Output 1.3 - Enforcement of immigration law
Mary-Jane Jones, Director, Compliance Training, National Training Branch, standing left, and Greg Phillipson, Director, Compliance Policy Section, CP&CCD, standing right, assisting compliance officers in their understanding of aspects of the Strategic Plan.
Highlights
Our new Onshore Compliance Strategic Plan
We launched our interim Onshore Compliance Strategic Plan during 2006. The plan is one of our key responses to the Palmer and Comrie Reports and provides guidance and a national perspective for our onshore compliance activities.
The plan was developed by a working group of senior staff from around the department. Defining a set of principles to guide officers in their work, it identifies national priorities for compliance in the department. The plan ensures that resources are allocated against identified areas of risk and that an appropriate balance is struck between prevention, deterrence, and enforcement.
Governance arrangements for the compliance programme
Strengthened governance arrangements were introduced to clarify the compliance accountability framework and to guide us through a robust business redesign process for all onshore compliance functions. Case management underpins these arrangements.
Key elements include establishment of:
- a Compliance Executive, responsible for planning, governance, business transformation, and performance of the onshore compliance programme
- the Compliance Strategy Working Group, a senior inter-divisional/inter-programme forum comprising our staff from around Australia. The first brief of the Working Group was to produce the interim Onshore Compliance Strategic Plan
- Practice Management Groups comprising our staff directly responsible for the day-by-day management of our main compliance functions onshore, together with representatives from relevant business areas in National Office.
We also agreed to implement a quality assurance framework over our compliance operations and decision making process. We are implementing this quality assurance framework to promote continuous improvement in compliance and to give our stakeholders the assurance that the decisions we make are fair and reasonable as well as consistent with national best practice.
Other initiatives arising from the Palmer Report
We introduced a case management service delivery approach in January 2006 and a Community-Care Pilot from May 2006 to address the needs of clients with complex circumstances and/or those who are vulnerable. Case studies with more information on these initiatives can be found on pages 127 and 130, respectively.
The Immigration Status Service (ISS) started operation in February 2006 and allows police, Australia-wide, to make enquiries into the immigration status of people who are in Australia and suspected of being unlawful non-citizens. The ISS operates 24 hours a day, seven days a week with a dedicated 1800 telephone line as well as fax and email facilities.
The ISS provides a response to police within 10 minutes for around 50 per cent of these enquiries. It is proving a valuable tool for police to ascertain whether someone is lawfully in the community and to involve us if further follow-up is required.
Regional Cooperation - Regional Movement Alert List System
Our department and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade worked closely with counterparts in the United States of America to launch the pilot Regional Movement Alert List System (RMAL). RMAL seeks to detect lost and stolen passports at the time of airline check-in and to prevent them from being used illegally. RMAL is an Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) counter-terrorism initiative.
The RMAL pilot, launched in September 2005, demonstrated that countries can verify in real time lost and stolen passport data. APEC leaders welcomed the success of the pilot and agreed to its expansion to include other APEC economies. New Zealand joined the RMAL pilot in March 2006 making RMAL a world-first in the multilateral accessing of lost and stolen passport data. More APEC economies are expected to become involved in RMAL.
RMAL adds another layer to Australian and regional border security and fosters stronger relationships with Australia's regional counterparts.
Regional Cooperation - Advance Passenger Information systems
We continued to promote the benefits of Advance Passenger Information (API) systems within the APEC group. API systems provide border authorities with advance warning of suspect persons travelling to a country and are a powerful addition to domestic border security. The implementation of API systems across the Asia-Pacific region would significantly enhance regional security and for this reason APEC leaders have endorsed API systems as an effective counter-terrorism measure and a'pathfinder initiative'.
To advance this initiative, we are providing eligible APEC economies with feasibility studies assessing the capacity of their existing border management systems to integrate with an API system. In 2005-06, we provided feasibility study reports to the People's Republic of China (July 2005), Vietnam (December 2005), and Brunei Darussalam (May 2006). Since 2002, we have provided API feasibility studies to 11 economies, and participating economies have provided positive feedback on the relevance and usefulness of the reports in guiding the development of their own API systems.
APEC Ministers have welcomed the increasing participation of member economies in this initiative, with 11 APEC economies having implemented or committed to implementing API systems.
Advance Passenger Processing system
A key element of our secure and streamlined border processing is the Advance Passenger Processing (APP) system which is used to pre-check passengers before they travel to Australia. The APP system prevents inadequately documented passengers from being uplifted by airlines overseas and increases the efficiency of incoming passenger processing in Australia for both airlines and the cruise ship industry.
System enhancements were introduced in early 2004 that enabled us to obtain advance passenger information in respect of all airline passengers (including those transiting) and crew prior to their arrival in Australia. There are currently 47 airlines that fly to Australia that must submit mandatory APP for both their passengers and crew.
APP checking occurred in approximately 99 per cent of passenger air arrivals in 2005-06, an increase from 98 per cent in 2004-05 and 96 per cent in 2003-04.
It is mandatory that airlines send APP data for each passenger and crew member at the time of departure from overseas to ensure the security of Australian borders. To increase the level of compliance with mandatory APP, the government had decided to introduce an APP infringements regime, with relevant legislation to be introduced in 2006-07. The infringements regime is directed at airlines that do not send us this data, and has been trialled since early April 2006 in close liaison and consultation with the airline industry. The trial seeks to enable each of the 47 airlines which fly into Australia an opportunity to streamline their processes to reduce possible infringements in the future.
Since 2004, international cruise ships have provided APP reports for over 99 per cent of cruise ship arrivals with only minor administrative errors affecting 100 per cent compliance.
APP is being extended to container cargo vessels in 2006. We have been working with the industry peak body, Shipping Australia Ltd, since 2004 to determine the most appropriate method of introducing APP into the cargo shipping environment. This has involved trials with cargo operators and recognises the significant technological differences between passenger cruise ships and the wide variety of cargo vessels, most of which do not have Internet capability.
Since March 2006, we have worked with a small number of container cargo vessel operators to implement APP before a broader implementation by all container vessels during the second half of 2006. The purpose of this partnership approach was to ensure APP works effectively and is user-friendly before we require it of container vessel operators and agents on a wider scale.
Maritime crew visa
The government announced in December 2005 that a new maritime crew visa would be developed for implementation from July 2007. This new visa will replace special purpose visa arrangements that are currently available to foreign crew members of commercial ships entering Australia. The new visa is being developed in consultation with industry and will provide improved border integrity and security checking of foreign seafarers entering Australia.
Airline Liaison Officers
Airline Liaison Officers (ALOs) play an important role in protecting Australia's borders, and they are also key players in preventing unlawful movements in the region. They conduct document screening of many Australia-bound passengers at certain international gateways. They provide advice to airlines and to host governments on passenger documentation issues, and by their visible presence, deter the activities of those involved in people-smuggling. During 2005-06 the ALO network increased to 22 ALOs at 16 locations.
Border Operations Centre
The Movement Alert List (MAL) is our principal electronic alert system and forms an integral part of Australia's national security and border control strategy.
The 2005-06 Budget provided funding of $43.9 million over four years for the enhancement of MAL to ensure its continued successful operation and to keep it at the forefront of the world's alert list systems. This includes the establishment of a 24 hours seven days per week global MAL processing centre in Canberra to provide a centralised high-quality check of all visa and citizenship applicants against MAL. The development and upgrade of a number of information technology systems and communications links enable this to occur. Specialist trained staff and substantial improvements in name search algorithms, quality assurance of records, technical expertise, and business processes will make sure that the risk of missing a MAL match is minimised.
Construction fit-out and occupation of a purpose-built facility - the Border Operations Centre - will be completed in July 2006. Enhancements to the various departmental information technology systems will be progressively rolled out during 2006-07 in order to commence centralised processing.
Immigration staff, Sharon Bickford and Peter Whitney board a vessel at a Brisbane seaport with Ken Battley and William Hunter from the Australian Customs Service.
Counter-terrorism
We work closely with Australian security, intelligence, and law enforcement agencies to prevent the entry of non-Australians who may pose a threat to national security. This includes security checking as part of visa processing and Australia's multi-layered management of the border.
We are actively involved in whole-of-government counter-terrorism efforts. In late 2005, we participated in the multi-jurisdictional exercise (MJEX), Mercury 05 which was part of the government's counter-terrorism exercise programme. The exercise was designed to test responses to the attempted entry of a terrorist into Australia and it highlighted our role in managing the border.
We also participated in a number of inter-agency forums, including the Australian Government Counter-Terrorism Policy Committee and the Australian Government Counter-Terrorism Committee.
National Identity Verification and Advice
The National Identity Verification and Advice section (NIVA) was established in May 2005 to ensure that cases involving complex and potentially sensitive identity issues are identified as early as possible and handled in a systematic, nationally consistent, and expeditious manner. In its first year of operation NIVA developed - and provided Australia-wide training on - national procedures for establishing the identity of clients encountered in the field and of people in immigration detention. NIVA received a total of 279 identity-related referrals during 2005-06.
Identity
We are implementing an identity management strategy designed to provide robust, consistent, and effective processes to identify clients. The objectives of the strategy are to:
- improve the way we establish identity the first time we deal with a client
- ensure that we are consistently dealing with the same person every time
- use advanced technology to facilitate identity verification, such as online real-time checks of proof-of-identity documents, document examination equipment, and biometrics to 'anchor' identity
- ensure consolidated identity information is available to staff at all times
- provide a centralised investigation service when it is difficult to determine true identity
- implement the whole-of-government National Identity Security Strategy, including our identity data access or exchange by other government agencies.
From August 2006, we will begin integrating biometrics into business systems in order to ensure stronger identity verification processes for clients. We have signed a three-year contract with Unisys to supply biometrics software, equipment, and specialist services. Biometric systems will be rolled-out to detention centres in September 2006 and progressively deployed to other business line areas. This will include refugee and humanitarian caseloads, protection visa caseloads, secondary lines at Australian airports, compliance operations, and Australian processing offices.
Identity management in the Travel and Immigration Processing System database
The Travel and Immigration Processing System (TRIPS) database is an underlying border control system that collects client details from our client visa processing systems. Each client recorded in TRIPS has a unique person identity digit (PID) number and TRIPS information can be queried by staff processing applications in any connected system.
The Comrie Report highlighted the fact that the existence of multiple records for a client, each with different details, can have very serious consequences. It is our goal to have one record for each client, and therefore only one PID in TRIPS. However, because the interactions between our different systems are complex, and new client information may not always exactly match existing information, some clients have multiple records or PIDs.
Case Management - a service delivery approach |
|
The first group of new case management staff photographed while receiving their initial training at the Australian Catholic University in December 2005.
Our new case management service delivery approach, targeting clients with complex circumstances and/or those who are vulnerable, was established in New South Wales, Victoria, and Queensland at the end of February 2006. A case management framework and an interim IT system are helping staff to implement the service. Additional case management staff have been recruited as a result of the 2005-06 Budget, so that case management services are in place in every state and territory office in Australia. The new service delivery approach is already making a difference in achieving appropriate and timely immigration outcomes, while at the same time ensuring clients are dealt with in a fair and reasonable manner.
|
Staff from the TRIPS Helpdesk, Entry Operations Centre, and airports regularly identify and correct multiple PID problems by merging records for the same client. In 2005-06, over 420 000 PID merges were completed manually or by automated matching programs. In the coming year, as part of the Systems for People project, automated processes will be improved to reduce the number of multiple PIDs created and to better identify and correct multiple PIDs.
Staffing of the TRIPS Help Desk was increased to nine in 2005-06 (compared to four at the beginning of 2004-05) so that inaccurate client data in TRIPS can be promptly corrected. Seven training sessions in merging multiple PIDs were provided to airport staff in Sydney and Melbourne in 2005-06 and a new procedures manual was given to all staff who are responsible for merging PIDs.
