide to travel, talk to your doctor first and strictly follow steps to prevent mosquito bites during your trip," it says.

On Wednesday evening, Australian Medical Association (AMA) vice-president Stephen Parnis said pregnant asylum seekers on Nauru needed to be protected, assessed and "not exposed to any risk". He stopped short of saying whether the woman should be removed from the island.

The admission that Zika is present on Nauru comes in the same week senior doctors, including the AMA, raised grave concerns about the standard of medical care available to asylum seekers held in offshore detention, which they said would not be accepted in Australia.

In its submission, the department said "every precaution" was being taken to stop transferees contracting the Zika virus. 

The Sydney Morning Herald, 27 April 2016:

The source said the man spoke to UNHCR representatives of "the intolerable mental and physical pressure on refugees and particularly on himself, who [is] imprisoned at Nauru."

UNHCR regional representative Thomas Albrecht said his organisation was concerned about the "grave mental state of asylum seekers and refugees" and urgent action was needed to prevent further suffering and address worsening mental health.

The UNHCR had been in Nauru since Sunday conducting a monitoring mission of arrangements for asylum seekers and refugees transferred from Australia.

A refugee advocate who is in close contact with those at Nauru said tensions were high after the Papua New Guinea Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled the Manus Island detention centre was illegal, opening up the prospect that detainees there could be released.

"People are thinking 'what about us'. They are feeling desperate," the advocate said, adding she believed the man had burns to 80 per cent of his body.

The incident follows a Nauruan court decision in February to convict and fine a refugee for attempted suicide in a move authorities said was designed to "stamp out the practice".

Dept. Immigration and Border Protection, media release, 29 April 2016:

A 23-year-old Iranian man who set himself on fire in Nauru has tragically died today from his injuries.

Appropriate support is being provided to his wife and friends.

The man was taken to Republic of Nauru Hospital for medical treatment by the Nauruan authorities. He was then transferred to Australia by air ambulance for medical treatment. The man passed away this afternoon in a Brisbane Hospital.

The Department expresses its sympathies to his wife, family and friends.

The death will be reported to the Queensland Coroner. No further comment will be made at this time.

Facebook:  Doctors4refugees, 29 April 2016

The death of Omid once again exposes the lie that people offshore have the same medical care as those in the Australian community.
We know that the Nauru hospital staff struggled with maintaining an adequate airway and had difficulties accessing an intravenous line. These are quite difficult to do in a severe burns victim and needs a specialised team immediately. Some parts of remote Australia may also not have this expertise but he would have been airlifted out to a tertiary hospital in a matter of hours.
When he got to Brisbane we [sic] was grossly oedematous (swollen) from the loss of vital proteins and had fluid leaking into his lungs, further impairing his breathing. Much of this was clearly compounded by the early lack of adequate oxygenation.
It is not an unusual complication; it’s entirely predictable in a person with this level of burns
This tragic outcome once again demonstrates the complete impracticality of accommodating these highly vulnerable people so far from Australia.

"Omid" set himself alight on 27 April, was airlifted to a Brisbane hospital sometime on 28 April – approximately 22 hours after self-harming. He died on 29 April 2016.

He appears to be the third asylum seeker who has died after setting themselves alight since June 2014 and the eighth offshore detainee who has died since August 2002.

UPDATE

ABC AM, 2 May 2016:

Shocking video and new details have emerged that raise questions about the standard of medical care given to the asylum seeker who set himself on fire on Nauru last week. Omid Masoumali died on Friday in a Brisbane hospital, two days after his injuries. His grieving wife Nana has told doctors on the mainland that while on Nauru, Omid was without a doctor's care for two hours at the medical facility and lay in agony a further eight hours before morphine was administered….

Omid Masoumali's body will be flown back to Iran.
His family have been asked to pay the $17,000 cost.

The Guardian, 3 May 2013

The young Somali woman who set herself alight on Nauru – the second refugee in a week to do so – has been taken to Australia by air ambulance, but her situation remains critical.

Hodan, 21, doused herself and set herself alight inside the OPC1 section of the detention centre on Nauru.

According to reports, she suffered severe burns to most of her body. One person reported “all of her clothes were burned off”.

