Suchergebnisse

Encouraging migrants to move to regional Australia is frequently viewed as a 'win-win' for receiving communities, local economies, and migrants themselves. New arrivals—including skilled workers, temporary migrants, refugees and other permanent migrants—have the potential to revitalise regional towns and bring new life to local economies. Migration to Australia's regions also adds cultural richness and diversity while easing pressure on urban infrastructure and services. In turn, settling in regional contexts can speed up the integration process for migrants, providing them with unique settings in which to establish a new life. However, Australia's regional areas differ greatly in terms of their socioeconomic and demographic characteristics. Many of the potential benefits of regional migrant settlement may be offset by the challenges of existing disadvantage, limited employment and career opportunities, and gaps in service provision, housing and affordable transport. Moreover, not all communities in regional towns have experience in supporting new arrivals or a shared commitment to celebrating cultural diversity. Migrants themselves may be wary of the limited opportunities for employment and cultural safety in regional towns and may choose to relocate only temporarily, sometimes to meet visa requirements. These risk factors can combine to compromise the sustainability of regional settlement initiatives before they have even begun. Realising the benefits of regional settlement requires careful planning, knowledge of what works, and close collaboration between key stakeholders. Funded by the Queensland Government through Multicultural Affairs Queensland, Welcoming Cities has partnered with the Monash Migration and Inclusion Centre to conduct a review of existing evidence on regional migrant settlement in Australia and propose scenarios for the design of potential migrant resettlement initiatives.

This article draws upon content analysis of Australian parliamentary transcripts to examine debates about asylum seekers who arrived by boat in three historical periods: 1977–1979, 1999–2001, and 2011–2013. We analyze term frequency and co-occurrence to identify patterns in specific usage of the phrase "boat people." We then identify how the term is variously deployed in Parliament and discuss the relationship between these uses and government policy and practice. We conclude that forms of "discursive bordering" have amplified representations of asylum seekers as security threats to be controlled within and outside Australia's sovereign territory. The scope of policy or legislative responses to boat arrivals is limited by a poverty of political language, thus corroborating recent conceptual arguments about the securitization and extra-territorialization of the contemporary border. ; Cet article s'appuie sur une analyse de contenu de transcriptions de débats parlementaires australiens sur les demandeurs d'asile arrivés par bateau lors de trois périodes historiques: 1977–1979, 1999–2001 et 2011–2013. Nous analysons la fréquence et cooccurrence des termes afin d'identifier des tendances dans l'utilisation spécifique de l'expression « boat people ». Nous identifions ensuite comment le terme est déployé dans les débats parlementaires à travers le temps et discutons du rapport entre ces utilisations et les politiques publiques et pratiques gouvernementales. Nous en arrivons à la conclusion que des formes de traçage discursif de frontières ont amplifié les représentations des demandeurs d'asile comme une menace sécuritaire devant être contrôlée à l'intérieur et à l'extérieur du territoire souverain de l'Australie. L'étendue des réponses politiques ou législatives à l'arrivée des bateaux est limitée par la pauvreté du langage politique, corroborant ainsi les arguments conceptuels récents autour de la sécurisation et de l'extra-territorialisation de la frontière contemporaine.

Abstract
This article analyses policy documents and data from interviews with employment and settlement service providers, employers, and government officials to explore the increasing shift of Australian refugee settlement policies towards neoliberal imperatives of productivity and self-sufficiency. The responses of service providers shed light on prevalent constructions of refugee subjecthood and related expectations of humanitarian entrants as potential labour market participants. Our analysis highlights the policy rationales that underpin the contemporary design and delivery of refugee settlement support, and draws attention to variations in service providers' adoption of these rationales. We argue that, while the realignment of refugee settlement support in Australia towards 'workfare' is consistent with emergent global narratives of 'enhancing refugee self-reliance', the significance of this shift lies in the ideologically driven erosion of the primary protective purpose of Australia's long-standing humanitarian migration programme.

This article draws upon content analysis of Australian parliamentary transcripts to examine debates about asylum seekers who arrived by boat in three historical periods: 1977-1979, 1999-2001, and 2011-2013. We analyze term frequency and co-occurrence to identify patterns in specific usage of the phrase "boat people." We then identify how the term is variously deployed in Parliament and discuss the relationship between these uses and government policy and practice. We conclude that forms of "discursive bordering" have amplified representations of asylum seekers as security threats to be controlled within and outside Australia's sovereign territory. The scope of policy or legislative responses to boat arrivals is limited by a poverty of political language, thus corroborating recent conceptual arguments about the securitization and extra-territorialization of the contemporary border.