Today's post is by Dhanya Herath
The
Issue
Refugee, noun:
a person who has been forced to leave their country to
escape war, persecution, or natural disaster.
Asylum seeker, noun:
someone who leaves their own country, often for
political reasons or because of war, and who travels to another country hoping
that the government will protect them and allow them to live there.
In any discussion about refugees, it pays to make a
clear distinction between refugees and immigrants. A key difference is motivation: immigrants are driven by their own
desire to move countries; refugees are forced to relocate.
If we look at the number of displaced people in
general, the number of people forced from their homes is at the highest level
on record, at 65.6 million people around the world. That's equivalent to more
than two times the population of Australia being forced out of their homes. Add
three times the population of NZ, and we get close to the actual figure and
scale of the displacement.
22.5 million of these displaced
people fit under the definition of refugees, of whom over half are under 18
years old. 10 million are stateless people, who have been denied a nationality
and access to basic human rights. The grey sliver in the pie chart below represents
the 189,300 refugees resettled out of the 65.6 million people displaced from
their homes in 2016.
Current
Policy
Under the National Party, New Zealand currently
accepts 750 refugees per year with an additional 300 places available for
family reunification. Our current quota of 750 refugees was established in 1987
- and hasn't changed since, joining perms, mullets, and jazzercise in the list
of 'Things We Really Could Have Left Behind In The 80's.'
There’s a bit more to this policy, however. As a
country, we receive refugees from four different regions: Asia Pacific, Africa,
the Middle East and the Americas. Before the National Government came into
power in 2009, the split of refugees that we took from Asia Pacific, Africa,
and the Middle East was roughly equal. In
2009, we had a change of policy which essentially shifted our focus to the Asia
Pacific region, citing “broad security concerns” as the reason. The end
result of these policy changes has meant that refugees from Africa and the
Middle East can only enter NZ if they already have family here - an effective
ban on any new refugees from that region, and one reflected in the numbers: the
average number of people from African countries has dropped down to 5% of our
intake over the
last five years.
This point may seem like nit-picking - does it matter
where a refugee is allowed to enter from?
It’s still a life saved, right? Well, perhaps. It does pay to note, however,
that the United Nations have recommended that the refugee quota should be
focused on resettling the most vulnerable, and have explicitly stated that the
most vulnerable people are from the African and Middle Eastern regions –
precisely the regions which the 2009 policy changes leave out.
Party
Policies
As elections loom ever closer, the parties have
brought out a range of policies on refugees and asylum seekers, broadly
summarised below.
If your first reaction on seeing this flowchart is to
lament that we ever opened our borders, then NZ First is the party for you. NZ
First has not expressed support for increasing the refugee quota and has not
announced any policies regarding refugees or asylum seekers, which may be a
statement in itself.
The National Party is for those who favour raising but
not doubling the quota, with their policy to raise the quota to 1000 places in
2018. They are also
planning to select a further
refugee settlement location and pilot a new community sponsorship category, the
details of which have not yet been released.
The parties which do favour doubling the quota differ
mainly on the extent and speed of the increase. In the camp of parties which
want to double the quota but not right away, we have Labour with a one-liner of
a policy: over the next three years, they will increase
the quota to double its current value.
The Green Party, United Future, and TOP all favour an
immediate doubling of the refugee quota to 2000 places, and support the idea of
a community sponsorship scheme for refugees. Having doubled the refugee quota,
the Green Party would progressively increase it to 4000 people per year in
2023. In addition, they would begin a community sponsorship scheme which would
take in 1000 additional refugees per year and introduce a new humanitarian visa
for people displaced by climate change in the Pacific, for a
total of 5000 refugees per year.
TOP plans to begin their community sponsorship
scheme with 300 of the 2000 quota refugees proposed. While TOP and the United Future
Party haven’t explicitly stated a goal of increasing the refugee quota beyond
doubling it, both parties have stated that they would dynamically shape the refugee quota
to reflect the response from groups who want to be involved in resettling
refugees.
Then there are the parties which haven’t made an
explicit statement on refugee policy. The Maori Party hasn’t released a policy
regarding refugees and asylum seekers, although co-leader Te
Ururoa Flavell has said that he would like to see the refugee quota
increased, and mentioned that ‘We need to make sure there are proper checks and
systems in place so that they can't just come in and buy land for example.’
While the ACT party website also doesn’t have an
explicit policy on refugees, ACT leader David Seymour has stated that the quota
should be "pegged to our ability to support refugees” (as well as
insisting that refugees should sign up to “kiwi values”). Our ability to
support refugees can be measured in a range of ways, the most common being
population. As of mid-2016, NZ was taking on 0.3 refugees per 1000 people, a
quarter of the number of refugees Australia is taking in per capita. For the quota to keep in line with population growth in NZ over the years, it would need
to be increased to 1500 places. ACT also specified that new arrivals should sign a "statement of
commitment to New Zealand values".
With the
election coming up soon, it may be time to decide whether a party’s stance
on refugees and asylum seekers will influence your vote. It’s not my place to
sway your vote either way, and this piece was supposed to be simply a quick
guide to the range of party stances available for you to choose from. But
here’s the thing. I’m human, and being human means I’m biased.
I had
planned to start this with a disclaimer: I am an immigrant child, of immigrant
parents. The disclaimer was supposed to be a peace offering: "Look,"
it would say, "I know I have biases, but I hold them lightly. They're not
the reasons I believe what I do." That would be a lie though. I don't hold
my biases lightly - I couldn’t, just as you couldn't let go of yours easily. My
biases are wrapped around me like a scarf, in the way I make my tea, in the way
I slip back into Sinhala when I'm annoyed, in the way I instinctively feel a
connection with someone speaking Sinhala on the train. I think it would be the
same for the refugees.
So I'm
not here to say that we should increase the refugee quota because the people
seeking asylum are the same as us. I'm saying that we should change the refugee
quota despite the fact that they are different, despite the differences in
culture, despite the differences in language, even despite the fact that they
may put the milk in before the hot water when making tea. There will be hurdles
– many of them, quite likely, and ones which we can’t make light of – which
come with refugees adjusting to the new culture and social mores. In the face
of all of that, I can't seem to step away from the fact that every single one
of these people were driven to our shores by the same desire that brought my
parents here, and the same desire that brought our ancestors here to New
Zealand: to build a better life for themselves and their children. It's
hard for me to judge refugees any differently than I would someone moving from
Hamilton to Auckland for a better life - except that the people arriving on our
shores as refugees were driven by the fear of war and death. When refugees come
to our shores, they’re not seeking a better life – they’re simply seeking to
live.
Dhanya Herath is a recent biomedical engineering & speech science masters graduate from the University of Auckland, who is currently working as a newbie software developer. When not failing miserably at being impartial, she likes hiking, human rights, and not being cold. She's also part of a new voting campaign targeted at youth, Political Hatchlings.
Dhanya Herath is a recent biomedical engineering & speech science masters graduate from the University of Auckland, who is currently working as a newbie software developer. When not failing miserably at being impartial, she likes hiking, human rights, and not being cold. She's also part of a new voting campaign targeted at youth, Political Hatchlings.
No comments:
Post a Comment