Immigration Intelligence IT system
We established our global immigration intelligence IT system (IMtel) in May 2006 with a successful roll-out to overseas posts and the training of all overseas compliance staff in its use. It is now possible for reports to be lodged in IMtel at any of our onshore and offshore locations, or via our Global Remote Access Service and have the report available for any staff member with access to IMtel within seconds of its lodgement. The objective is to make IMtel more widely available and versatile through enhancements, customisation, and comprehensive user training.
|
ALO Sandi Triplett processing evacuees in Dili. Airline Liaison Officers in East Timor
|
Preventing people-smuggling activity
Establishing a dedicated air smuggling unit has provided real time tactical support and intelligence to assist in the prevention of people smuggling to and through Australia's airports.
More than 50 people were detected entering Australia by suspected illegal entry via maritime vessels in 2005-06. A number of regional countries were active in preventing and deterring people smugglers and the movement of potential illegal immigrants towards Australia. Without this assistance the number of people entering through the maritime environment could have been higher as people smugglers remain active in both the region and source countries and can be expected to continue targeting vulnerable people for possible movement to Australia.
We continue to work closely with the Australian Federal Police (AFP) on people-smuggling issues. The joint-agency People-Smuggling Strike Team (PSST) has achieved considerable success through extradition and prosecution since it was established in 2000. The work of the PSST resulted in convictions for three separate people-smuggling matters in the past year:
- convictions were recorded on nine charges relating to people-smuggling resulting in a sentence of five and a half years' imprisonment
- convictions were recorded on two charges relating to people-smuggling resulting in a sentence of eight years' imprisonment
- following a retrial, convictions were recorded on seven charges relating to people-smuggling, resulting in a sentence of 10 years' imprisonment.
Migration Agents Taskforce
The Migration Agents Taskforce (MATF), together with our regional investigation teams, target activities of selected registered and unregistered migration agents suspected of involvement in organised malpractice and criminal activity.
As a result of MATF activity, an agent was convicted of eight charges relating to the presentation of false papers in connection with protection visa applications, resulting in a sentence of two and a half years' imprisonment.
Monitoring other migrant organisers/facilitators
We continue to focus on the role played by organisers and facilitators, including migration agents, education agents, and labour hire companies seeking to abuse migration and citizenship programmes.
We work closely with education providers, education agents and students to ensure the provisions of certain legislation and codes of practice.These include the Education Services for Overseas Students (ESOS) Act 2000, the National Code of Practice for Registration Authorities and Providers of Education and Training to Overseas Students (the National Code) and the Migration Act 1958 are met. The MATF works closely with other agencies (such as the Australian Crime Commission, the Australian Taxation Office, Centrelink, and the AFP) to collect evidence and ensure that appropriate sanctions are applied. We also work closely with the AFP as part of the joint-agency PSST, and we are working with the AFP and other agencies on the issue of identity fraud.
Response to Ombudsman's report on administration of character powers
The Commonwealth Ombudsman released his report on the administration of section 501 of the Migration Act 1958 and its application to long-term residents on 9 February 2006. The report highlighted deficiencies in application of procedures used for cancelling long-term permanent residents' visas on character grounds. We acknowledged that there are defects in the administration of the relevant policy and procedures, and accepted the Ombudsman's recommendations in so far as they related to administrative reforms.
Our response also noted that the broad improvements we made following the Palmer and Comrie Reports have already addressed many of the Ombudsman's concerns, and we are continuing to implement further measures to improve the administration of the character powers.
Complex case management | |
|
For the majority of clients, their experience with the immigration system is quite straightforward. Their experience is characterised by simple transactions that allow large numbers of people to visit Australia and return home with minimal interaction with us. However, for others, things are not so straightforward. An elderly Chinese National woman was found to be an 'unlawful non-citizen' and placed in immigration's detention centre at Maribrynong, Victoria. The woman was subsequently diagnosed as having a 'personality disorder' and transferred to a hospital for treatment. At the hospital, the woman would not engage or have eye contact with staff and she appeared fearful and anxious and refused to leave Australia. One of our case managers worked with the woman with the help of a Mandarin speaking psychologist and a departmental compliance officer. The case manager, acting as a solutions broker, developed relationships with community leaders through the local church group and the Chinese Association. The case manager was able to secure culturally appropriate and supportive accommodation for the woman after her discharge from the hospital. Her health and psychological state improved and she returned to China to be reunited with her family. Case management achieves faster immigration outcomes for people and ensures their needs are met while they pass through the immigration process.
| |
Detention reforms
In response to the findings of the Palmer Report, a package of reforms was announced in 2005-06 that will lead to improvements to detention arrangements, and will create a more appropriate environment for people held in immigration detention. Already many of these reforms have been implemented.
In line with the Prime Minister's statement in June 2005 and the Migration Amendment (Detention Arrangements) Act 2005, children are no longer detained in Immigration Detention Centres (IDCs), but are accommodated with their families under a residence determination arrangement enabling them to move about freely in the community. These families live at a specified address with reporting conditions, supported by NGOs who are funded to source housing and provide assistance including ensuring access to relevant services and social support networks.
In addition to the Residential Housing Centre (RHC) located at Port Augusta in South Australia, the Sydney RHC at Villawood is expected to be opened in August 2006 and the Perth RHC is scheduled for occupation by December 2006. RHCs are separate from established IDCs and provide a more domestic and independent environment, with housing or motel-style accommodation in a community setting. RHCs have a much reduced level of security which is appropriate for the low flight-risk client group for which they are intended.
Further options to accommodate detainees will be provided by the Immigration Transit Accommodation Centres (ITACs) announced in May 2006 and planned for Adelaide, Brisbane, and Melbourne. These ITACs will house short term, low flight-risk detainees for short periods of time in places separate from established IDCs. Like RHCs, the security arrangements will be much lower than for traditional IDCs.
To rationalise the immigration detention services network, IDCs at Woomera in South Australia and at Singleton in New South Wales will be returned to the Department of Defence.
Accommodation at the Sydney Residential Housing Centre.
A programme of improvements to infrastructure at IDCs has continued with projects at the Baxter Immigration Detention Centre. The amenity of Baxter has been improved with the provision of floodlit grassed sporting fields, volley ball and basketball courts along with the construction of a new visitors reception area. At other centres, the removal of razor wire has been completed or is continuing. Development works which will increase the accommodation capacity of Maribyrnong Immigration Detention Centre are underway. The new facilities at Maribyrnong will have improved security, provide more privacy, include an expanded visits area, and establish better education, recreation, and medical facilities as well as improved amenities for dining with some self-catering options. The accommodation areas at the Perth Immigration Detention Centre will be refurbished, and the recreational courtyards there will be upgraded.
Improvements to services for the mental health of people in immigration detention were addressed with the allocation of $7.9 million over four years to implement a new long-term Health Strategy. Along with the introduction of a screening programme for mental health, we have undertaken direct management of the health and psychological services contracts for people in immigration detention centres. We are negotiating for the provision of health services directly from the states.
Funds have been allocated for the establishment of a Detention Monitoring Unit and the Detention Health Advisory Group (DeHAG). Supporting our strong commitment to being closely engaged with our key stakeholders in a more open and accountable interaction, DeHAG will play a major role in providing us with advice regarding the design, implementation, and monitoring of improvements in health care programmes for people in immigration detention.
The mental health care and well-being of people in immigration detention has been significantly enhanced by the national roll-out of an integrated mental health care programme. All people in immigration detention who are received into an immigration detention centre are assessed for mental health concerns. This involves a Suicide and Self Harm Assessment undertaken on arrival by the receiving Detention Services Officer, an 'at risk' assessment by the nurse undertaking a general health assessment, and a follow up by the mental health team for anyone exhibiting risk. This team comprises a mental health nurse, a psychologist, a senior counsellor, a general practitioner, and a psychiatrist.
If the management plan requires inpatient mental health treatment, this will be arranged through clinical pathways developed with identified public and private sector health providers.
All of these enhancements to the standard of immigration detention accommodation and services reflect our commitment to embrace detention service policies and practices that are founded on the principle of duty of care.
The government endorsed departmental principles guiding detention in May 2006, are:
- immigration detention is mandatory 'administrative detention', it is not indefinite or correctional detention>
- people in immigration detention must be treated fairly and reasonably within the law
- detention service policies and practices are founded on the principle of duty of care
- families with children will be placed in centre-based detention only as a last resort
- people in centre-based immigration detention are to be provided with timely access to quality accommodation, health, food, and other necessary services
- people in immigration detention are detained for the shortest practicable time, especially in centre-based detention
- people in immigration detention are carefully and regularly case managed as to where they are to be located in the detention services network and the services they require
- the assessment of risk factors underpins operational decision making
- detention service operations are subject to continuous improvement and sound governance.
Community Care Pilot |
|
Denis Nihill, seated, IOM Regional Representative for Australia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea and the South Pacific, signing the Heads of Agreement with IOM employee Keiko Foster and DIMA employees, Sally Babbage and Chris Peason, for the provision of information and counselling services to help clients prepare for their immigration outcomes. From May 2006, our vulnerable clients in the community, including those with acute health needs, the elderly and those settling in after time in detention, will receive targeted assistance under the Community Care Pilot. The pilot, held in NSW and Victoria, will run for 12 months and has two components: community assistance, provided by the Australian Red Cross, and immigration information and counselling services, provided by the International Organization for Migration. Vulnerable clients will also have limited access to legal advice through the Immigration Advice and Application Assistance Scheme.
|
1.3.1 Regulate entry and departure
Objective
The objective of this programme is to provide efficient and orderly immigration processing while ensuring an effective screen against those who have no entitlement to enter the country.
Table 36: Performance information - Regulate entry and departure
| 2005-06 Measures | Results | |||
| 2002-03 | 2003-04 | 2004-05 | 2005-06 | |
| Quantity | ||||
| 23 million passenger and crew arrivals/departures processed within the integrity framework | 16.6 million | 18.6 million | 22.6 million | 23.3 million |
| Quality | ||||
| Increasing or maintain proportion of arriving air passengers and crew processed via Advance Passenger Processing | 99 per cent of passenger arrivals processed. Crew data not yet available. | |||
| Increasing or maintain proportion of arriving sea passengers and crew processed via Advance Passenger Processing | 99 per cent of passenger arrivals processed. Crew data not yet available. | |||
| Travel statistics services completed for interagency delivery within agreed timeframes | 91.6 per cent achieved. | |||
| Persons breaching the Migration Act are prosecuted, removed or have their status regularised | 13 new briefs of evidence were submitted to the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions for consideration, 1 prosecutions were initiated and 16 court matters were concluded that resulted in convictions. | |||
| All immigration Torres Strait Island Treaty obligations are met through the Movement Monitoring Officer (MMO) network | 48 853 traditional inhabitant movements recorded, and 616 ineligible persons refused entry. Papua New Guinea nationals accounted for 95 per cent (23 679 arrivals and 22 890 departures) and Torres Strait Islanders 5 per cent (1263 arrivals and 1021 departures). | |||
Description
We use leading-edge technology to deliver a secure immigration processing system that is as non-intrusive as possible for genuine travellers. We work in tandem with the Australian Customs Service to provide a streamlined immigration clearance process. To achieve these goals, we have established cooperative relationships with airlines and the cruise shipping industry and we have invested in systems that enable checks of travellers' immigration status before they board planes and cruise ships to Australia.
Analysis of performance
In 2005-06 there were a total of 23.3 million passenger and crew arrivals and departures compared with 22.6 million passengers and crew arrivals and departures in 2004-05. This represents an increase of 3.1 per cent.
The 2005-06 total figure comprises 21.4 million air passengers, 1.2 million air crew, 0.09 million sea passengers and 0.6 million sea crew, compared with 20.7 million air passengers, 1.2 million air crew, 0.06 million sea passengers and 0.6 million sea crew for 2004-05.