Manus Island detention Centre declared illegal by PNG Supreme Court in a unanimous judgment

Five judges sitting as the Supreme Court of Justice in Papua New Guinea have unanimously ruled that holding 905 asylum seekers at Manus Island detention centre is unconstitutional and a violation of their human rights.

Excerpts from the full judgment:

The Turnbull Government refuses to consider returning these asyulm seekers to Australian mainland immigration detention centres.

Mr Dutton said refugees at Manus Island could resettle in PNG and those whose claims were rejected should return to their country of origin.

Earlier on Wednesday, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull said the court ruling was "under consideration" and the detention centre was the responsibility of the PNG government, adding "I can't provide a definitive road map from here".

The Australian Lawyers Alliance is of the opinion that this judgment opens the door for the Australian Government to be sued for damages by detainees.

PNG Supreme Court Decision on Manus Island by Stephanie Anderson

UPDATE

ABC News, 27 April 2016:

Papua New Guinea's Prime Minister Peter O'Neill says the Manus Island regional processing centre will be closed following a ruling from the country's Supreme Court….

Mr O'Neill has now released a statement said that his government "will immediately ask the Australian Government to make alternative arrangements for the asylum seekers".

"For those that have been deemed to be legitimate refugees, we invite them to live in Papua New Guinea only if they want to be a part of our society and make a contribution to our community," he said.

"It is clear that several of these refugees do not want to settle in Papua New Guinea and that is their decision."

Mr O'Neill has also stated that the local economy would suffer as a result and the Government would work with the Australian Government to ease the transition.

Then Australian Attorney-General George Brandis in March 2015: "Media organisations are not the target of this law. The targets of this law are criminals and paedophiles and terrorists"*

The Australian federal police have admitted they sought access to a Guardian reporter’s metadata without a warrant in an attempt to hunt down his sources.

It is the first time the AFP has confirmed seeking access to a journalist’s metadata in a particular case.

The admission came to light when the AFP told the privacy commissioner it had sought “subscriber checks” and email records relating to the Guardian Australia journalist Paul Farrell, and the correspondence was sent to Farrell by the office of the Australian information commissioner……

The AFP’s submission said: “You will see that exemptions have been claimed under s47E(d) and s37(2)(b) on some folios. These exemptions primarily relate to e-mail and other subscriber checks relating to Mr Farrell, and examination of meta data associated with some electronic files.”  [The Guardian, 14 April 2016]

At 11.35am AEST on 17 April 2014 The Guardian published journalist Paul Farrell’s article Australian ship went far deeper into Indonesian waters than disclosed with this map:

And this observation:

The redacted version of the classified report, obtained by the Australian Associated Press under freedom of information laws, said: “Entry to Indonesian waters was inadvertent, arising from miscalculation of the maritime boundaries, in that the calculation did not take into account archipelagic baselines.”

Crucially, the report adds: “Territorial seas declared by foreign nations are generally not depicted on Australian hydrographic charts.”

But the digital map from the vessel casts doubt on these findings, and clearly shows the Australian ship crossing the red line that marks the point of Indonesia’s baselines and entering its waters past the headlands near Pelabuhan Ratu bay. Indonesia’s territorial seas are 12 nautical miles further out from where the baselines are marked in red. It is not known whether the digital mapping device was operational at the time the Ocean Protector entered Indonesian waters.

If he wasn’t a blip on the Australian Federal Police radar before the publication date of that article, Paul Farrell was from then on.

However, it is unclear if the initial request to investigate this journalist came from the then Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, Scott Morrison, his department or some other individual or agency.

Although what appears to be Folio 3 of an est. 200 pages in Case No.5610147 seems to suggest that Customs (now called Border Force) may have been the complainant of record by May 2014 and the media finger points to the head of Australian Customs and Border Protection Services, Michael Pezzullo.

On 12 Febraury2016 Farrell stated of this investigation:

The files are made up of operational centre meeting minutes, file notes, interview records and a plan for an investigation the AFP undertook into one of my stories. Most concerning is what appears to be a list of suspects the AFP drew up, along with possible offences they believe they may have committed.

The documents show that during the course of an investigation into my sources for a story I had written, an AFP officer logged more than 800 electronic updates on the investigation file.

Farrell is not the only journalist whose metadata has been accessed in search of sources, but the Australian Federal Police insists that it has not accessed any journalist’s metadata for the last six months – the last time being in 13 October 2015.

