political games and teeth

I thought twice about eating tonight for two reasons.

1. I had my teeth cleaned at the dentist this afternoon. Within 30 seconds of my consultation, my dentist Joe commented on the chip I have on one of my front teeth AND managed to provide me with the suite of options available to fix it. I declined each option (there is a story behind every bodily imperfection including one’s teeth)…but my teeth have never felt so clean!

2. I felt sick at the thought that the coalition has a chance of winning the election this weekend. By Sunday 22 August, if Tony Abbott is our PM, he will have taken steps to ‘stop the boats.’ In the world of government policy this will mean that Abbott will have contacted the government of Nauru about their involvement in the processing of offshore asylum seekers heading for Australia. He will also reintroduce temporary protection visas. Both are draconian policies that should remain buried forever as a dark period of Australia’s history. As was the case when these policies were first introduced, their re-introduction will be unsuccessful in deterring asylum seekers to Australia.

Are you passionate or ambitious?

Dunno the answer to the question! I was travelling on a local bus in Tamil Nadu, India’s southern-most state and was chatting with Madravan, our Indian translator and chaperone. A deep thinker who has studied hospitality, Ghandian philosophy and a few interesting things, we had been chatting about a place in India called Varanasi – a place where life and death come together. Apparently people go there to find themselves…and often love it so much there that they burn their passport, leaving them no choice but to remain there.  Others go there to die…according to Madravan, it is not unusual to see floating bodies. What a place. I was so interested to know more about this place that I flirted very briefly with the possibility of rescheduling my flights just to drop in. Unfortunately that did not come to fruition but this discussion about this crazy place did lead to another conversation about people who are passionate and people who are ambitious.

Are ambitious people necessarily passionate, living lives of authenticity and integrity? Not necessarily. There are plenty of world or national leaders who are clearly ambitious about achieving certain things but who would not be considered overly passionate individuals.  Likewise, can you be passionate and aspire to do great things without being necessarily ambitious? Ideally, passionate people cannot achieve their vision if they are not ambitious enough. Would love to explore the potential tension and relationship between these 2 words but really don’t have the ambition to do so right now – my passion for making chocolate muffins (package mix style, only require me to add milk, an egg and oil!) is taking over!

final thought – What about people who are both passionate and ambitious? Impossible combination? Possibly, but a necessary one.  

Another reason why India is so fascinating – it leads me to think about some interesting thoughts with very few conclusions. Ha. Story of my life!

Fair trade and rainforest alliance certification schemes – more than just an alternative business model?

Lately it has occurred to me how many strangers’ living rooms I may be framed in around the world. This has little to do with the fact that I have an international network of friends who love to frame pictures of me and more to do with my habit of being part of the background of internationally renowned tourist attractions when they are being photographed with a tourist visitor. I suspect my back, side profile, arms and legs have featured most prominently – I guess I will never know!

This realization came to me during a recent trip to India and Cambodia where there seemed to be an increased number of camera clicks and flashes in my direction that were not aimed at me. Ha! Apart from avoiding camera flashes that were not directed towards me in the first instance, the 3 week adventure proved character building and energising and served as a reminder of how my purchasing choices do impact those in the developing world. It was great to explore Southern India, not just because my previous trip to India had only been to the Northern part of the country but because of the opportunity to join University of Melbourne’s researchers, Kate and Sam on their project that was partly aimed to investigate the effectiveness of fair trade, rainforest alliance and other certification systems on protecting the human rights of workers on tea plantations of Southern India. For 2 weeks in July, we visited and interviewed workers on tea plantations, questioned management about the welfare and human rights protections of the tea workers, met with trade unions, NGOs, auditors that check farm’s compliance with a range of certification schemes, among with many other people. I had never really considered how national laws such as India’s Plantation Labour Act and associated labour ministeries and inspectors worked alongside certification systems – was it a complementary relationship, each filling the gaps left by the other? How familiar were the labour authorities of fair trade and rainforest alliance certification schemes? Turned out, not very familiar at all! (I was so shocked about meeting with the Labour Commissioner – I couldn’t believe he knew nothing about these schemes. I shouldn’t have been surprised though – as I later understood, the state government thinks they are doing enough to support the workers…) It was particularly interesting to compare the treatment and experience of workers on certified fair trade and rainforest alliance plantations and to understand management’s motivations for adopting certification of India’s (and the world’s) most important commodity.

