Evaluating Long-term Measures for Refugee Settlement in Australia

The provided content discusses the incentives-only approach to motivating forces in refugee policy, highlighting the long-term measures proposed by experts, including better movement pathways, further insurance for displaced people, and sustainable solutions. The article also touches on the challenges faced by destination countries like Australia, particularly with regards to asylum policy and international boundaries. Additionally, it notes that while there have been some improvements in refugee strategies under both liberal and labor governments, more needs to be done to address the root causes of displacement.

Australian foreign policy
Name of the student
Name of the university
Author note

The aim of the study is to critically analyze the claim that a distinct difference exists
between the liberal as well as labor governments on asylum and refugee policy. During the
course of the discussion, the study begins the discussion by articulating the pre and post-colonial
legacies on Australian foreign policies. The discussion further proceeds with evaluating the main
developments in the policy while shedding light on their relationship to national identity and
politics. The additionally identifies the issues of the alliance in the policy along with the analysis
in global as well as local place politics with relevant emerging foreign policies. On the whole,
the paper mainly critically elaborates on Australian foreign policy in relation to the key concepts
and approaches and theories of Australian foreign policy.
A wide range of border security measures has been adopted by both the Coalition as well
as the labor government with maintenance. In addition to the border security measures, anti-
people smuggling measures have also been taken by the governments on the verge of the
entrance of asylum seekers in groups illegally in Australia through the waterways since the year
of 2001 (Gibney 2018). Both the parties agreed over mutual consent in terms of several key
measures which have been taken in order to combat with the issues. The key actions are
inclusive of the measure of detaining the unauthorized arrival of asylum seekers. This particular
detention measure for the asylum seekers was introduced in the year of 1900s, and the Keating
government (labor government) is credited to have brought the measure into practice whereas the
coalition government Howard government was the first to have introduced the arrangements in
terms of offshore processing in the Pacific (Masocha 2017). Even though both the government
had similar intention there were some differences between the two governments in terms of the
policies. The major difference lied upon the fact that whether protection should be provided to
the asylum seekers permanently or temporarily and what would the annual size of intake of the

refugees in a formal manner. In addition to the refugees, other humanitarian entrants were also
one of the major considerations in terms of difference (McLean 2016). A broad scope of outskirt
safety efforts has been received by both the Coalition just as work government with upkeep.
Notwithstanding the fringe safety efforts, several other measures in line with detention
have additionally been received by the administrations nearly passage of refuge searchers in
gatherings illicitly In Australia through the conduits since the time of 2001. Both the parties
concurred over shared assent regarding a few key estimates which have been taken to combat
with the issues (Shepard and Suter 2017). The key measures are comprehensive of the proportion
of confining the unapproved entry of refuge searchers. This specific confinement measure for the
haven searchers was presented in the time of 1900s, and the Keating government is credited to
have brought the measure into training while the alliance government Howard government was
the first to have presented the courses of action as far as seaward handling in the Pacific. Despite
the fact that both the legislature had comparable aim there were a few contrasts between the two
governments regarding the approaches (Muller 2016). The real distinction lied upon the way that
whether insurance ought to be given to the haven searchers perpetually or shortly and what might
the yearly size of admission of the outcasts in a formal way. Notwithstanding the exiles, other
philanthropic contestants were likewise one of the significant contemplations as far as contrast.
The two major parties, Coalition and Labor, disagree over a limited number of
challenges. To be more specific in manner whether the permanent security should be given to the
asylum seekers or they should be offered temporary security (Jakubowicz 2016). Besides,
another area is there as to what should be the number of annual intake of refugees by the
Australian government in a formal manner along with the number of other humanitarian entrants.
In respect to that it must be noted that over some aspects, a bipartisan agreement was there

regarding both the concerns. In the month of October of 1999, the Howard government
tentatively introduced the regime of protections for the asylum seekers, those who had entered
illegitimately through waterways and were determined as the refugees (McPhail, Nyamori and
Taylor 2016). Earlier, the government would only offer the short term security arrangements for
the distinct individuals in terms of humanitarian crisis. In regard to that, it deserves mention that
entry permits in terms of domestic protection had been initiated during the rule of the Hawke
government.
The permit was issued mainly for the Chinese nationals eying primarily on the students'
visa existing in Australia soon after the incident of the Tiananmen massacre in the year of 1989
(Phillips 2014). In the year of 2008, an election commitment was honored by Rudd government
while abolishing the Howard government’s initiative of temporary protection for asylum seekers
with granting of the permanent protection to particularly those who were present in the country
against those visas. Subsequently, the continuous urge from the opposition parties kept on being
rejected by the Gillard as well as Rudd government. In this context, it deserves mention that the
opposition parties put forward their concerns in order to reintroduce the Temporary Protection
Visa measure which was brought by the Howard government despite of the fact of increasing
number of boat arrivals in the shores of Australia. Both the parties differ over a predetermined
number of difficulties (Borland et al. 2016). While the Coalition government kept on presenting
their argument that the abolition of Temporary Protection Visa policy was followed by the
increasing number of unauthorized arrival of boats. The coalition government further claimed
that the Temporary Protection Visa policy as a deterrent in an effective way for the boat arrivals
in the country. On the other hand, the labor party continued the argument by stating that in
combating the boat arrival issue, the introduction of Temporary Protection Visa policy resulted

as ineffective measure. Many figured out that due to the policy women and children undertaking
the journey to Australia by boat have been increased. To be progressively explicit in the way
whether the lasting security ought to be given to the refuge searchers or they ought to be offered
brief security. What's more, another region is there regarding what ought to be the quantity of
yearly admission of displaced people by the Australian government in a formal way alongside
the amount of other philanthropic participants.
In regard to that, it must be noticed that over a few angles, bipartisan understanding were
there with respect to both the worries. In the long stretch of October of 1999, the Howard
government presented the routine of assurances in a short way for the shelter searchers, the
individuals who had entered misguidedly through conduits and were resolved as the asylums.
Prior, the administration would offer the transient security courses of action for the particular
people regarding the compassionate emergency. Concerning that, it merits notice that section
allows as far as household insurance had been started amid the standard of Hawke government.
The permit was issued for the most part for the Chinese nationals peering toward primarily on
the understudies’ visa existing in Australia not long after the occurrence of Tiananmen slaughter
in the time of 1989 (Phillips 2014). In the time of 2008, a race responsibility was respected by
Rudd government while canceling the Howard government's drive of impermanent assurance for
haven searchers with giving of the permanent insurance to especially the individuals who were
available in the nation against those visas.
In the year 2012, an expert panel on asylum seekers was developed. The main purpose of
the expert panel was to provide guidance to the Australian government so that the measure can
be taken in order to combat the issues (McPhail, Nyamori and Taylor 2016). In respect to that, it
has been specially given emphasis that no quick solution can be there in order to mitigate the

issue. Also, it has been underpinned by the expert panel that the solution cannot be simple. The
panel rather proposed an integrated range of short term as well as long term measures. While the
short term measures were inclusive of disincentives as well as incentives, the long term measures
proposed by them included recommendations which can be the means of better migration
pathways by the government (Jakubowicz 2016). While regime reintroduction in terms of
offshore processing can be the example of disincentives, the humanitarian programs and their
rapid increase would be an example of incentives. The recommendations also included further
opportunities for protection for the refugees in line with the incorporation of the improvised
regional framework of cooperation. A large number of stakeholders are in favor of a like-minded
approach and have put forward their requests to the Australian government in order to take
actions towards the development of improvised protection opportunities for refugees particularly
in the country which is predominated by a range of measures in terms of sharing burdens (Muller
2016). However, several arguments were developed with suggesting the fact that this can be
negotiated among the existing regional cooperative settings like the Bali process against the
people smuggling, in person trafficking and other related transnational crime.
The specialist board on shelter searchers was built with the fundamental motivation
behind the master board was to give direction to the Australian government with the goal that the
measure can be taken to battle the issues. In regard to that, it has been extraordinarily given
accentuation that no fast arrangement can be there to alleviate the issue (Hebbani and Angus
2016). Additionally, it has been supported by the master board that the provision cannot be basic.
The board rather proposed a coordinated scope of present moment just as long haul measures.
While the temporary measures were comprehensive of disincentives only as motivating forces,
the long haul measures proposed by them included suggestions which can be the methods for

better movement pathways by the administration (Shepard and Suter 2017). While routine
representation as far as seaward handling can be the case of disincentives, the compassionate
projects and their fast increment would be a case of motivating forces. The suggestions
additionally included further chances of insurance for the displaced people in accordance with
the fuse of the extemporized territorial system of participation. Countless are agreeable to a like-
minded approach and have advanced their solicitations to the Australian government to take
activities towards the improvement of ad-libbed security open doors for displaced people
especially in the nation which is prevailed by a scope of measures regarding sharing weights
(McLean 2016). Be that as it may, a few contentions were produced with recommending the way
this can be consulted among the current territorial helpful settings like Bali process against the
general population pirating, face to face dealing and other related transnational wrongdoing.
Furthermore, it has been bolstered by the ace board that the course of action can't be
essential. The committee rather proposed a planned extent of present minute similarly as whole
deal measures (Masocha 2017). While the flitting measures were thorough of disincentives
equally as propelling powers, the whole deal measures proposed by them included proposals
which can be the strategies for better development pathways by the organization. While routine
reintroduction to the extent toward the ocean taking care of can be the situation of disincentives,
the humane undertakings and their quick addition would be an instance of propelling powers
(Gibney 2018). The proposals moreover included further odds of protection for the uprooted
individuals as per the breaker of the improvised regional arrangement of investment. Endless are
pleasing to a like-minded approach and have propelled their request to the Australian
government in order to take exercises towards the enhancement of promotion libbed security
open entryways for uprooted individuals particularly in the country which is won by an extent of