Footnote

* See http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/probes-of-journalists-communications-records-rare-police-say-20150317-1m1g9d.html

Australian federal election date must be getting closer - Border Protection has been trotted out to spin indefinite, arbitrary offshore detention of asylum seekers

Given the level of public and parliamentary debate, it would be hard to be completely oblivious to human rights issues surrounding Australia's asylum seeker policies, however Secretary of the Department of Immigration and Border Protection Michael Pezzullo appears to have managed an Olympic-level feat of amnesia, denial and spin.

Dept. of Immigration and Border Protection, news release, 8 March 2016:

Immigration detention and children: separating fact from fiction

A message from Michael Pezzullo - Secretary of the Department of Immigration and Border Protection

08-03-2016

Consistent with the law of the land, and under direction of the government of the day, the Department of Immigration and Border Protection operates a policy of keeping children in detention only as a last resort, and releasing those children that might be in detention as soon as reasonably practicable.

This is a very contentious area of public policy and administration. Sometimes emotions rise and facts gets distorted. For the reputation of my Department and its officers, it is crucial that I set the record straight: the Department and its uniformed operational arm, the Australian Border Force, does not operate beyond the law, nor is it an immoral ‘rogue agency’.

Recent comparisons of immigration detention centres to ‘gulags’; suggestions that detention involves a “public numbing and indifference” similar to that allegedly experienced in Nazi Germany; and persistent suggestions that detention facilities are places of ‘torture’ are highly offensive, unwarranted and plainly wrong – and yet they continue to be made in some quarters.

In the same vein, any contention that prolonged immigration detention represents "reckless indifference and calculated cruelty," in order to deter future boat arrivals, do not pass even the most basic fact check. The number of children in detention would not be falling if that were the case.

The resources devoted to providing medical and support services, and the commitment of doctors, service providers and departmental staff to the welfare of those individuals, undercuts emotive and inflammatory claims to the contrary.

The Department’s operations are underpinned by the law of the land. In this regard, the High Court of Australia has upheld the legal foundations for both ‘turn back’ and ‘take back’ maritime operations (in a case brought down in January 2015) as well as regional processing arrangements (in the case known as M68, brought down in January 2016).

While policy can be debated, there should be no place for falsehood, rumour and unfounded speculation. People smugglers are constantly poised to jump on any relevant mistruth in order to convince prospective asylum seekers to pay them to get to Australia.

That is also why official statements on this issue have to be precise and unambiguous as to the essential objective of government policy. The maritime path to Australia is closed; and people subject to regional processing will not be allowed to settle in Australia.

What is often overlooked in so called commentary on this issue (and even, regrettably, in some media reporting) are the facts. Significant progress has been made over the past year to move children and their families from detention into the community. As I write, there are now 58 children who arrived by boat in held detention, down from a peak of almost 2000 back in 2013.

Much recent commentary has centred on a group of asylum seekers temporarily in Australia for medical treatment. A large number of this group are family members accompanying those in need of treatment. Consistent with policy and law, they will be returned to Nauru or Papua New Guinea at the conclusion of their treatment. The policy of the Government is that these persons will not be allowed to settle in Australia. No child will be returned to a place of harm, and we will exercise appropriate discretion and compassion in making decisions on a case-by-case basis, without fanfare.

Those returning to Nauru will return to a full open centre arrangement for all transferees and settled refugees. All are free to come and go from the accommodation centre 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

Within the Department we have taken significant steps to enhance oversight, advice and scrutiny being applied to the care of those in detention, including children. The Department’s Chief Medical Officer, Dr John Brayley, provides me and the Commissioner of the ABF with impartial professional medical advice on health matters.

We have also increased our engagement with independent oversight bodies including the Minister’s Council on Asylum Seekers and Detention, the Australian Human Rights Commission and the Commonwealth Ombudsman.

Consistent with advice provided to me by the Department’s Chief Medical Officer, all transferees and refugees in Nauru and Papua New Guinea receive appropriate mental health care. The Department’s service provider’s support these Governments to provide health services, including mental health care, broadly commensurate with Australian community standards.

Recognition of an individual's mental health needs is particularly pertinent because many individuals in detention arrive with pre-existing mental health issues and may have experienced traumatic events in their country of origin or on their attempted journey to Australia.