The question I always looked forward to hearing a response to when meeting with management of tea estates was ‘what motivates you to adopt certification schemes?’ Initially I was shocked by the response of management – wasn’t the ONLY reason they were embracing fair trade and rainforest alliance certification schemes for the purpose of ensure the human and labour rights of workers on their plantations are protected? Partly, sure – they know that the success of their business is reliant on the looking after their workers – their labour source. ‘Our buyers are asking for it – Unilever and Tata say that their consumers are demanding it. If we don’t response accordingly, we will find ourselves outside the market. ‘IT’s funny because I really should not have been so surprised by this response – I had, after all, always explained fair trade to others as an alternative business model – a model whereby the management of tea estates is committed to improving the livelihood of workers – ie. Through fair trade, the management receives a ‘premium’ – an increased amount of money which allows them to develop community development projects within the tea estate through consultation with workers on the estate. Don’t get me wrong – the management of some estates were very open about their commitment to supporting the lives of workers, emphasising its importance as part of their business model. And I was left thinking – does the motivation of management matter that much? – what really matters is that the management is responding to the needs of buyers who are in turn responding to the expectations of everyday consumers who want to know their dollar is having a positive influence.

Meeting with Sheka and Dilip from Just Change was particularly interesting –Just Change India is an international network of community groups and individuals all over the world committed to creating a new and alternative trading system so that disadvantaged communities can gain greater control over their lives. As Sheka and Dilip explained to me, Just Change abandoned what would have been a traditional NGO approach to market development – where the producers are seen as poor and the consumers are rich and can pay the highest possible price. Such a system works, but the market segment is different from the communities that the NGO are supposed to be working with. As their website states, Just Change started looking for innovative ways at inter-marketing between poor and marginalised people who are in fact both producers and consumers. And rather than look at each segment as sets of individual consumers or producers, they viewed them as a community, and the exchange as a trading from one community to another, as a means to enhance livelihood. Dilip talked about the fact that the tea market is controlled by Tata and Unilever – fair trade and rainforest alliance certification schemes will not change this fact. The certification schemes are simply an alternative way of doing business that ensures that companies such as Unilever and Tata continue to profit. While acknowledging that such certification schemes are a great first step, he emphasised that they are not enough. Eg. The community group in which he works with in Southern India, the adivasis community is able to pluck 4000kg of tea leaf in one day but based on current demand, only 200kg would be able to be sold as fair trade – not enough to make an impact. Whilst the premium granted through fair trade certification is obviously a great thing, if the price of the tea drops, it is the workers that suffer – a cup of tea may be an extra 10p in the UK, only one-tenth of that contributes to the community where the tea is sourced from. What I also found interesting was their view that fair trade is no longer a ‘movement’ – now it is just a business model that companies are embracing not because they feel they have a responsibility to be driven by factors other than profit, but because they know they will left out of the market if they do not embrace it. In summary, the moral compass of businesses embracing fair trade and rainforest alliance certification schemes needs to change for it to be truly effective long term.

Ah – travelling is always food for the soul – in this instance, it was also food for the brain. It has certainly made me re-think what the idea of ‘fair trade’ really means – and that it has to be something that does more than make western consumers feel good about what they eat, drink and wear in terms of its impact on those in the developing world.

Living a life of solidarity

What does it mean to live a life of solidarity? This has been something I have been exploring recently ever since a particular incident on the train. At about 8am on a Wednesday morning, a guy dressed in a suit stepped onto the packed train I was on. Struggling to find a comfortable standing position, he decided to yell at a young guy who was not dressed in a suit to ‘move down the aisle’ in order to better accommodate inner city passengers such as himself. The younger guy not in a suit calmly explained that he could not move down the aisle because there was a suitcase in the way. The guy in the suit was not interested in his response. He continued – ‘move down the aisle,’ the fellow passengers on the train heard him say again. When the young man ignored his orders due to his physical inability to respond to his demands, the man in the suit decided to take things into his own hands. Pushing through his fellow passengers to what he still believed was available space in the aisle, he made his way to stand next to the young guy . When he finally stood in this space, he found himself standing awkwardly in between a suitcase and the death-stares of frustrated commuters. But what shocked me more was that no one said anything about how unacceptable the man in the suit’s behaviour was. How was it right that he could treat people like this was a busy peak hour train and humiliate a fellow commuter? I was angry with myself for not saying anything straight away – my mouth was open in disbelief but I was struggling to collect my thoughts. I found myself turning to the young guy – Are you alright?’ I asked. ‘Do you want to have my seat?’ I did not want to waste my words on someone who could treat people like that so I chose to glare at him instead – my glare was equivalent to a 1000 words.

I do not think my actions were particularly helpful or brimming with solidarity either but I do know that my attempt to check-in with the younger guy, the victim of the suited guy’s lack of solidarity, was a public acknowledgement of my commitment to living a life of solidarity. That is, a life whereby one is aware of the impact that their actions and consumption, and way of life can affect other people and the environment. Thankfully, positives can always be drawn from bad experiences. This incident only made me feel more determined to live a life of solidarity and spot ‘moments of solidarity’ in my own life. I have witnessed the existence of solidarity in the following moments:

 • A letter to the editor from someone who was excited to have bought her third ‘i gadget.’ Admitting in her letter that she loves her ipod, iphone and her newly purchased ipad, she shared in her piece the reality behind the real cost of the ipad – the fact that multiple Foxconn factory workers in southern China have committed suicide as a result of their working conditions. Apple claim on their website that they deeply committed to ensuring conditions are safe and dignified for their workers. She writes ‘I can wait indefinitely to buy the new iPad if it means preventing one more suicide.’

• Finding a break in the rain on Sunday afternoon, I decided to make the post of the opportunity by going for a quick run. After running for about 30 minutes, I found myself overtaking a guy who had been running ahead of me for a while. I was torn – would encouraging him to keep going and a reminder that he is ‘doing a good job’ be the right thing to do or would my comment be perceived as slightly condensing? I chose the former, ‘keep up the great work – you are doing a great job,’ I shouted out encouragingly. He did not respond (does a runner’s grunt and pant count?!)

• A teleconference with 6 of the people I went to India with 6 years ago. One of my ‘India sistas’ (ie. One of my travelling buddies from my trip with World Vision) was getting married the next day so last minute we organised a teleconference to wish Jen luck for her wedding and her move to India’s Bangalore. I was even more excited by the fact that I will be seeing Jen in India in only 3 weeks as I will be based in Bangalore for my research into the tea sector!

Moments of solidarity yet to come:

• Rally for Refugees to kick off Refugee Week on Sunday 20 June.

• The launch and consultation of the Australian Corporate Accountability Network (ACAN) later this week.

What tools does one need to live a life of solidarity? Having a voice and being willing to use it when the opportunity arises? Using our eyes and our sense of perception so as to know when best to intervene?

We are all so busy looking at and using our i phones, listening to music on our i-pod and reading documents on our i-pad that we have forgotten to use our own voice AND the two ‘i s’ we had to begin with – the eyes we use to see! This is especially so when we realise that most of us are blind to the real impact of our use of such technology on workers’ labour and human rights and the environment. This ignorance is relevant to a whole variety of products we use and the fact we continue to use and consume them begs the question – where is our sense of solidarity?

What it means to have a voice is another thing I have been exploring a lot lately. It started with a date I had with a guy I had met the week before who explained to me that as someone who worked as a lawyer, he did not have a voice. Whilst he is more than a mere mouthpiece of his clients, he explained to me, his role as a lawyer is to essentially to do as instructed by his client.

But does my date’s supposed lack of voice at work necessarily translate to an inability to speak out on things that matter outside work? Or because he does not need to use his ‘personal voice’ for the purposes of work, his personal voice has no role to play in any forum outside work? Perhaps there is idea that because you have voted you have effectively done enough – no matter what happens you can always comfort yourself with the fact that you used your voice when it was expected – at an election. Failure to speak out, an insistence on silence is therefore justified because no other legitimate opportunity to speak out has presented itself.

The reality is that there are multiple opportunities we have to use our voice, especially if we are Australian citizens. In my experience of advocacy and campaigns in an international development context (namely, at World Vision), effective advocacy involves meeting regularly with your local MP to gain their support. Advocacy and influencing at a domestic NGO is somewhat different. Whilst meeting with politicians is also encouraged, input into consultations and government enquiries is another way everyday people can have their voice heard.

Nurturing and encouraging a society that champions solidarity does not seem to be a high priority on the Australian Government’s or the Opposition’s priority list as we head into an election. Whilst we have elected politicians to be our voice in parliament, there is little evidence to suggest that they are using their voice legitimately to respond to issues many of their constituents are concerned about such as tackling climate change and respecting the human rights of refugees and asylum seekers.

The lack of difference between the two major parties on a whole of policy issues, namely climate change and refugees and asylum seekers means a significant swing to the Greens at the next election is inevitable. The seat of Melbourne is the Greens’ best seat – although they still need a swing of 4.7%. I know who I will be voting for this election – the party that correctly represents my voice in parliament and champions policies that demonstrate solidarity.

Who’s the leader anyway?

The word ‘leader’ has always struck me as an unusual word, especially in a sentence involving (some) Australian politicians and (some) corporate leaders. Whilst I would not necessarily define myself as one of those ‘anti-government, anti-corporation, tree-hugging types’, I have become increasingly frustrated with both sectors mainly due to their narrow minded understanding of their responsibility to protect human rights. Australian corporations, in many ways, are responding to the pressure of everyday punters who are increasingly demanding that profits do not have to be at the expense of ethical principles and human rights. Australian politicians, on the other-hand, are not attune to such demands or if they are, choose not to respond. As it is fair-trade fortnight, it is exciting to reflect on the changes in Australia’s corporate culture – Cadbury’s move to stock fair trade diary milk chocolate is a great example of the impact that consumer pressure can in influencing corporate change. Unfortunately I am not as excited when I reflect on the current story played out in Australia’s political sphere -  in the past month, the Australian Government has announced that:

-          it will be suspending the processing of claims Afghani and Sri Lankan asylum seekers and that it will be re-opening Curtin (and possibly Baxter) detention centre (justifying its decision to do so on the full capacity of Christmas Island’s detention centre;

-          it will reject the recommendations of the Brennan Inquiry into a national human rights act to implement legislation to protect human rights in Australia, thus ignoring the clear will of the Australian people (what a disappointment, especially given the important role that the Victorian Charter of Rights and Responsibilities has played in protecting human rights since its enactment, whereby all new laws are checked at the planning and policy stage to check they are compatible with the charter);

-          ‘the wearing of the burqa’ in Australia is confronting…WTF?? Tony Abbott, one of our so-called leaders who made this comment is more confronting than wearing a burqa could ever be…comments like this kill any dreams of the Australian Government actively promoting multiculturalism within its policies in the near future especially so as we are in an election year.

-          The Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) will not begin until 2012 or 2013.

The politics of fear seems to be driving force behind such policies. If I didn’t know any better, I would think that an election year in Australia and the protection of human rights cannot co-exist. Does going hard on so-called illegal immigrant win elections?

I have thought long and hard about how effective one can be as politician in advocating for change. Whilst there are exceptions, I would argue that as far as politics is concerned, the expectation that local members vote along party lines and are frequently forced to compromise their own beliefs and values for the sake of remaining in power is indicative of the fact that you can have more influence on the outside. Comments made by local member ‘ie. How will me doing this help me to win the election?’ are certainly a reminder of the reality of the political game.

The corporate space is less clear – what do you do to change the status quo in the business world so that business profit is not at the expense of the protection of human rights? Do you work against the corporate world, advocating loudly for what is right? Do you work within the system, alongside these sectors, acting as an industry change agent?  Change agents operating within a corporate can no doubt be champions for ethical supply chains and sustainable business practices, provided that their approach is more than just marketing strategy designed to keep individual and organisational watch-dogs for corporate responsibility and accountability quiet.

The Australian Corporate Accountability Network (ACAN) is having its launch and consultation in a few weeks time and we will be discussing this very question as we discuss Australia’s vision for greater corporate accountability in business practices in Australia.

Lost Boys of Sudan

Ball, a Sudanese refugee in his late twenties is one of the regular visitors to my workplace at the Brotherhood of St Laurence. My position at work, geographically speaking, is adjacent to the door which means that I am frequently the first to welcome and the last to say good-bye to visitors such as Ball. This is significant because I am often the first one privy to good news (lucky I am not interested in working as a security guard at a night club!) such as Ball’s news on Thursday–that he had a job working as a teller at the ANZ bank!! He told me that during his interview, he’d been asked why he wanted to work at a bank. His response, as he articulated to his interviewers, was brilliant – ‘Where I come from, we keep money under our mattresses. We do not have banks like you do here. I want to understand how Australia’s banking system operates so that I can explain it to my community living in Australia. ’ Ball explained to me that he was worried that he had been too honest in his interview…perhaps he should have pretended that he wanted to work at a bank because he liked money?! It pays to tell the truth, as Ball discovered. In fact, during this conversation he said to me ‘Alana, sometimes someone’s weakness is another’s strength…the bank want to hire me because I can speak English, Dinka (Sudanese national language) and Arabic. I will be working in one of their branches in the Northern suburbs where many people from my community struggle with English and need to use a bank.’

Ball is in his final semester of his university studies. He is writing a book about his life in collaboration with other Sudanese boys who have fled their lives in war-torn Sudan and arrived in Australia as refugees. Ball is one of the Lost Boys of Sudan, that is, one of the many young people who were separated from their families, friends, and relatives. (Despite the name, they do have female members within the organisation ). The majority of the Lost Boys have lived for several years in refugee camps in Kenya, Uganda, Ethiopia, and Egypt. Those who have recently arrived in Australia such as Ball are seeking a good education and/or livelihood to establish a new life.

Are you anti-migration or pro the immigration and asylum seekers policies of Tony Abbott and Kevin Rudd? Then you need to meet Ball and the millions of other migrants to Australia who have contributed to the multicultural Australia I love.

Are ethics fashionable? Are we suffering from Affluenza?

A survey recently reported on in The Age earlier this week discussed the fact that the majority Gen Y never see themselves as owning a house – instead, most of them envision and expect to rent for the best part of their lives. During the last few months, an internal battler has been waging in my mind – to rent or to buy? Whilst I am not about to delve into the pros and cons of either (I’ll leave that to those who can claim to be experts on the property industry!), it does make me think about the sort of things we value. Is success in life measured by what you tangibly own? Has one achieved less in life because of their failure to own a house and because they have wasted 20-30% of their income on rent? Warning to those that are naive to the world of banks – never let a bank teller convince you that you are almost (almost, but ‘not quite’ being the key word! )in a position to put a deposit on a house – like those at work at McDonald’s, they are expected to upsell!

Some of these thoughts – about materialism, measuring success in life, etc are the essence of one of my favourite books, Affluenza – how to be successful and stay sane. The book talks about the phenomenon that is sweeping across the western world: the fact that we are getting richer and richer and simultaneously less and less happy. Oliver James, the author visited people all over the world in order to investigate the extent to which different nations were affected by the affluenza virus  – the placing of a high value on money, possessions, appearances (physical and social) and fame. Psychologists squabble over what our needs are – we need to feel secure, emotionally and materially; we need to feel part of a community, to give and receive from family, neighbours and friends; we need to feel competent, that we are not useless and are effective in our chosen tasks; and that we need to feel autonomous and authentic , masters of our own destinies. BLAH BLAH – so much, all for one person! As the blurb of the book states, he leads us to an unavoidable and potential life changing conclusion: that to ensure our mental health we can and must pursue our needs rather than our wants.

I am the first to admit that I like to wear nice clothes and feel good but I can’t say I enjoy shopping. I am always concerned about where the clothing is made, how much energy was required to produce the garment I am about to purchase and whether the person behind the labour received a fair price for their labour. Instead, recycling clothes, buying things from op-shops and coming up with new creations by mixing and matching existing clothing. Despite this, I do love a good excuse to buy something new from my favourite store on Brunswick St called Clear It, a mixture of old season stock from Revival and Alannah Hill so when I found out I had a new job, I knew that this was the perfect opportunity to buy some new items. I was so excited during my hour in the store that I failed to check price tags whilst there. It was not until I came home that I realised that half of my items were made in China, the other half in Australia. I was told years ago by a labour activist friend that clothing made in Australia from Alannah Hill is fair wear, a similar certification system to fair trade (although there is nothing on their website to this effect). It was the purchases from China that concerned me the most so in my guilt, I emailed them right away:

Dear Annabel,

I hope this email finds you well. My name is Alana Smith and I spent a few hours at Clear-it in Brunswick St yesterday where I purchased a number of Alannah Hill products. I love the clothing and particularly enjoy buying it when it is discounted! The staff at the store were also particularly helpful.

Last year, someone mentioned to me that Alannah Hill’s clothing was ‘ethical’ – ie. the clothing was made in Australia and therefore those that made the clothing were guaranteed to be paid a fair price for their labour. I took their word for it and it was only today that I looked at the labels on my purchases more carefully. Most of the labels say ‘designed in Australia’ but ‘made in China.’  Can the company Alannah Hill guarantee that those who make the items sold in Australia are paid a fair price for their labour? The clothes are obviously expensive, even when they are discounted and I was curious to know whether this meant that those in the garment industry making this clothing were therefore paid properly.

I like to be informed about the products I purchase and would appreciate any information you could provide for me in this respect.

I look forward to hearing from you. Alana Smith

The response I received:

Many thanks for the email – I understand your concerns, however I would like to reasure you that Alannah Hill clothing is very ethical in its production and development.

A selection of garments are made overseas, as we have offices in Hong Kong also – where we develop some items – However a large amount of clothing is produced locally – we have a wonderful relationship with our local suppliers who have been either in the Alannah Hill company or working closely with us for many years, and I can assure you they are well compensated and treated very well.

Thanks again for your interest, we really appreciate your custom.

Many thanks

Annabel

I thanked Annabel for her response but I was left wondering whether I needed to do more investigative work myself to be guaranteed of the labour standards of the workers behind one of my favourite brands. I was again reminded of this when I attended an ethical clothing and sustainable fashion event during fashion week. Organised by Ethical Clothing Australia (Formerly The ‘No Sweat Shop’ label  and Homeworkers Code of Practice) , the event was themed on the question of whether ‘Ethics are simply fashionable…or can fashion ever truly be ethical?’

Thoughts? Ethics in fashion, business and industry are gradually becoming as important as the quality and durability of a garment or some other product– and with the right campaigning and pressure from fashion-enthusiasts, there is no reason why fashion cannot be ethical and have at its foundation, respect for human and labour rights.

No coincidences in an election year

The last 2 weeks has been a nasty trip down memory lane. I’ve been reminded of some of the political realities associated with an election year – the way politicians succumb to doing anything they can to stay in power. I’m referring to the changes made in respect of asylum seekers journeying to Australia. It is certainly no coincidence that in an election year, the Government has become increasingly tougher on border protection, introducing new processing times for certain asylum seekers and literally re-opening some of the nightmares of the past – the Curtin Detention Centre.

Three or so years ago, we had a very different story. As I have written before, the Rudd Government appeared committed to improving the plight and experience of refugees coming to Australia. Since its election, the Rudd government had – until last week – distanced itself from the refugee policies of the Howard government and emphasised its new, more humane approach to refugee protection.

I’m writing to Jason Wood, my local MP this afternoon to get his views on this. He is currently a member of the Opposition and is committed to border protection. Why do border protection, detaining of refugees unnecessarily and deliberate delays in the processing of asylum seekers from Afghanistan and Sri Lanka have to go hand in hand?

This article sums things up well –

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/refugee-obligations-violated-20100412-s40l.html?comments=51

Finding love…and a new job

The first few weeks in a new job are full of conversations, organisational charts and introductions to both people and projects. I say this because as I begin my third week at the Brotherhood of St Laurence, a domestic charity based in Melbourne.  My role is to focus on strategy development and policy in the Brotherhood’s Ecumenical Migration Centre (EMC) which basically means developing programs and initiatives to assist refugees upon their settlement in Australia.

All you need is love. While that one liner is yet to make it into the organisation’s strategy document, it does seem to encapsulate the importance of one connecting with their community

One of my most entertaining conversations so far at my new job had nothing to do with refugees, multiculturalism or settlement issues and had everything to do with finding love. It was Day 8 of the ‘new job’ and I was almost at a stage where I could articulate in a few sentences what the day-to-day of my job looked like to friends and family who kept asking me how the ‘new job’ was when I met George. Do not worry – this is not about to become a story about how I met my future husband or the man of my dreams. George is not the current apple of my eye but an 80 year old member of the Coolibah Club, a day group the Brotherhood runs for elderly people in Fitzroy so that they can receive a free breakfast and lunch and connect with other elderly members of the community. I bumped into George as I hurried to my next meeting and once the niceties associated with introductions were complete, he asked if I had a great-grandma he could go out with, someone who could be his companion as he got older. Although I did not wish to disappoint St George about the lack of great-grandmas in my life, I had to be truthful – my remaining great-grandparent died about ten years ago and I told him so. The fact that I had provided George with a response to his request seem to inspire him to inquire about other possible family members but his persistence wmet with the same response. He was not phased and instead asked whether I had any grandmas he could go out with. He was one persistent man. 

George’s comments about ‘finding someone to love’ triggered further conversations. I was encouraged and inspired to seek out how my colleagues met their loved ones, loving the way their faces lit up as they described the way they felt the moment they first met. More importantly, my conversation with George reminded me of the importance of feeling connected to the community, the need we all have to be loved and desired. As my conversations with my new work colleagues have continued (and my inquisitiveness and interest about how they met their partners has subsided!), my attention and energy has turned to importance of connecting newly arrived refugees in Australia to the community so that their settlement experience in Australia is a positive one. I am constantly reminded of the amazing contribution that migrants have made to Australia – the Australia we know today would be a very different place without their influence (it would be full of people with my background – that of a convict!). In this light, it is disappointing and frustrating that the Government fails to use the word ‘multiculturalism’ in any of its policies on social inclusion – its failure to include this implies a lack of thought and concern for refugees and migrants to Australia generally.

I am often reminded of a poster that was stuck on a wall adjacent to my desk during my internship at the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in Geneva. It said ‘A refugee would like to have your problems.’ It certainly puts things into perspective.

Some new beginnings, along with a return to the past

The word ‘change’ generally has positive connotations, provided that such change does not involve a return to something that was negative. Starting a new job, meeting a new friend or lover or going on an adventurous trip overseas are all positive example of change that leave you feeling refreshed, revitalised and ready to take on the world! Then there is the type of change that involves a return to the past, a past that was negative, possibly at odds with your personal values or efforts made and that may have kept you lying awake at night, unable to sleep. I can note horrendous dating experiences, embarrassing moments and my fetish for tie-dyed clothing as personal examples.

I experienced another blast from the past that has left me confused and frustrated today. I was shocked to discover recently that the Opposition have suggested a return to the Pacific Solution as the only way to send a ‘strong message’ to people who get here illegally that they ‘can’t expect to stay in Australia.’ He said the message would solve the problem of overcrowding on Christmas Island. PLEASE!!!! These people are not ‘illegal’ – many, if not most, are found to be genuine refugees and therefore have a right to seek asylum in Australia as Australia is a signatory to the Refugee Convention. A return to the Pacific Solution is unnecessary, because it proceeds from the bizarre assumption that, if Christmas Island is full, we cannot accommodate any more asylum seekers while they are processed. But as Julian Burnside states, that conclusion is absurd: ‘we have on-shore detention centres capable of holding many thousands of asylum seekers. The Coalition should know: they built some of them and used all of them when in government. It would be a simple matter to bring surplus asylum seekers to the mainland detention centres if detention is needed.’

http://www.nationaltimes.com.au/opinion/politics/pacific-solution-revival-is-unchristian-mr-abbott-20100208-nmtg.html

I must admit that it took me a long time to get my head around Australia’s immigration policy of the Howard era. While I know that this has something to do with the fact that attention to policy detail is not my forte, I also suspect that this is more related to the fact that the policies were so inhumane and devoid of consideration for human rights that I struggled to comprehend how they could be justified and developed in the first place. The Rudd Government brought about significant change in respect of refugee policy such as through the abolition of temporary protection visas and the ending of the Pacific Solution. Indefinite detention has been replaced with detention only for the time needed for health and security checks. Detention of children is now treated as a measure of last resort. These changes were long overdue and very much welcomed when they came into force. A return to the past, as advocated by the Opposition, would be outrageous.

There is some positive change I can reflect on. This new beginning may even influence the Opposition’s abhorrent policy towards refugees. I begin work at the Brotherhood of St Laurence’s Ecumenical Migration Centre in the next few weeks as a Strategy Development Officer (fancy name!!) – a big change as I have been with World Vision for the past six years. Migration and refugee policy is a topical and often controversial area of debate in Australia (did you hear about the Government’s changes to the skilled worker scheme announced on Sunday?)  and having the opportunity to work in a centre that has been at the forefront of the migrant rights movement in Australia (that is what the website says!) is something I am particularly interested in. In working towards the Brotherhood’s vision of an Australian free to poverty, the EMC advocates for social inclusion and employment participation;  whole of community intervention, supporting collaboration between government, community and corporate sectors; community capacity building, among other things.