measures in regards to sharing loads (Masocha 2017). In any case, a couple of disputes were
created with prescribing the manner in which this can be counseled among the contemporary
regional supportive settings like Bali process against the all-inclusive community pilfering, vis-à-
vis managing and other related transnational bad behavior.
Over the recent past years, several measures of detention have been taken by both the
Coalition as well as labor government. However, most of the long term incentives as well as the
proposed measures in line with the long term solutions which were suggested by the panel
experts have hardly been implemented in an actual manner and are yet to be fruitful (McLean
2016). While many are of the argument that the humanitarian intake in an annual manner of the
country is generally generous in nature, the magnitude of the challenges generating from the
increasing rate of individuals seeking security worldwide is daunting while imposing
considerable challenges over all the destination nations inclusive of Australia. A major portion of
the shareholders presents arguments that one of the biggest challenges for any of the destination
nation’s government is to build asylum policy which essentially emphasizes international and not
domestic boundaries. These also one of the major concerns and offers sustainable long term
solutions (Shepard and Suter 2017). Over the ongoing past years, a few proportions of
confinement have been taken by both the Coalition just as work government. Be that as it may,
the majority of the long haul motivating forces as the proposed measures in accordance with the
long haul arrangements which were recommended by the board specialists was barely executed
in a real way and is yet to be productive. While many are of the contention that the helpful
admission in a yearly way of the nation is commonly liberal in nature, the greatness of the
difficulties producing from the expanding rate of people looking for security worldwide is
overwhelming while at the same time forcing significant difficulties over all the goal countries

comprehensive of Australia (Hebbani and Angus 2016). A real bit of the investors presents
contentions that one of the greatest challenges for any of the goal country's administration is to
assemble refuge strategy which basically stresses on global and not residential limits. These
likewise one of the real concerns and offers possible long haul arrangements.
Thus, on a concluding note, it is right to state that the purpose of the examination was too
fundamentally break down the case that a distinct contrast exists between the liberal just as work
governments on shelter and displaced person strategy. Over the span of the discourse, the
examination started the exchange by articulating the pre and post-colonial heritages on
Australian refugee strategies. The talk further continued with assessing the fundamental
improvements in the strategy while revealing insight into their relationship to local personality
and governmental issues. The discussion furthermore distinguished the effects of partnership in
the approach alongside the examination worldwide just as local place political issues with
appropriate developing outside strategies. All in all, the paper primarily basically explained on
Australian remote arrangement in connection with the key ideas and methodologies and
speculations of Australian external approach.

References
Borland, J., Spies-Butcher, B., Ralston, D., Perche, D., Bexley, E., Savage, G.C.,
Dickinson, H., Dodson, J., Gillespie, J., Mendelssohn, J. and Wanna, J., 2016. Election
2016: what will a re-elected Coalition government mean for key policy areas?. The
Conversation.
Gibney, M.J., 2018, April. The state of asylum: democratisation, judicialisation and
evolution of refugee policy. In The Refugees Convention 50 Years on: Globalisation and
International Law (pp. 19-46). Routledge.
Hebbani, A. and Angus, D., 2016. 'Charity begins at home': Public perceptions of the
homestay initiative for asylum seekers in Australia. Australian Journalism Review, 38(1),
p.83.
Jakubowicz, A.H., 2016. Once upon a Time in… ethnocratic Australia: migration,
refugees, diversity and contested discourses of inclusion. Cosmopolitan Civil Societies:
An Interdisciplinary Journal.
Masocha, S., 2017. Globalisation and Glocalised Responses to Asylum Seekers: A
Comparative Analysis of Australia and the United Kingdom. In Social Work in a
Glocalised World (pp. 75-86). Routledge.
McLean, W., 2016. Neoclassical realism and Australian foreign policy: understanding
how security elites frame domestic discourses. Global Change, Peace & Security, 28(1),
pp.1-15.

McPhail, K., Nyamori, R.O. and Taylor, S., 2016. Escaping accountability: a case of
Australia’s asylum seeker policy. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 29(6),
pp.947-984.
Muller, D., 2016. Iimmigration, asylum seekers and Australia. Meanjin, 75(2), p.59.
Phillips, J., 2014. A comparison of Coalition and Labor government asylum policies in
Australia since 2001. Parliamentary Library.
Shepard, A. and Suter, K., 2017. Asylum Seekers and Australian Politics.