Referrals to the department at airports
In 2005-06, around 300 000 passengers were
referred by the Australian Customs Service to us at airports for reasons
ranging from data amendments, to arrivals without visas, and bona fides checks.
Of those referred to us, the majority were immigration-cleared to enter
Australia with only 0.03 per cent of the total number of non-Australian
citizens seeking entry being refused immigration clearance.
DIMA Immigration Inspector William Shi assisting a passenger in the immigration clearance process at the Sydney Kingsford Smith Airport.
Seaports
We now have more than 20 dedicated seaports officers located in state and territory offices and regionally in Port Hedland and Cairns. Under an ongoing training programme, we have delivered immigration clearance training to Customs officers at most major and several regional ports. During the 2005-06 year, immigration officers boarded 1796 vessels for the purposes of examining crew and passenger documents and resolving case referrals identified by Customs as being of potential immigration concern.
Advance Passenger Processing system
Advance Passenger Processing (APP) is a key element of border processing, providing the capacity to pre-check passengers before they travel to Australia.
Following the successful implementation of APP by international airlines in 2003, APP was extended to international cruise ships from 1 January 2004. Coverage of certain container vessels started in March 2006 ahead of progressive broader implementation of APP in the container cargo sector.
APP checking is currently occurring in approximately 99 per cent of passenger air arrivals in 2005-06, an increase from 98 per cent in 2004-05 and 96 per cent in 2003-04.
Documentary requirements for maritime crew
Documentary requirements include the need for ships' crew to hold both a valid passport and another document linking them to the ship on which they are employed.
From 1 July 2005 to 30 June 2006, more than 320 000 crew arrived in Australia and only 110 arrived without the required documentation. This represents 0.03 per cent of all crew arrivals and demonstrates a high level of compliance by the shipping industry with the documentary requirements.
Infringement notices
Under Australian law, international carriers entering Australia from overseas must comply with certain obligations in relation to their vessels and the people on board their vessels. It is the responsibility of the carrier to ensure that a passenger is properly authorised to travel to Australia.
Where a carrier (air or sea) brings an inadequately documented passenger, or an undocumented passenger to Australia, the carrier may be liable, upon conviction, for a fine of $10 000. As an alternative to prosecution carriers may elect to pay a prescribed penalty of $5000 for an offence (an infringement notice).
We maintain this policy to deter carriers from failing to confirm passengers' immigration status before they board a plane to come to Australia. Any such oversight on the part of a carrier has scope to seriously compromise Australia's border security.
The infringement regime is a key component of a range of initiatives we have undertaken to promote Australia's border integrity.
The effectiveness of Australia's border security initiatives is illustrated by the significant drop in the number of infringement notices served on airlines in recent years. At their peak in 1999-2000 over 5000 infringement notices were issued. In 2003-04, there were 1211 such notices, representing a decrease of over 48 per cent on 2002-03. In 2004-05, there were 993 infringement notices issued representing an 18 per cent decrease on 2003-04. In 2005-06, there were 871 infringement notices issued to airlines representing a 12 per cent decrease on 2003-04, and a decrease of over 80 per cent since 1999-2000.
The decrease in infringement notices points to a decrease in the incidence of inadequately documented arrivals. The Advanced Passenger Processing system and the Airline Liaison Officer network particularly have contributed to this reduction, and we continue to work with airlines and cruise ships in an attempt to further reduce inadequately documented passenger arrivals.
Figure 28: Infringement notices issued (air and sea)
The net number of infringement notices served on shipping vessels was 58 in 2005-06 compared to 50 in 2004-05. This small rise in the number of infringements served indicates that the shipping industry has largely come to terms with the new documentary requirements introduced in July 2004.
Automated border processing
We have been working with the Australian Customs Service on the implementation of the SmartGate automated border processing (ABP) project. This project is part of an overall programme owned by Customs that spans four years beginning in July 2005 and ending on 30 June 2009.
The impetus for the SmartGate ABP project is the increased demand on international airports in Australia with more people travelling. In around 10 years time, it is anticipated that 70 per cent of air travellers entering Australia will have an International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO)-compliant ePassport. SmartGate will enable self-processing of eligible passengers who hold ePassports via an automated gate. ePassport technology - in conjunction with identity verification technology used by SmartGate - will not only facilitate passenger processing but also enable the speedy and secure verification of incoming travellers.
Customs plan to phase in the implementation of automated border processing using ePassports from February 2007. The automated solution will be voluntary for all eligible passengers.
In order to enable automated processing at Australia's borders, we are amending legislation to allow Australia to capitalise on currently available identification and identity verification technologies and expedite immigration processing.
This initiative will also facilitate travel by New Zealand citizens who are eligible ePassport holders by early 2007. SmartGate will supplement the existing passenger facilitation strategies such as joint queuing lines for citizens of Australia and New Zealand at international airports.
Melbourne Commonwealth Games 2006
Melbourne hosted'simply the best' Commonwealth Games ever from 15 to 26 March 2006.
We played an important role in ensuring the smooth entry of competitors, officials, and visitors for the Games. Competitors and officials were issued with special purpose visas, known as Commonwealth Games Travel Authorities. There were 6995 of these travel authorities issued.
The Sydney Entertainment Processing Centre ensured that large numbers of performers who came to participate in the Cultural Festival had a smooth entry. Some of the more unusual entertainers included the bus painters from Pakistan who painted a Melbourne tram during the course of the games.
We placed an officer in Africa, based in Pretoria, who ensured Commonwealth Games Associations were aware of the visa requirements and ensuring their travel to Australia was trouble free. An officer from the Ottawa office travelled to the Caribbean to assist teams from that part of the globe.
Airline Liaison Officers at transit points in Dubai, Johannesburg, Singapore, and Kuala Lumpur were on hand at key hub airports to assist teams with their onward travel to Australia. The Entry Operations Centre was on call to provide assistance with visa matters that needed to be resolved.
The onshore compliance programme played an important role in the planning for the Commonwealth Games that was held in Melbourne in March 2006. A total of 6995 people entered Australia on Commonwealth Games Travel Authorities. Of these, only 26 Commonwealth Games officials and athletes overstayed their visas, while a further 34 Commonwealth Games athletes and officials applied for protection visas. These protection visa applicants included 14 Sierra Leone athletes who received considerable media attention at the time. We worked closely with Victoria Police and activated a compliance handling strategy that involved contact with community leaders and support groups to encourage cooperation from the overstayers, and regular checks of our systems including the Entitlement Verification Online (EVO) system and checks with other agencies. The total number of Commonwealth Games overstayers at 30 June 2006 has been reduced to 12.
Migration fraud and investigations
We are responsible for the investigation of offences under the Migration Act 1958 and the Australian Citizenship Act 1948. Outcomes of those investigations may result in criminal prosecutions, administrative action, or regularisation of visa status.
A number of court matters were initiated, concluded, or were ongoing during 2005-06. Thirteen new briefs of evidence were submitted to the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions for consideration, 12 prosecutions were initiated, and 16 court matters were concluded that resulted in convictions.
Combating people-trafficking
We continued to work collaboratively with other agencies in the whole-of-government programme to combat people-trafficking, including onshore and offshore activities.
Onshore activities
Identifying suspected trafficking and referral to the AFP for possible investigation continued during the year, particularly for suspected cases involving trafficking into sexual servitude or debt bondage.
DIMA's gold medal performance |
|
Officially it took Samson Ramadhani Nyonyi two hours and 11 minutes to win gold at the Melbourne Commonwealth Games but in reality the Tanzanian runner's race for gold began much earlier with a marathon effort by migration officers on the African continent. About 7000 athletes and team officials descended on Melbourne for the games between 15-26 March 2006. Managing such a large number of arrivals posed a huge logistical problem for us but our staff remained undaunted with the success of the Sydney Olympic Games still fresh in their minds. The availability of electronic visa arrangements for some Commonwealth countries helped streamline the processing of many applications. However, the task of processing visas in most of the 71 countries represented at the games was hampered by the need to place the old-style visa labels in the passports of each and every athlete and team official - an enormous task. Athletes and team officials from 17 countries on the African continent, not including South Africa, had to get their passports endorsed before they could enter Australia. Teams were established in each of the countries to apply the visa labels to the passports of athletes and team officials. Because selection for many sporting events took place just prior to the games, migration officers were left with just a few weeks in some cases to process visas. In Africa, migration officers travelled extensively to finish this huge task in time for the athletes to travel to the games. Similar efforts were undertaken in the Caribbean and Pacific nations. Staff in Australia worked tirelessly to support their overseas counterparts, providing background checks on visa applications. Our officials played an important role in the security and administration of the games, working closely with games organisers and other agencies such as the Australian Federal Police before and during the event. The games will go down as a defining moment in Australian sporting history with much credit to the behind-the-scenes efforts of our staff.
|
Offshore activities
We continued to fund a Senior Migration Officer (Compliance) positioned in Bangkok, Thailand, working with other Australian agencies, the Thai police, non-government, and international organisations in anti-trafficking prevention and deterrence activities.
Investigating suspected sexual slavery
In 2005-06, there were 32 referrals to the AFP of suspected cases of people-trafficking in Australia involving the identification of 19 possible victims. All of these cases involved suspected trafficking of women into the sex industry. Further assessment identified 10 cases where sufficient evidence existed for further investigation of trafficking and the individuals were granted bridging F visas (BVF). Of these 10 cases, three subsequently returned home, three were on BVF's as at 30 June 2006, and four were granted criminal justice stay visas in support of investigation and/or prosecution activities.
A total of seven criminal justice stay visas and five criminal justice entry visas were granted during the year. Some of these visas were granted as a result of investigations started in previous years. The criminal justice entry and stay visas allow a person to enter into or to remain in Australia to assist authorities in the prosecution process for a trafficking offence.
In 2005-06 the first successful prosecution was recorded in a case involving charges of sexual slavery. The defendant was found guilty and sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment. A number of other cases were also under investigation or in the prosecution process during the period.
1.3.2 Prevent unlawful entry
Objective
The objective of this programme is to deliver on Australia's commitment to border protection.
Table 37: Performance information - Prevent unlawful entry
| 2005-06 Measures | Results | |||
| 2002-03 | 2003-04 | 2004-05 | 2005-06 | |
| Quantity | ||||
| 2000 persons refused entry (excluding unauthorised boat arrivals) | 937 | 1241 | 2058 | 1995 |
| 1000 unauthorised boat arrivals - illegal foreign fishers and stowaways | 947 | 1025 | 1551 | 2880 |
| Quality | ||||
| Cost of Airline Liaison Officer (ALO) network compared to avoided cost through denied entry | Cost of ALO programme: $4.1 million
Direct avoided costs estimated at around $8.5 million. It is not possible to estimate the deterrence and regional impacts. |
|||
| Risk of unauthorised or fraudulent entry mitigated by the Overseas Compliance Officer network | Overseas compliance officers produced over 700 information reports for the period 2005-06 and around 4600 cases of fraud were detected and recorded on the department's systems over the same period. | |||
| Number of visas cancelled offshore over time | 2088 (a 7.6 per cent increase over the 1940 for 2004-05) | |||
Description
We have established offshore and border operations to identify and detect people who have no entitlement to enter Australia and to prevent their entry. We use a range of strategies to detect and prevent unlawful entry through the use of deterrents and law enforcement as well as engaging other countries in efforts to deal effectively with irregular flows of people.
Our operations are concentrated on:
- preventing unlawful entry by people who are improperly documented or who constitute a threat to the community on national security grounds or criminal background, or otherwise fail to meet the requirements for entry
- preventing people-smuggling activities
- combating unauthorised boat arrivals through prevention and deterrent strategies
- assisting in the prevention of fraud against our visa programmes.
Analysis of Performance
Refused immigration clearance
In Australia's multi-layered approach to border processing, the border is the final point at which a person's identity and authority to remain in Australia can be confirmed before they enter the community.
A person can be refused immigration clearance if they are unable to meet Australia's entry requirements. This occurs where a person either has their visa cancelled or refused at the border, or is inadequately documented, and is unable to or refuses to comply with the requirement to provide evidence of their identity and authority to enter Australia.
In 2005-06 there were 1598 people refused immigration clearance at Australian airports - around 0.03 per cent of all non-Australian citizen passenger air arrivals. This represents a decrease of 2 per cent over the 1632 people refused in 2004-05.
In 2005-06, around 70 per cent of people refused immigration clearance had their visas cancelled due to a decision that they were not bona fide visitors to Australia, in that they did not intend to comply with the conditions associated with their visa. A person may also be refused immigration clearance if they fail to meet the character requirement for entry to Australia, or if they produce fraudulent documentation with an aim to illegally enter Australia.
In 2005-06, around 95 per cent of those refused immigration clearance at Australian airports left Australia within 72 hours, in most cases on the next available flight.
In 2005-06, there were 397 people refused immigration clearance at Australian seaports. This is a 6.8 per cent decrease over the 426 people who were refused immigration clearance in 2004-05.
Deserters and stowaways
In 2005-06, 15 deserters and three stowaways were located by our compliance units, compared to 12 and 25 respectively in 2004-05.
Airline Liaison Officer (ALO) network
Our ALOs conduct document screening of many Australia-bound passengers at key international gateways. They provide advice to airlines and to host governments on passenger documentation issues and, by their visible presence, deter the activities of those involved in people-smuggling. During 2005-06 the ALO network increased to 22 ALOs at 16 locations.
In 2005-06, ALOs intercepted 143 persons attempting to travel to Australia on forged or fraudulent documentation. In some locations, Australia's ALOs share information with the ALOs of other countries and host governments, contributing to international action against people-smuggling. For example:
- an ALO was involved in preventing a Chinese woman from travelling to New Zealand from Shanghai via Hong Kong on a fraudulently obtained Australian passport
- following advice from the ALO, local authorities in Hong Kong interviewed a Bangladeshi national travelling to San Francisco from Hong Kong who admitted to be attempting to travel on a fraudulently altered Australian passport
- ALOs were placed at short notice in Vanuatu where they were instrumental in preventing the operations of a people-smuggling ring
- ALOs played a major role in assisting in emergencies such as in facilitating the travel of evacuees from East Timor.
In cooperation with ALOs from other countries, Australian ALOs helped interdict over 2500 people from travelling to a variety of countries in 2005-06. This level of interdictions is an indicator of the continued global activity of people-smugglers.
Biometrics and identity management
The biometrics programme is part of a broader identity management strategy to improve the integrity of non-citizen identity information, reduce identity fraud, and support and comply with national and international initiatives in travel processing. It is also closely tied to the Systems for People programme and contributes to our'single view of client' initiative.
Under the planned roll-out of biometric technology, personal identifiers such as photographs and finger scans from non-citizens will be collected at key points in the immigration process and stored in a central database for future identity verification.
We are developing an identity service that will facilitate a consistent and integrated approach to the management of client identity information we hold.
As at the end of 2005-06, the identity service database held information on more than 3.5 million client identities, including around 435 000 facial images and 3.3 million travel documents.
The identity service also complements initiatives resulting from our strategic partnership with IBM under the Systems for People programme of work, integrating the management of identity information into client-centric processing.
On the international front, we collaborated with key countries to move forward with identity and biometric issues. Australia chaired the Inter-Governmental Consultations on Asylum, Refugee and Migration Policies (IGC) Technology Working Group and the Four Countries Conference (4CC) Biometrics and Technology Sub-Group.
The newly established 4CC sub-group met for the first time in June 2006 to identify and pursue options for improved collaboration and interoperability between Australia, Canada, the UK, and the USA on biometrics and technology in a primarily border security context.
Identity management
The operational arm of our identity management strategy, the National Identity Verification and Advice section (NIVA), was established in May 2005. NIVA's functions include:
- helping operational staff in state and territory offices deal with the identification of people of immigration compliance interest
- coordinating a national approach to the investigation and identification of people of immigration compliance interest where it is difficult to establish identity, with the principal focus being on people in immigration detention
- ensuring cases involving complex and sensitive identity issues are identified as early as possible and handled in a consistent, systematic, and expeditious manner.
The early-warning system is coordinated through a referral process set out in MSI 409 Establishing Identity in the Field and in Detention. Cases where a client is unidentified or has claimed to be an Australian citizen or permanent resident are referred to NIVA through an escalation mechanism. Initially NIVA's role is limited to monitoring progress on investigations ('information' referrals), but NIVA officers also conduct investigations of particularly complex cases ('action' referrals).
Since it started, 279 cases have been referred to NIVA. Of these:
- 71 per cent were referred for information only, while the remaining 29 per cent were actively investigated by NIVA officers
- 87 per cent of 'information' referrals were finalised in under three months
- 86 per cent of 'action' referrals were finalised in less than six months
- a total of 164 (59 per cent) cases were resolved, of which 129 (79 per cent) were information referrals and the remaining 35 (21 per cent) were action referrals.
In addition to managing a growing caseload NIVA has:
- introduced new policies, procedures, and tools designed to help operational staff to establish identity in the field and in detention and to ensure a consistent approach to identity investigation department-wide
- delivered training in these new policies, procedures, and tools to over 300 compliance and investigations officers around Australia
- sponsored legislative amendments to allow the disclosure/publication of certain personal identifiers where required to assist identity investigations
- sponsored a facial recognition software project
- established relationships with people and agencies who provide expert advice on identity-related matters
- expanded to enable additional resources to focus on further strengthening our policies and business processes in relation to establishing identity
- coordinated our response to requests from law enforcement agencies for information regarding missing persons.
Document Examiner Joanne O'Brien using document examination equipment at Sydney Airport.
Document examination
The Global Document Examination Network provided document examination training in Australia to 350 of our officers in the states and territories, including officers preparing for overseas postings and short-term missions. Document examination training was also conducted in 12 locations overseas over 18 weeks covering nine countries. We provided 472 officers from foreign government immigration and border agencies with three days training in advanced document examination. Twenty-five of those trainees were also provided with training in the use and maintenance of document examination laboratory equipment.
The network was involved in a number of key initiatives to reduce the incidence of document fraud:
- An additional 10 document examination positions were located in Sydney, Perth, Canberra, and Melbourne as well as two overseas positions in Kuala Lumpur and Manila. These new positions have been filled by people who have forensic document examination training and experience in the Australian Federal Police, state government police forces, and the forensic document examination equipment industry. The additional forensic document examination resources will both improve the skills of our staff in overseas posts and enhance the capability of immigration and related law enforcement agencies across the Asia-Pacific region to detect document and identity fraud. This will strengthen their capability to detect and prevent the movement of people who may be intent on terrorist or other criminal activity. These resources will significantly boost our existing document examination capability and enable the growing demand for both international capacity building work and domestic focussed work onshore.
- Passport readers were installed at 26 overseas posts to assist in the training and detection of fraudulent passports and/or other documents. These were posts identified as those with a high incidence of document fraud.
- A searchable repository of bulletins and alerts on fraudulent travel documents detected both onshore and offshore, is now available on both DIMAnet (the department's intranet) and a standalone DVD/CD based version. The repository is called Document Examination Alert Notices (DEAN) and has over 800 records on its database.
- At 30 June 2006, there were 30 of our staff across Australia enrolled in the Diploma in Forensic Document Examination at Canberra Institute of Technology. The course is an accredited formal qualification that includes thorough understanding of technical and scientific skills involving the application of forensic document examination techniques in the workplace and the operation of forensic document examination equipment. We also sponsored the enrolment of four overseas students from the Philippines and Indonesia in the course.
The network was also involved in a number of activities with governments in the Asia-Pacific and Middle East regions to build on border management strategies. In February 2006, a small team of forensic document experts from the People's Republic of China (PRC) Ministry of Public Security visited Canberra and Sydney to provide technical assistance to our forensic document examiners dealing with PRC travel documents. Members of the delegation came from Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, and Zuhai (Macau border). The visit included:
- comprehensive workshop presentations in Canberra and Sydney by the PRC team on the 'G series' passport to national and airport-based forensic document examination staff
- a briefing by our Canberra-based document examiners on the Australian e-passport series
- briefings by the Biometrics Policy and Sea Ports areas of the department.
The delegation also visited and observed the operation of a state document laboratory and primary line operations in Sydney. The visit was extremely successful, building on the excellent cooperation we have enjoyed with both the Ministry of Public Security and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. It should further enhance the key working relationships between visa, passport, and border control authorities in the lead-up to the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games.
The document examiners contributed to regional security initiatives, including the leadership of the Anti-Fraud Document workshop for ASEAN Immigration Officers held in May 2006 in Phnom Penh.
They also participated in our capacity-building initiatives during 2005-06 with training in countries such as the United Arab Emirates, Vietnam, Jordan, Sri Lanka, PRC, Malaysia, and New Zealand.
Overseas compliance training
We continued our programme of targeted training and briefings for staff who undertake overseas compliance roles. In 2005-06, 60 Airline Liaison Officers, 58 officers selected for long-term posting overseas, and 24 locally engaged employees completed role-specific training programmes that included document examination skills. These programmes increase their skills to address document and identity fraud, people-smuggling, and visa programme integrity. Fourteen airline and ground handling supervisors from Indonesia, the Philippines, and Malaysia took part in border and visa systems and document examination training in Canberra and Sydney.
Overseas compliance officer network
We deploy 30 specialist overseas compliance officers to 22 locations to collect immigration intelligence, investigate caseload fraud, combat human trafficking and people-smuggling, and deliver significant components of our international capacity-building agenda.
In response to heightened concern for security, selected posts have been equipped with specialist equipment following Cabinet acceptance of the recommendations of the review of security measures at Australian embassies in 2005-06. Equipment included such things as hardened vehicles and satellite telephones.
In the six months to June 2006, 379 formal information reports were produced by the overseas compliance network to support our operations and policy formulation. Most reporting is now done on Immigration Intelligence (IT System) (IMtel).
Onshore intelligence network
The national intelligence network became operational in November 2005. National Intelligence Officers (NIOs) are located in key ports, state and territory offices, and onshore visa processing centres. They are responsible for the detection and reporting of people-smuggling, human-trafficking, organised fraud, identity fraud, ship-jumpers, crew deserters, and for liaison with state-based agencies.
We deployed 10 Border Intelligence Officers (BIOs) in 2005 at key airports and seaports in Australia. This expanded the national intelligence officer network to 18 officers. Our BIOs provide an integrated and Australia-wide network that has enhanced the collection, analysis, and reporting of intelligence at the border. These officers are receiving high levels of intelligence training including participating in courses conducted by the Australian Federal Police and the Australian Customs Service.
NIOs will participate in the AFP-led Joint Airport Intelligence Groups at key airports when these start operating. Selected BIOs have been involved in developing protocols and procedures with their counterparts from other participating agencies and departments.
NIOs and Overseas Compliance Officers regularly work as teams to collect information and conduct initial analysis. This process is being simplified by the availability of IMtel to both groups.
Intelligence IT support
In 2003, we established IMtel, a protected intelligence database.
A review in 2005 resulted in formal support for upgraded capability of IMtel. The upgraded IMtel focussed on exploiting its powerful search facilities, making IMtel more accessible, extending its analysis capability, and giving access to additional users.
In line with the objectives of Palmer Project 19, the roll-out of IMtel offshore has significantly enhanced our intelligence gathering and dissemination capability by creating a global intelligence network. Overseas officers now have the ability to search and exchange information with each other and their onshore colleagues in real time. Through better communication, onshore and offshore officers will be able to make more informed decisions.
The number of IMtel users has increased over 120 per cent in the last 12 months, from 296 in 2004-05 to 661 in 2005-06.