For this reason the Department and its service providers support individuals with a range of specialist care options including mental health assessments and individualised care plans. The Department provides access to mental health nurses, counsellors, psychologists and psychiatrists to individuals transferred to Australia for medical care. 

The Nauru and Manus RPCs both have mental health care staff onsite, including mental health nurses, counsellors, torture and trauma counsellors, psychologists and a psychiatrist. There are also additional mental health care staff based at the Nauru Settlement clinic.

Since December 2014 significant improvements have also been made to infrastructure, education and health and welfare services in Nauru.

Around $37 million has been spent upgrading medical facilities in Nauru, which has a population of about 10,000 people. This includes, at the Republic of Nauru Hospital, a new surgical inpatient ward and medical building as well as the installation of a CT scanner which is also available to transferees, refugees and local Nauruans.

This is supplemented by improved neonatal and obstetric services and the establishment of visiting specialist consultation and surgical services to transferees.

The Australian government has also provided additional settlement accommodation in hard-walled buildings, expanded the Nauru Primary School, built a new Community Resource Centre and upgraded the island’s water supply. To support education, we have provided expatriate professional development and teacher support services (a total of 11 teachers) in Nauru schools and five school counsellors.

I must also address ongoing and consistent claims that those expressing opinions on immigration detention are “risking jail by speaking out”. While often repeated, this claim is also wrong and unsupported by any facts.

The secrecy and disclosure provisions in Part 6 of the Australian Border Force (ABF) Act are not unique. These types of provisions are similar to those which apply to partner agencies and a wide range of other Commonwealth agencies with responsibilities for the management of confidential or protected information. They do not prevent, for example, medical professionals from seeking the best clinical outcomes for their patients.

In the midst of this debate, the Department will continue to focus on the fair, dignified and humane treatment of people in our care. We make decisions compassionately, consistent with Australian law. We will continue to reduce the number of children in detention as soon as practicable, within the law, as we have done in recent years.

Ultimately, the Department shares the same goal as its critics – to have no children at all in immigration detention, consistent with the law of the land.

Now I have to confess that I did not immediately spot the errant "allegedly" in this section of the Border Farce news release - suggestions that detention involves a “public numbing and indifference” similar to that allegedly experienced in Nazi Germany,  but I did enjoy the fallout which resulted in this statement later that same day: 

Statement on Department's opinion piece

08-03-2016

In response to recent media reporting and claims on social media relating to an opinion piece published by the Department regarding children and conditions in immigration detention:

Any insinuation the Department denies the atrocities committed in Nazi Germany are both ridiculous and baseless.

This has been wilfully taken out of context and reflects deliberate attempts to distort this opinion editorial to create controversy.

The term ‘allegedly’ was used to counter claims of 'public numbing and indifference' towards state abuses in Nazi Germany and the link to immigration detention in Australia. We reject the comparison to immigration detention as offensive and question this being made as a blanket statement - an allegation hence 'allegedly' - to describe the attitude of the German population at large during that terrible time.

Brief Background

The Sydney Morning Herald, 1 September 2015:

Australian Human Rights Commission president Gillian Triggs has slammed as "extremely troubling" that the firm running offshore detention centres will likely have its contract renewed even though a Senate report revealed systemic abuse and human suffering under its watch.

Professor Triggs, a distinguished and respected lawyer, said the Department of Immigration and Border Protection's decision to name Transfield Services as its preferred tenderer to continue running the camps at Nauru and Manus Island, on a contract worth a speculated $2.7 billion, reflects the secrecy and lack of transparency pervading detention centres.

We are deeply concerned, it's extremely troubling," she told ABC radio, adding Transfield Services, who has been paid billion of dollars to run the camps, had been forced to dismiss scores of staff members for poor conduct.

She said the decision should be examined by "an objective independent reviewer".

"The idea that [Transfield Services] should be granted another five-year contract in these circumstances is something that clearly needs to be reconsidered in light of the findings of the select committee."

That committee, which delivered its report into Nauru on Monday, found conditions were "not adequate, appropriate or safe" for asylum seekers.

It concluded the Nauru centre is badly run and despite the Australian government spending billions of dollars on the camp, its knowledge of what goes on inside is inadequate......

Australian Psychiatry, February 2016 issue, Abstract: