From: gaojeng@durras.anu.edu.au (J. Gao)
Subject: Australian Parliamentary Report on CSS's Visa Status (Excerpts)
Summary: report
Keywords: report
Organization: Computer Services Centre, Australian National University
Date: 14 Sep 92 09:35:11 GMT

Dear CSS,

The report "Australia's Refugee and Humanitarian System: Achieving a
Balance between Refuge and Control" by the Joint Standing Committee on 
Migration Regulations has just been released. The 223-page report consists 
of eight chapters, the last being on PRC nationals.

The following is a few most important excerpts.

Gao Jie
For the National Union of Chinese Students and Scholars
Canberra

=========================================================================
Chapter 8
...

Conclusions

8.41  Recent policy in relation to PRC citizens has been aimed at providing 
a humanitarian response to students affected by the unrest in China. The
policy, though, has contributed significantly to the immense burden which
has been placed on Australia's refugee determination system over the past
three years. It also has led to a significant degree of uncertainty among
PRC nationals in Australia. The Committee is critical of the prevarication
concerning Chinese in and outside Australia. The delay and confusion has
aggravated the position of genuine PRC refugee and humanitarian claimants
in Australia. It has resulted in many thousands more Chinese arriving in
Australia after the Tiananmen Square incident without appropriate bona fide
checks. The decision to grant a four year permit to Chinese students has
produced community resentment, particularly amongst groups like the Sri
Lankans, Lebanese and Cambodians, who have at least as good if not, in many
instances better claims to protection.

8.42  The recent changes to the law relevant to PRC citizens has provided
them with a confusing array of choices for pursuing their claims to remain
in Australia. Of particular concern to the Committee is the significant
uncertainty among PRC nationals in Australia about their future prospects
for remaining in Australia. The four year temporary entry permit
effectively has created a class of temporary citizens who are unable to
make any long term plans for the future. If, as suggested by DILGEA in
evidence to the Committee, they can be permitted to remain indefinitely on
temporary entry permits, they have been given a type of "guest worker"
status. Without the security of residence status, they may be marginalised,
a tolerated but unwanted group in the community. Their uncertain immigration
status affects their families, as well as their employment and education
prospects.

8.43  The Committee notes that both the Government and the Opposition have
stated their positions in relation to PRC nationals. However, because there
is a divergence of views between the Government and Opposition, PRC
nationals in Australia remain in a state of uncertainty.

8.44  There are difficulties in granting permanent residence to
pre-Tiananmen Chinese as a class. There also are real problems if all such
PRC citizens are rejected for permanent residence in 1994. This may result
in some 10,000 PRC citizens, the present four year permit holders, joining
the refugee claimants queue. There is the real and alarming possibility
that, in June 1994, the refugee determination system will be clogged with
another large contingent of PRC applicants. Australia can ill afford the
cost of processing such a large number of applicants via the refugee
determination process.

8.45  The Committee notes that a previous Prime Minister of Australia made
a commitment to PRC nationals in Australia at the time of the Tiananmen
Square incident. That commitment has been confirmed by the present Prime
Minister. While Committee members disagree as to whether the commitment
should have been made in the first place, the Committee considers that
Australia, as a nation, must stand by the word of its Prime Minister, and
should honour the commitment which has been made. Any solution to the PRC
dilemma must be within the spirit of that commitment.

Recommendations
===============

8.46  The Committee recommends that:

      27.*  the Government end the uncertainty concerning the long term
future of PRC permit holders in Australia by announcing the arrangements
which will be used to differentiate between those who from June 1994 will
be granted permanent residence, those who may be granted a further four
year temporary entry permit, and those who will be returned to the PRC;

      28.   as non-discriminatory criteria are an important principle in
Australia's refugee determination system, from June 1994 PRC permit holders
should be eligible to apply as follows:

            .   for permanent residence, on the basis of relevant universal
selection criteria; or

            .   for continuing protection, to be established on a case by
case basis against internationally accepted criteria.

      29.   to assist in determining whether there is a need for on-going
protection for PRC permit holders, an in-country assessment of human rights
provisions in the PRC should be prepared for use by the Department of
Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs, and assurances should be
sought from the Government of the PRC that those PRC permit holders who
return to the PRC will not suffer discrimination or detention up their
return; and

      30.   those PRC permit holders who do not meet selection criteria
should be granted, on expiry of their permits, a short extension of stay,
say three months, to enable them to put their affairs in order and make
appropriate arrangements for departing Australia.

* The serial numbers are the continuation from the similar parts in the
preceeding chapters. (Gao Jie)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chairman's Dissenting Report
============================

In Relation to Chapter Eight on PRC Permit Holders


In paragraph 8.45 of the report, the majority make the following comment:

"While Committee members disagree as to whether the commitment should been 
made in the first place, the Committee considers that Australia, as a 
nation, must stand by the word of its Prime Minister, and should honour the 
commitment which has been made. Any solution to the PRC dilemma must be 
within the spirit of that commitment."

However, in their recommendations, the majority clearly contradict that
spirit. They argue that a large proportion of PRC permit holders should be
required to return home after June 1994. In fact, all those who do not
qualify for "continuing protection, to be established on a case by case
basis against internationally accepted criteria", should be sent home after
"a short extension of stay, of three months, to enable them to put their
affairs in order and make appropriate arrangements for departing
Australia". This position is in clear and blunt contradiction with the
assertion quoted earlier in paragraph 8.45 of the report. I cannot support
such a drastic solution and especially on which would dishonour the
commitments made by the Prime Minister.

I agree with Senator Cooney when he says in his dissent:

"In my view, at the conclusion of the four year temporary entry permit
period they now enjoy and which ends in June 1994, they are to be eligible
for one of two categories.

The first category is to give them permanent residence; the second is to
continue the temporary entry status they now enjoy."

However, I do not agree with Senator Cooney that only those who can satisfy
refugee and current humanitarian criteria should be granted permanent
residence. Instead, I believe that the Government should create a special
category called a special PRC Permit and those who pass this permit should
be granted permanent residence after 1994.

Proposed Recommendations
------------------------

The PRC permit policy to be adopted for implementation from June 1994 should
comprise the following:

      .   that all PRC permit holders be eligible to apply for permanent
residence provided that they satisfy certain criteria;

      .   that all applications be considered on a case by case basis as to
whether they satisfy the criteria for a specially designed PRC permanent
entry permit;

      .   that applicants must show, in order to qualify, that they have
strong humanitarian grounds, such as the possibility of facing severe
discrimination or detention on return and/or that they have appropriate
connections with Australia, that they have been making a worthwhile
contribution to Australia, and that they satisfy public interest criteria;
and

     .   those applicants who satisfy these criteria would be given
permanent residence, the remainder would continue to be given temporary
entry permits until such time as they themselves thought it was safe to
return to China. At no stage should they be force to return against their
will.

I urge the Government to adopt these recommendation.

Dr Andrew Theophanous, MP
Chairman
==========================================================================
     
The report is available from Austrlian Government Publishing Servie, or the
Commonwealth Bookshop. The ISBN is: 0 644 22185 2
Newsgroups: aus.culture.china