A number of enhancements have increased IMtel's usability. Easier search and reporting functions and improved analytic tools have increased the effectiveness of officers using IMtel and reduced the training required from several days to two or three hours. IMTel development is scheduled to continue throughout 2006 and 2007.
Brisbane Character Assessment Unit
The Brisbane Character Assessment Unit, which was established in January 2004, is responsible for assessing most cases where we are considering refusal of a visa on character grounds (under s.501 of the Migration Act 1958). The unit considers refusals for all offshore applicants and some onshore applicants. The unit also considers a small number of possible visa cancellations under s.501 referred by the Darwin office.
Decisions made by the Minister personally under s.501
In 2005-06, the Minister personally made s.501 decisions in six cases - four cancellation decisions and two warnings. In 2004-05, 14 such decisions were made.
When the Minister personally cancels a visa under s.501, the former visa holder does not have access to merits review of that decision, although judicial review is still available.
In 2005-06, delegates of the Minister made 1539 s.501 decisions. These comprised 50 cancellation decisions and 1489 refusal decisions.
Section 501 contains the power to cancel a visa where the visa holder is found not to pass the character test for reasons such as:
- a substantial criminal record
- an association with a person, group, or organisation involved in criminal activity
- their past and present criminal or general conduct.
A person whose visa is cancelled under s.501 wholly or partly because of their criminal conduct or substantial criminal record is prohibited from returning to Australia.
In 2005-06 there were 54 visas cancelled under s.501.
General visa cancellations
The Migration Act 1958 contains seven separate powers for cancelling a visa apart from s.501. The power used will depend on the location of the visa holder (whether in Australia, in immigration clearance at an Australian airport or seaport), the type of visa held, and the particular circumstances of the case. While the Migration Act allows for more than one power to be used in any particular case, generally only the most appropriate power will be used.
Section 109 - Incorrect information
Section 109 is used to cancel temporary and permanent visas where the visa holder has given incorrect information or presented a bogus document in order to obtain a visa. It may only be used where the visa holder is in Australia, although equivalent grounds are provided in s.116 for cancellation where the person is outside Australia (see below).
In 2005-06 there were 34 visas cancelled under s.109.
Section 116 - General grounds
Section 116 contains a number of general grounds for cancellation, including breach of visa conditions and where the grounds for holding the visa no longer exist. Further grounds under s.116 are prescribed in the Migration Regulations. Section 116 cannot be used to cancel a permanent visa in Australia, except where the visa is cancelled at the airport on the visa holder's first entry to Australia.
In 2005-06 there were 3621 visas cancelled under s.116.
Section 128 - Visa holder outside Australia
Section 128 contains the same grounds as s.116 but is used to cancel permanent and temporary visas where the visa holder is outside Australia. This power is different to the other powers in that no notice of intent to cancel is sent to the visa holder prior to cancellation. Instead, following cancellation, the former visa holder is invited to apply for revocation of the cancellation.
In 2005-06 there were 11 403 visas cancelled under s.128.
Section 134 - Business visas
Section 134 is used to cancel permanent business migration visas where visa holders fail to abide by the conditions of their visa.
In 2005-06 there were 1021 visas cancelled under s.134.
Section 137J - Student visas
Section 137J relates only to student visas and occurs by operation of law in certain circumstances.
In 2005-06 there were 2165 visas cancelled under s.137J.
Section 137Q - Regional sponsored employment visas
Section 137Q is used to cancel regional sponsored employment visas where the holder fails to abide by the conditions of their visa.
In 2005-06 there were no visas cancelled under s.137Q.
Section 140 - Consequential cancellation
This power is used mainly to cancel the visas of dependent family members where the main visa holder's visa is cancelled, in which case the cancellation occurs by operation of law. It may also be used to cancel the visas of other people who only held a visa because another person who had their visa cancelled used to hold a visa. In that case, cancellation is discretionary.
In 2005-06 there were 3454 visas cancelled under s.140.
Figure 29: Visa cancellations in 2005-06
In 2005-06 the most common power used to cancel visas was s128 (52 per cent) followed by s.116 (17 per cent), followed by s.140(16 per cent), followed by s.137J (10 per cent) and s.134 (5 per cent).
Figure 30: Visa cancellation by visa category
The visa category with the highest number of cancellations in 2005-06 was the temporary residence category, with 40 per cent cancellations in that year. The second highest number of cancellations was in the student category with 32 per cent. The third highest was the visitor and working holiday maker category with 19 per cent.
Of the 21 819 persons who had their visas cancelled in 2005-06, there were 8917 females, 12 893 males and 9 cases where gender was not recorded. Of the females 4453 or 50 per cent were aged between 20-30 years, followed by the 31-40 year age group with 1786 or 20 per cent. Males in the 20-30 year age group had the highest number of cancelled visas 6079 or 47 per cent of the male group, followed by 2759 or 21 per cent for the 31-40 years age group.
Figure 31: Visa cancellation by age and gender
Data source: RAS cancellations database.
Figure 32: Visa cancellation by location of delegate
Of the 21 819 visas cancelled in 2005-06, there were 1172 cancelled at Australian airports, 18 559 at other onshore locations, and 2088 offshore.
Figure 33: Visa cancellations in Australia (excluding airports)
The state or territory with the highest number of visa cancellations in 2005-06 was New South Wales with 5156 cancellations, followed by Tasmania (3753), Australian Capital Territory (including National Office 2575), Victoria (2381), Western Australia (2249), Queensland (1251), South Australia (1080), and the Northern Territory (114).
Of the 1172 cancellations made at Australian airports in 2005-06, 590 or 50 per cent were made at Sydney airport. The next highest was in Melbourne with 265 (23 per cent) and Queensland with 216 (18 per cent). Perth had 90 and there were small numbers (seven and four) in Adelaide and Darwin respectively.
Figure 34: Visas cancelled at Australian airports
Figure 35: Visa cancellation by source country
In terms of absolute numbers, the United Kingdom had the largest number of cancellations (3485) in 2005-06, followed by the People's Republic of China (2003), Malaysia (1751), India (1609), and Korea (1168).
Figure 36: Visas cancelled overseas
In 2005-06, our officers stationed in other countries cancelled 2088 visas. The overseas post with the highest number of cancellations was Kuala Lumpur with 361, followed by Shanghai with 264,
Seoul with 210, Cairo with 134, Hong Kong and Singapore with 124 each, London with 104, New Delhi with 88, Auckland with 64, and Tokyo with 52.
Figure 37: Source countries by cancellation rates
* Countries with a minimum of 500 visa grants. Excludes visas granted and cancelled in Taipei. The 'Other' category includes countries with less than 500 grants and countries with 500+ and a rate less than 1.63%.
The country or territory of citizenship with the highest cancellation rate in 2005-06, as opposed to the highest total number of cancellations, was Ghana (4.7 per cent). Zambia (3.8 per cent) was followed by Sudan (3.4 per cent), Nigeria (2.9 per cent), Kenya (2.5 per cent), New Zealand (2.4 per cent), Bangladesh (2 per cent), Oman (1.9 per cent), Latvia (1.8 per cent), and Slovakia (1.6 per cent). Cancellation rates for individual citizenships can vary significantly between years. The cancellation rate is calculated by dividing the number of cancellations for the year by the number of visas granted in the same year. Only those countries with 500 or more visa grants are included.
War crimes screening
A War Crimes Screening Unit was established in 2002 to screen applicants and advise decision-makers on this aspect of character checking.
War crimes screening pays particular regard to applicants who are from regions where conflicts led to human rights abuses. Individuals suspected of having been involved in war crimes are listed on our Movement Alert List (MAL). There are currently over 7000 names on the MAL related to war crimes and crimes against humanity.
A total of 761 cases were referred to the unit for screening advice during 2005-06.
Illegal foreign fishers
Illegal foreign fishers apprehended for alleged breaches of the Fisheries Management Act 1991 are held in fisheries detention on enforcement visas for a maximum of seven days (168 hours) while fisheries authorities conduct investigations into the alleged offences and determine which fishers are to be charged. An enforcement visa is granted by operation of law, not by application. When the person is released from fisheries detention, their enforcement visa ceases to be in effect. They become unlawful non-citizens and must be detained under the Migration Act 1958 and removed as soon as reasonably practicable.
We have worked closely with the Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF) on the Border Protection Legislation Amendment (Deterrence of Illegal Foreign Fishing) Act 2005 (BPLAA). Parts relating to the detention arrangements for illegal foreign fishers started on 30 November 2005. The major outcomes of the amendments contained in this Act are:
In 2005-06, there were 2888 illegal foreign fishers apprehended for alleged fisheries offences. By 30 June 2006, 2691 illegal foreign fishers had been removed.
Figure 38: Number of illegal foreign fishers
Illegal foreign fishers | |
|
Illegal foreign fishing has increased significantly in the past five years, particularly in Australia's northern waters. The growth has been fuelled by commercial interests rather than traditional fishing activities. Illegal fishing presents a significant threat to Australian fish stocks, as well as environmental, quarantine, and security risks. As such, the monitoring, detection, and apprehension of illegal operators in Australian waters is a high priority for the Australian Government. We continue to work closely with the Australian Fisheries Management Authority and the Australian Customs Service to address the growing numbers of illegal foreign fishers in Australian waters. We are carrying out an integral role in this whole-of-government programme to deter illegal foreign fishing through the detention and repatriation of illegal foreign fishers. The Northern Immigration Detention Centre (NIDC) in Darwin will have a total capacity of 612 detainees once an upgrade to the centre is completed. The NIDC will serve as a central point for holding fishers transferred from the remote locations of Broome, Gove, Thursday Island, and Weipa until they are removed or, if required, prosecuted for fisheries offences. During 2005-06, two multi-agency operations were held to apprehend foreign fishing vessels and crew. Operation Clearwater Two was held between 5-19 October 2005, during which time 31 vessels were seized and a total of 187 fishers were apprehended. From 22 March 2006 to 3 April 2006, Operation Breakwater resulted in a total of 23 vessels being seized, with a total of 197 crew apprehended. Our role during these operations was to manage apprehended fishers in remote locations and to coordinate their transfer as soon as reasonably practicable to the NIDC and Baxter Immigration Detention Centre for prosecution or removal.
| |
1.3.3 Detection onshore
Objective
The objectives of this programme are to identify and respond to breaches of immigration law in Australia and to detect and locate people who:
- have no lawful authority to be in Australia
- have remained in Australia after their visa has expired (overstayers)
- are in breach of conditions which apply to their visa (for example, illegal workers).
Table 38: Performance information - Detection onshore
| 2005-06 Measures | Results | |||
| 2002-03 | 2003-04 | 2004-05 | 2005-06 | |
| Quantity | ||||
| 11 000 persons located | 23 078 | 20 003 | 18 341 | 10 443 |
| Quality | ||||
| Number of visas cancelled onshore following breaches, over time | n/a | 18 098 | 20 313 | Some 18 559 visas were cancelled onshore, down 8.6 per cent on the 20 313 cancelled onshore in 2004-05. In 2005-06 we cancelled 1365 visas as a consequence of clients being located for breaching their visa conditions (cancellation within two days of location). This compares with 2629 cancellations in 2004-05.
A total of 21 819 visas were cancelled in 2005-06, a decrease of 6.6 per cent on the 2004-05 total of 23 365 cancellations. Many of these are administrative cancellations, for example, when a person leaves Australia before their visa expires. A total of 1172 visas were cancelled at Australian airports and 2088 were cancelled offshore. |
| Quality | ||||
| Number of over-stayers who cease being overstayers within 2005-06 compared with the number of non-citizens becoming overstayers in the same period | n/a | n/a | 13 970 compared to 9550 non-citizens becoming overstayers | At the snapshot date of 30 June 2006 the proportion of overstayers who had ceased being overstayers in 2005-06 was approximately 37 per cent more than the proportion of non-citizens who became overstayers in the same period. In comparison, in 2004-05 46 per cent more people ceased being overstayers in proportion to those who became overstayers. |
| Intermediaries are engaged to contribute to the reduction of breaches of the Migration Act | The Entitlement Verification Online (EVO) system continues to be the our premier mechanism for engaging with intermediaries such as employers, labour suppliers, and licensing authorities. EVO is an Internet-based system that allows registered users to check the work rights and other entitlements of visa holders who are in Australia. A significant achievement during the year has been the enrolment of Woolworths Limited as a user of EVO. Woolworths, with a workforce of around 144 000, joins Coles-Myer and a number of other major Australian employers who have chosen to verify the work entitlements of visa holders through the EVO system. During the year, over 3100 Australian employers made a total of more than 115 000 online work rights checks in relation to prospective employees. A substantial number of employers also continue to use our fax-back work rights checking and telephone work rights information services. |
|||
Description
We aim to prevent and deter breaches of immigration law. Where this is not possible this output component detects and locates those who have breached immigration law. People found in breach of immigration law may have their visas cancelled, be removed from Australia, and face prosecution. This output component also incorporates the investigation and prevention of organised fraud and immigration malpractice in the Australian community and the active engagement of intermediaries such as licensing bodies and employers to contribute to the reduction of breaches of the Migration Act
Analysis of performance
During the year there have been major developments in our onshore compliance strategies and operational outputs. The focus has been on moving to a risk-based approach to compliance, with a major area of attention being the balance between prevention, deterrence, and enforcement activities. The emphasis on developing and implementing our response to external scrutiny, including introduction of case management systems, revision of instructions and policy, and development of appropriate training of our staff has also meant that locations are down on previous years.
As a result of the Palmer and Comrie Reports, we have re-assessed the manner in which compliance activities are conducted. This period of re-assessment saw a marked decrease in the number of compliance locations being effected. In 2005-06 we effected 10 443 locations of people who had either overstayed their visas or were in breach of their visa conditions. This is a decrease of 43 per cent on the 2004-05 total of 18 341 locations.
One change is the re-development of compliance training. Compliance staff are not permitted to undertake field activities without having had appropriate training. This is contributing to the present reduction in compliance location numbers. Additionally, the decrease in locations reflects a shift in the balance between preventative, deterrence, and enforcement activities. There has been an increased emphasis on preventative work, which has been reflected in the increased use of our Entitlement Verification Online (EVO) system.
Voluntary locations, where people approach us of their own accord, or in response to notification of intention to cancel, or because of requests to attend, accounted for 6397 locations. Some 2540 locations occurred as a direct result of compliance field work. A further 1506 locations were recorded as 'non-voluntary approaches' where unlawful non-citizens are located by other government agencies; for example when police detain someone for a criminal offence and it is then discovered that the person is an unlawful non-citizen. Locations must also be recorded as 'non-voluntary approaches' when another agency is directed to go out and detain an unlawful non-citizen on our behalf.
A total of 1924 locations concerned people who were found to be working illegally.
Of the 10 443 locations in 2005-06, some 7142 resulted in unlawful non-citizens being issued bridging visas. Bridging visas can be granted for a person to make arrangements to depart Australia, lodge a substantive visa application, or where they are pursuing merits or judicial review of a visa decision.
Employers and other intermediaries
A continuing strategy has been the focus on 'intermediaries' such as employers, migration agents, education providers, and labour hire companies who can play a strong role in assisting people to adhere to migration law.
During 2005-06, we continued to promote the Entitlement Verification Online (EVO) system. This is an Internet-based real-time visa entitlement checking system that allows employers, labour suppliers, licensing authorities, and educational institutions to check work rights and other entitlements of visa holders in Australia.
The EVO system has gained widespread acceptance from employers in every industry sector (including, for the first time, the sex industry) and is now our principal vehicle for work rights checking. Feedback received from employers indicates a high level of satisfaction with the service, as they get an answer on the spot (compared with 24 hours or more for our faxback service). In addition, the employer does not need to keep any paperwork as we keep a record of who has been checking and what checks have been made.
We continue to conduct employer awareness training sessions to educate employers about work rights with the aim of reducing the number of illegal workers. These sessions also inform employers and labour suppliers about the work rights checking facilities provided by us. Illegal Worker Warning Notices are issued to employers or labour suppliers who have employed or referred illegal workers. The warning notice advises employers that they have employed an illegal worker and advises of the possibility of further prosecution. In 2005-06, we issued 1094 notices, compared to 2280 notices in 2004-05. A total of 197 employers received more than one notice.
The largest numbers of warning notices were issued in the following industries:
- accommodation, cafes and restaurants
- manufacturing
- retail trade
- construction
- personal and other service (sex industry).
Community information
Information from the public provides important support to the government in its efforts to maintain the integrity of our Migration Programme. The community uses a range of avenues to report instances of malpractice, the prime method being by telephone. A free national dob-in fax service is also available.
A total of 32 673 calls were received in 2005-06 to our 13 and 1800 numbers dealing with dob-in information. This compares to 35 706 calls received in 2004-05.
Students
In 2005-06 the number of student visa cancellations was 6922, compared to 8140 student visa cancellations made in 2004-05.
In 2001, arrangements were introduced that provided for the automatic cancellation of visas for overseas students who failed to meet the minimum class attendance requirements or achieve satisfactory academic results, as required by conditions attached to student visas. The main condition is called condition 8202 and provides that a visa holder must satisfy course requirements and, where such records are kept, attend at least 80 per cent of scheduled course contact hours.
Education providers must report students in breach of condition 8202 to us. They must also send the student a notice of breach, which requires the student to attend our office within 28 days to explain the breach. If the student fails to comply with the notice their visa is automatically cancelled under s.137J of the Migration Act. Automatic cancellation enables a rapid response to breaches of condition 8202, reducing the volume of resources required to follow up non-complying students.
Overstayers
The number of overstayers in Australia at 30 June 2006, was estimated to be around 46 400. This continues the downward trend of previous estimates of 47 800 at 30 June 2005, just under 51 000 at 30 June 2004, and around 59 800 at 30 June 2003. 'Overstayers' are people who are suspected of remaining in the Australian community unlawfully after their temporary visas expire. The estimate therefore does not include overstayers who were in immigration detention at the estimate date.
We attribute the decrease in the estimated number of overstayers to a number of factors, one of which is a sustained improvement in relevant data quality. There has also been a higher level of adherence to conditions of entry to Australia, which is a product of effective screening arrangements overseas.
Training
Following the Palmer and Comrie Reports and the announcement of the College of Immigration, we identified five priority areas for enhanced training of compliance staff. These areas were:
- reasonable suspicion
- identity investigations
- emerging legal issues
- search warrant training for delegates
- access, use, and interrogation of our systems.
A project team within the department developed content and material for an enhanced Compliance Officer Training Programme, delivery of which will commence upon establishment of the College of Immigration in July 2006. This enhanced programme will involve a number of months of intensive training to ensure that compliance staff have the skills they need to do their job fairly, reasonably, and with openness and accountability.
During 2005-06, and in anticipation of the commencement of the College of Immigration, we continued to deliver existing training programmes to continuing staff, new staff, and newly appointed compliance team leaders. In particular:
- training on 'reasonable suspicion', identity investigations, and emerging legal issues was delivered to 336 officers
- 63 officers completed Search Warrant Training for Delegates
- 84 new compliance officers completed Module I compliance training
- 38 newly appointed compliance team leaders completed Module II compliance training.
Compliance officers must successfully complete Module I training before being allowed to participate in compliance field activities. Module I covered training in the exercise of regulatory powers, investigating non-compliance with legislation, detaining unlawful non-citizens, conducting and recording interviews, and conducting searches.
Team leaders must have also completed Module II training before being allowed to lead compliance teams in the field. Module II training covered the review of information gathering and analysis, conflict de-escalation, operational briefings and planning, reasonable suspicion and identity, particularly as they apply to the responsibilities of a team leader.
1.3.4 Removals
Objective
The objective of this programme is to give effect to the requirement in migration legislation that non-citizens who have no basis to remain in Australia are removed. This output component also delivers security to the community through the removal or deportation of non-citizens who may be of concern to the public for reasons such as involvement in serious criminal activity.
Table 39: Performance information - Removals
| 2005-06 Measures | Results | |||
| 2002-03 | 2003-04 | 2004-05 | 2005-06 | |
| Quantity | ||||
| 9500 removals and departures | 13 878 | 12 689 | 12 524 | 10 501 |
| Quality | ||||
| Proportion of Bridging Visa holders who become unlawful or breach bridging visa conditions is maintained or reduced without increasing proportion of locations detained | 1.4 per cent compared to the past three year average of 2.4 per cent. This compares to the proportion of locations detained 0.30 per cent in 2005-06 compared to the past three year average of 0.77 per cent1. This trend is consistent with our risk-based approach to compliance. | |||
Note: (1) In 2004-05 the proportion of locations detained was incorrectly reported as 0.56 per cent. The correct figure is 1 per centin 2004-05 compared to the previous three year average of approximately 1 per cent.
Description
People who were located but not removed were dealt with in a variety of ways. Some remained in immigration detention pending their removal from Australia. Others were granted bridging visas to allow for voluntary departure from Australia or consideration of substantive visa applications or for completion of merits or judicial review proceedings.
Removal refers to a person leaving Australia as:
- an unlawful non-citizen under s.198 of the Migration Act
- a deportee under s.200 of the Migration Act
- a spouse or dependent of:
- a removee under s.199 of the Migration Act or
- a deportee under s205 of the Migration Act.
We have effective arrangements with most countries to effect the removal of people with no entitlement to remain in Australia. Our staff liaise with foreign missions in Australia and directly with foreign agencies overseas to facilitate return.
Analysis of Performance
In 2005-06 there were 10 501 removal departures and monitored departures compared to 12 524 in 2004-05 and 12 689 in 2003-04.
Character removals
Of these, 44 people were removed after their visas were cancelled or refused under s.501 of the Migration Act, compared with 47 in 2004-05 and 60 in 2003-04.
Illegal foreign fishers - rapid repatriation
In 2005-06, there were 2888 illegal foreign fishers apprehended, of which 345 were minors. During this period, a total of 2691 illegal foreign fishers were removed, compared with 1460 removals out of 1485 apprehensions in 2004-05.
1.3.5 Detention
Objective
The objective of this programme is to provide lawful, appropriate, humane, and efficient detention of unlawful non-citizens.
Table 40: Performance information - Detention
| 2005-06 Measures | Results | |||
| 2002-03 | 2003-04 | 2004-05 | 2005-06 | |
| Quantity | ||||
| 65 000 unauthorised boat arrival detainee days | 184 640 | 148 392 | 71 224 | 11 384 |
| 300 000 non-boat detainee days in Immigration Detention Centres and other places (includes people placed in the community on Residence Determination) | 274 973 | 262 705 | 299 470 | 273 834 |
| 7200 people taken into detention | n/a | n/a | 7 522 | 6 510 |
| 7300 people released/removed from detention | n/a | n/a | 7 721 | 6 626 |
| Quality | ||||
| Formal arrangements in place with relevant state authorities for education, police, corrections, child welfare, and health services | Seven MOUs (as at 30 June 2006) are in place with four states on matters of child protection, child welfare and education, policing, fire services, and health. One MOU is nearing finalisation, and progress is being made on 11 others with seven states and territories for issues including corrections, policing, and health as well as extending an MOU with the Australian Red Cross. |
|||
| Manage the delivery of detention services in accordance with the Immigration Detention Standards and other contractual requirements, with any breaches addressed | Monitoring of contractual requirements occurred with breaches addressed. | |||
| All unaccompanied minors and women and children assessed against relevant instructions for alternative detention arrangements | Following amendments to the Migration Act 1958 at the end of June 2005, we made arrangements for all families with children in detention to be moved into residence determination arrangements within the community. By the end of July 2005, we had successfully placed all families into these arrangements. Since these amendments, all families with children are referred to the Minister for consideration for community detention arrangements within four weeks of their entry. |
|||
| All cases for people in detention reviewed regularly to ensure progress of relevant processes | DRMs review the lawfulness and reasonableness of decisions to detain and continue to review the cases of people in detention to ensure that their cases are being actively progressed. Case management has also been introduced to provide additional focus on more complex or sensitive cases. | |||
Description
To detain unlawful non-citizens as required under Commonwealth legislation.
Analysis of PerformancE
Caseload management
There were 7375 people detained at some time during 2005-06, compared to 8587 in 2004-05, 7492 in 2003-04, and 7934 in 2002-03. The maximum number held in immigration detention on any one day was 1015 compared to 1154 in 2004-05, 1263 in 2003-04, and 1409 in 2002-03.
There were 6510 people taken into immigration detention during 2005-06, compared with 7522 in 2004-05. This included:
- 766 unauthorised arrivals (703 by air and 63 by boat) compared with 597 unauthorised air arrivals in 2004-05>
- 2099 people who had been living in the community but overstayed or breached visa conditions compared to 5319 in 2004-05
- 2888 illegal foreign fishers (IFF) compared with 1485 in 2004-05
- 757 others compared with 121 in 2004-05.
There were 6626 people released from immigration detention or removed during 2005-06 compared to 7721 in 2004-05. This included:
- 141 unauthorised boat arrivals compared to 206 in 2004-05
- 700 unauthorised air arrivals compared to 594 in 2004-05
- 2285 people who had been living in the community but had overstayed or breached visa conditions compared to 5294 in 2004-05
- 2691 illegal foreign fishers compared to 1460 in 2004-05
- 809 others compared to 167 in 2004-05.
Of the 6626 people released from immigration detention or removed during 2005-06:
- 197 had been granted a protection visa compared to 199 in 2004-05
- 814 had been released on other grounds compared to 1608 in 2004-05
- 5615 were removed from Australia compared to 5914 in 2004-05.
Figure 39: Population in immigration detention from January 2005 to July 2006
The blue line in Figure 39 shows the total number of people in immigration detention when illegal foreign fishers are taken into account, while the grey line shows the continuing downward trend in the number of people (excluding illegal foreign fishers) in immigration detention over the period from January 2005 to July 2006.
The number of persons in immigration detention at 30 June 2006 was 749, of whom 25 had applied for a protection visa but had not yet received a primary decision on that application. This compared with 865 at 30 June 2005 (with 28 awaiting a primary decision), 1143 at 30 June 2004 (with 16 awaiting a primary decision), and 1311 at 30 June 2003 (with 11 awaiting a primary decision). The 749 people in immigration detention included those who are living under alternative detention arrangements with 73 accommodated in the community under residence determination arrangements and 60 living elsewhere, for example in foster care, private apartments, correctional facilities, or hospitals.
The 749 people in immigration detention as at 30 June 2006 compared with 865 people in immigration detention as at 30 June 2005. This included:
- 17 unauthorised boat arrivals (compared to 93 at 30 June 2005)
- 40 unauthorised air arrivals (compared to 37 at 30 June 2005)
- 402 people who had been living in the community but had overstayed or breached visa conditions (compared to 648 at 30 June 2005)
- 251 illegal foreign fishers (compared to 54 at 30 June 2005)
- 39 others, such as stowaways and ships deserters (compared to 33 at 30 June 2005).
Figure 40: People entering immigration detention by arrival type - 1 July 2005 to 30 June 2006
While the number of people in immigration detention fell to 749 on 30 June 2006 from 865 on 30 June 2005, the number of people in immigration detention who are not illegal foreign fishers has been reduced by a much larger amount. At 30 June 2006 there were 498 people in immigration detention who were not illegal foreign fishers, compared to 811 at 30 June 2005. This represents a reduction in the number of people in immigration detention who are not illegal foreign fishers of 39 per cent.
The caseload at 30 June 2006 consists of 34 per cent of those detained being illegal foreign fishers. Less than 4 per cent of the caseload were awaiting a primary decision on their application for a protection visa. More than half (54 per cent) of those in immigration detention had arrived in Australia lawfully and were detained as a result of compliance action because they had overstayed their visa or breached visa conditions. As at 30 June 2006 there were no children held in Immigration Detention Centres (see following entry on residence determination).
Figure 41: People in immigration detention by arrival type as at 30 June 2006
Figure 42: People in immigration detention by location as at 30 June 2006
Figure 43: People in immigration detention by period detained as at 30 June 2006
A large portion of people in immigration detention either arrived in Australia lawfully and were detained after they breached the conditions of their visa or overstayed their visa, or are illegal foreign fishers. Only a small proportion of those in immigration detention on 30 June 2006 had arrived in Australia unlawfully by air or sea.
Figure 43 shows that at 30 June 2006, 49 per cent of people in immigration detention had been detained for less than 3 months and 59 per cent of people in immigration detention had been detained for less than 6 months.
Residence determination
Following amendments to the Migration Act 1958 in June 2005, we made arrangements for all families with children in immigration detention centres to be moved into residence determination arrangements within the community. By the end of July 2005, we had successfully placed all families into these arrangements. Since these amendments, all cases of families with children are referred to the Minister, for consideration for residence determination arrangements in the community within four weeks of their entry.
A residence determination enables recipients to move about in the community without being accompanied or restrained by an officer under the Migration Act. It is a form of immigration detention and does not give any lawful status, or the rights or entitlements of the holder of a valid visa. A residence determination is not a visa grant. People in immigration detention are placed in residence determination arrangements with conditions set that meet their individual circumstances. Generally, they must live at a specified address, report to us regularly, and not engage in paid work. Other conditions may be specified by the Minister. If people in residence determination arrangements do not abide by the conditions, the Minister can alter the conditions (such as requiring more frequent reporting) or people could be returned to mainstream immigration detention.
We have been working with non-government organisations (NGOs) to make sure that those placed in residence determination arrangements in the community are properly supported.
The NGOs are funded by us to source housing for the families and to allow payment of their bills and other living expenses. The NGOs also provide case officers to assist people in immigration detention living in the community under a residence determination and to ensure they have access to the relevant services and social support networks.
As at 30 June 2006, there were 73 people living in the community under residence determination arrangements (35 adults and 38 children). Of the 73 people, there were a total of 18 family groups and 7 individual adults.
Individual case coordination
An individual case coordination model at Baxter Immigration Detention Centre (IDC) was established following the conclusion of a pilot programme introduced there in October 2003. The model adopted by us, and modified over time, has enhanced approaches to detainee issues, providing us with the opportunity to improve focus on individual cases and giving us the ability to:
- identify and respond to the individual needs of people in immigration detention in a more systematic, effective, and timely manner, particularly through dialogue with those people
- help oversee and progress visa processes and migration outcomes
- identify cases where alternative immigration detention (RHC or community based alternative detention) or a residence determination should be considered
- manage and prepare for the visa and review process in which people in immigration detention are engaged
- prepare for release or removal
- respond to the changing profile of people in immigration detention and provide a strong support base for a number of special needs groups.
We are progressing case coordination processes for other immigration detention centres, building on lessons we learned at Baxter IDC.
Placement of people in immigration detention
In line with one of our key strategic themes, in particular, fair and reasonable dealings with clients, an enhanced approach to the placement of those people in the new Immigration Detention Network is being implemented. Through consultation with the Immigration Detention Advisory Group (IDAG) and key stakeholders, the new model will enable staff to place people within the range of immigration detention options, including immigration detention centres, residential housing centres, and other places of alternative detention. Decisions will be based on a detailed assessment of the person's individual needs, balancing the person's specific circumstances with associated risk factors, and the availability of immigration detention accommodation options. The model is currently being trialled and is undergoing an extensive consultation and review process.
Detention review managers
Detention Review Managers (DRMs) review the lawfulness and reasonableness of decisions to detain under the Migration Act. DRMs review the initial detention decision and continue to review the cases of people in detention on an ongoing basis to ensure their detention remains lawful and reasonable and that their cases are being actively progressed.
Detention review committees
The Executive Detention Review Committee (EDRC) meets on a monthly basis and is chaired by a Deputy Secretary. The EDRC provides a high level forum for dealing with possible systemic issues that may impact on the timely resolution of outcomes for people in immigration detention. Work commissioned by the EDRC in 2005-06 included improved engagement with consulates to effect timely removals, an independent review of detention reporting capability, and clarification of detention case management accountability across the service delivery network.
The Detention Review Committee (DRC) meets twice a month reporting to the EDRC. The DRC brings together officers from across the service delivery network with key policy and processing areas in National Office to review and agree on action for complex cases and to identify systemic issues for resolution or referral to the EDRC.
Formal arrangements with state authorities
We continued to pursue formal arrangements with state authorities for policing, corrections, and fire protection services. During 2005-06, we signed two MOUs for these services.
On 22 September 2005, we signed an MOU with the South Australia Police in relation to incidents and potential criminal matters occurring in places of immigration detention in South Australia. On 29 June 2006, in conjunction with the Department of Finance and Administration we signed an agreement with the South Australia Metropolitan Fire Service for provision of fire services to Baxter IDC. We have also progressed another four MOUs with state agencies in relation to policing and corrections.
We are also negotiating MOUs with state and territory health departments to fund health services provided by states and territories to people in immigration detention. An MOU has been signed with the South Australian Department of Health and an MOU is expected to be signed with the Northern Territory Department of Health and Community Services in August 2006. Negotiations are progressing with Queensland and Western Australia and negotiations with New South Wales, Victoria, and Tasmania are due to commence in September 2006.
Scrutiny
Issues relating to immigration detention continued to attract high levels of complex scrutiny. After investigation, more than 80 per cent were found to be unsubstantiated, although some significant issues arose requiring changes to contractor and our procedures.
We received inquiries into complaints from statutory bodies and other organisations, including the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC), the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman, the United Nations Human Rights Committee, the Western Australian Office of Health Review, and the NSW Health Care Complaints Commission. We responded to a total of 241 inquiries in 2005-06 compared to 212 inquiries in 2004-05 and 298 in 2003-04. We made 25 responses to HREOC in an average of 27 days compared to 35 responses in an average of 21 days in 2004-05, 203 responses to the Ombudsman in an average of 32 days compared to 171 responses in an average of 28 days in 2004-05 and 13 to the other organisations mentioned compared to six in 2004-05.
Immigration Detention Advisory Group
The Immigration Detention Advisory Group (IDAG) continues to advise the Minister on matters relating to the detention of unlawful non-citizens in Immigration Detention Centres (IDCs) and non-facility based detention arrangements. In particular, IDAG advises on the appropriateness and adequacy of detention services, accommodation, and amenities provided to people in immigration detention within an IDC and persons accommodated in non-facility based detention arrangements.
In 2006 the Minister expanded the role and membership of the IDAG in recognition of its significant contributions to the enhancement of key detention programme strategies, our detention programme consultative processes, and the detention reform agenda. In May 2006, former Victorian Senator, Mr Tsebin Tchen, was an additional appointment to IDAG.
We continued to provide Secretariat support to the IDAG in its provision of advice to the Minister on detention related matters.
Health Services in Immigration Detention Centres (IDCs)
Health care is delivered to people in IDCs through a combination of on-site health care professionals and referral to external facilities and specialists. The Palmer and Comrie Reports made recommendations for improving the well-being of people in immigration detention. We have focussed on addressing these recommendations and the past twelve months have been a period of assessment and improvement in the provision of physical and mental health services.
In early 2006 we established the Detention Health Advisory Group (DeHAG). The DeHAG provides us with the necessary independent, expert advice to design, develop, implement, and monitor health care services for people in immigration detention centres and related facilities. DeHAG had its inaugural meeting in March 2006 and will meet four times per year. Chaired by Associate Professor Harry Minas, (University of Melbourne - School of Psychiatry) DeHAG is made up of experts in psychiatry, psychology, public health, dentistry, refugee services, and nursing. The Ombudsman has observer status.
The developments in detention health services are being guided by the Detention Health Strategy to ensure a fair and appropriate level of health care to people in immigration detention. A priority is more open and accountable provision of health and mental health care, through the development of service standards that can be measured and monitored.
Ongoing consultation is occurring with states and territories to improve access for people in immigration detention to health services including public hospitals.
The mental health care and well-being of people in immigration detention has been significantly enhanced by the national roll-out of an integrated mental health care programme. All people who are received into IDCs are assessed for mental health concerns. This involves a Suicide and Self Harm Assessment undertaken on arrival by the receiving Detention Services Officer, an 'at risk' assessment by the nurse undertaking a general health assessment, and a follow up by the mental health team for anyone exhibiting risk. This team comprises a mental health nurse, psychologist, senior counsellor, general practitioner, and psychiatrist. If the management plan requires inpatient mental health treatment this will be arranged through clinical pathways developed with identified public and private sector health providers.
The provision of health care has been made more accountable through novation of the health care provider contracts from the management of GSL (Australia) Pty Ltd (GSL) to us. This change was recommended by the Roche Report into the Detention Services Contract. Direct management of the health provider contracts by us will permit the examination of health funding mechanisms in order that a more effective and transparent funding programme can be established for the future detention health programme.
Detention Services Contract (DSC)
GSL (Australia) Pty Ltd (GSL) completed its second 12 months as the Detention Services Provider (DSP) in December 2005. Our strategic priority for the DSP in 2006-07 is to effectively manage detention services, with a focus on the needs of people, including ensuring appropriate alternative arrangements for women, minors, and their families. The focus is retained on pursuing policy changes and major infrastructure projects, and managing outsourced contracts. The DSC is currently being amended to deliver better services to people in immigration detention and better value for money. Monitoring of the DSPs performance will be improved and programmes and activities for people in immigration detention expanded over the next two years. In addition, a long term detention health services delivery strategy will be delivered over the next four years.
Following an independent review of the current DSC, the Minister announced the decision on 1 March 2006, that we would re-tender the DSC, including a separate tender process for health services.
We have formed a Detention Services Tender Branch within the Detention and Offshore Services Division to manage the tender process, which will be conducted in full compliance with Australian Government and our procurement procedures.
This tender project is aimed at delivering new detention services arrangements that are focussed on the needs of people in immigration detention and reflect improved performance monitoring and contract management processes. The completion of this procurement process is planned to coincide with the expiry of the current DSC in late 2007.
Infrastructure programmes
The findings of the Palmer Report highlighted a specific need for improvement to our present onshore detention arrangements to create a more appropriate environment for people held in immigration detention facilities. Our programme of projects continues to contribute directly to the strategic theme of fair and reasonable dealings with clients through greatly improved amenities. Many of these improvements to existing immigration detention centres have come to fruition in 2005-06.
Newly constructed floodlit sporting fields at Baxter IDC.
Key achievements have been:
- the removal of razor wire from our major immigration detention centres, with work at the remaining two centres to be completed in 2006-07
- significant improvements to Baxter, Villawood, and Maribyrnong IDCs through refurbishment or establishment of new facilities including:
- improved accommodation facilities, amenities, and visitor centres
- significantly improved health facilities for the management of the health and well-being of people in immigration detention
- improved landscaping to improve sensory experience for people in immigration detention
- establishment of a new gymnasium, recreation rooms, and provision of entertainment equipment
- self-catering opportunities
- improved privacy measures and dedicated areas for smokers
- the establishment of new sporting fields, volleyball and basketball courts at Baxter with upgrades to sporting facilities for soccer, cricket, and various other ball games being planned for Villawood and Maribyrnong in 2006-07.
Improvements to immigration detention infrastructure will continue in 2006-07, including:
- The Sydney Residential Housing Centre (RHC) which is expected to be opened by the Minister in August 2006. Construction works for Perth RHC are well advanced, with completion scheduled for December 2006. The development of residential housing has become a key component of the government's policy response to the detention of people assessed as low flight and low security risk. The major benefit will be a more domestic oriented detention environment providing greater levels of autonomy.
- Planning which is underway for the establishment of Immigration Transit Accommodation Centres (ITACs) in Brisbane, Melbourne, and Adelaide for clients who are low flight-risk and expected to be accommodated for a short term. The ITACs will deliver hostel style accommodation, with a common kitchen where people can prepare and serve their own meals, supplementing the central dining service. The units will also include bathroom and laundry facilities similar to those found in self-contained accommodation. This new capability will deliver direct measures in providing 'fair and reasonable dealings' with clients by establishing new modern purpose built facilities which meet community standards.
- The delivery of centralised kitchen and dining facilities and the construction of a new medical centre at Baxter IDC.
- The remediation of the former Woomera and Singleton IDCs to enable their return to the Department of Defence.
- Major construction work by the Department of Finance and Administration of the new facility on Christmas Island, with completion forecast in 2007.
- The upgrading of the Northern Detention Centre in Darwin for illegal foreign fishers. The first stage of these major improvements has been achieved with the completion of the upgrades to the northern compound. Planning has commenced to upgrade the southern compound in line with the Palmer Report and Onshore Detention Review.
Computing facilities and Internet and email services
Trialling of computing facilities, Internet, and email services for people in immigration detention is being undertaken at Maribyrnong IDC. The trial will assist us in determining the rollout of similar services to other immigration detention centres with the aim of meeting community standards for the provision of computer services to people in immigration detention.
Removal Pending Bridging Visas
The new Removal Pending Bridging Visa (RPBV) came into effect on 11 May 2005 and the Migration Regulations were revised on 16 June 2005. It was introduced to enable the release, pending removal, of people in immigration detention who have been cooperating with efforts to remove them from Australia, but whose removal is not reasonably practicable at that time.
A RPBV may be granted using the Minister's new non-delegable, non-compellable public interest power to grant a visa to a person in immigration detention. This power is in section 195A of the Migration Act 1958.
As at 30 June 2006, there are a total of 22 people holding a RPBV. Since 11 May 2005 RPBVs have been granted to 34 people. Of the 34 people, four have subsequently been granted a permanent visa, seven have been granted temporary protection visas and one has voluntarily departed.
Reports to the Commonwealth Ombudsman on people in immigration detention for a long time
On 17 June 2005, the Prime Minister announced a number of changes to migration law and the handling of people in immigration detention. The changes received Royal Assent on 29 June 2005. The changes do not alter the broad framework of immigration detention, but allow greater flexibility, fairness, and timeliness in the administration of matters affecting people in immigration detention and provide for greater scrutiny by the Ombudsman of the operation of the detention powers.
One element of those changes requires us to report to the Ombudsman when a person has been detained for two years or more and at the end of each subsequent six-month period if the person remains in immigration detention. The Ombudsman produces a report on these cases which the Minister is required to table in both Houses of Parliament within 15 sitting days of receipt of the report.
As at 30 June 2006, we had provided reports to the Ombudsman covering 262 people who had been detained for two years. Reports were provided for 75 people who remained in detention at the end of a further six month period.
The Ombudsman has provided 70 reports covering 75 people to the Minister as at 30 June 2006. Of those reports, the Minister tabled 66 reports in both Houses. The remaining reports were to be tabled in August 2006.
Of the 75 people reported on by the Ombudsman, 30 were no longer in immigration detention at 30 June 2006. Of these the Minister had granted:
- permanent visas to six people
- temporary protection visas to five people
- permanent special humanitarian visas to four people
- a bridging visa to one person
- removal pending bridging visas to four people.
Six people have been removed from Australia, one person returned home voluntarily after being granted a Removal Pending Bridging Visa and two people have been released into the community following the Full Federal Court decision on Nystrom. Another person, who was subject to a deportation order, has been released pending reconsideration of his case.
Forty five people remained in immigration detention. Eight of these people were in the community in residence determination arrangements, three were in alternative detention in the community, one person was in hospital, and 33 were in immigration detention centres.
The recommendations made by the Ombudsman covered several areas. The most frequent recommendations included the Minister consider the grant of a Removal Pending Bridging Visa or that people be released pending the finalisation of their immigration status or removal arrangements. In other cases, the Ombudsman recommended that the Minister make a decision or consider a matter before the report was tabled in the Parliament.
Integrated strategy to support people in detentionSoccer players from across the world can be found each day practising their moves on the professional grade soccer field at the Baxter Immigration Detention Centre. If soccer is not their preferred sport, they can use the gymnasium or have a go at basketball, badminton, billiards, Australian Rules Football, yoga, and table tennis. Sport is considered an important part of an integrated strategy to support the mental and physical health of people in immigration detention. Sport is not the only kind of recreation available at the centre, with people encouraged to participate in the range of structured and unstructured activities. All people in immigration detention are regularly assessed and integrated management plans are initiated for those who need support and treatment. Multidisciplinary mental health teams, comprising of mental health nurses, a psychologist, counsellor, general practitioner, and psychiatrist are now working in immigration detention centres.
People in immigration detention at Baxter IDC playing soccer. Health care for illegal foreign fishersIllegal foreign fishers are receiving appropriate medical care while they are detained in Australia. Full health assessments are provided to all new fishers in immigration detention and are followed up with comprehensive medical treatment when necessary. When one Indonesian fisherman complained he was feeling 'lelah' (tired) he was sent to an Australian referral hospital for further tests. Leukaemia was diagnosed and comprehensive medical treatment, funded by us, commenced immediately. Some fishers in immigration detention are diagnosed with diseases such as tuberculosis and strict quarantine procedures are followed to ensure the safety of staff and the community from cross-infection. The health treatment of the fishers in immigration detention is completed before their repatriation. Care is taken to ensure that any on-going prescription medication is available in the fisher's local region. The fishers also receive written reports on the medical treatment received in Australia to pass to their district health practitioners.
|
1.3.6 Litigation
Objectives
The objectives of this programme are to:
- effectively manage migration and citizenship litigation in the courts and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT)
- provide timely analysis and reporting of litigation decisions.
Table 41: Performance information - Litigation
| 2005-06 Measures | Results | |||
| 2002-03 | 2003-04 | 2004-05 | 2005-06 | |
| Quantity | ||||
| 5000 matters resolved | 4766 | 5284 | 5340 | 5284 |
| Quality | ||||
| 70 per cent of defended matters in the court, resolved in Minister's favour | 88 per cent | 92 per cent | 95 per cent | 94 per cent |
Description
This output component supports ministerial and our decisions challenged in the courts and the AAT and keeps the Minister and the Executive informed of progress. Where applicants challenge decisions, each case is reviewed before hearing to ensure the decision is defensible. Analysis and feedback on litigation decisions helps identify and minimise legal problems and improve effectiveness of departmental decision making. Timely reporting on litigation decisions contributes to the effective immigration processing of those people seeking to enter or remain in Australia.
Analysis of Performance
Courts
During 2005-06:
- there were 3893 applications and appeals to the courts lodged against us or tribunal decisions compared with 4264 for the year 2004-05
- there were 4841 matters resolved in the courts compared with 4879 for the year 2004-05. Of those matters decided at hearing 94 per cent were in favour of the Minister compared with 95 per cent for the year 2004-05.
There were 2373 active cases before the courts as at 30 June 2006 compared with 3308 active cases before the courts as at 30 June 2005.
Administrative Appeals Tribunal
During 2005-06:
- there were 294 applications to the AAT lodged against our or tribunal decisions compared with 495 for the year 2004-05
- there were 443 matters resolved in the AAT compared with 461 for the year 2004-05. Of those matters decided at hearing 73 per cent were in favour of the Minister compared with 71 per cent for the year 2004-05.
There were 145 active cases before the AAT as at 30 June 2006. This compares with 307 active cases before the AAT as at 30 June 2005.