|
|
|
BOOK REVIEW
| Margot O'Neill, Blind Conscience, University of New South Wales Press, Sydney, 2008. pp. vi + 286. $34.95 paper.
|
| In this book, which reads like a novel by John le Carré, the story of an epic era in Australia's refugee policy is told: that of the mandatory detention of asylum seekers, from the 1990s to 2008. Via detailed interviews, Margot O'Neill introduces us to many of the major players in the drama, in which a disparate group of social activists ranging from childcare workers, social activists, conservative lawyers and senior politicians took on a powerful government and won. She presents graphic descriptions and evidence about critical incidents and milestones in a fight to find justice for a persecuted minority. It includes transcripts of extended interviews with Philip Ruddock, the most public face of the policy. She concludes with reflections from the major players now that the situation is partially resolved. |
1
|
|
Several books, academic papers and media reports have been written about these phenomena. So what does this book add to our knowledge and understanding of what happened? Coming from the position of her own initial disbelief the author explores and provides answers to a number of key questions. Why, at this point in time was it politically expedient to vilify and 'protect' Australia from refugees? Why was the majority of the population ready to accept this proposition? Just how bad was the treatment meted out to refugees inside our detention centres? Why did their plight eventually touch so many disparate people? What fuelled social action of a scale unseen since the Vietnam War? What and who eventually brought about major change in government policy? |
2
|
|
The story that Margot O'Neill so graphically portrays is of a democratic process that is seriously flawed, manipulated by politicians and media, smoke and mirrors. It is about the pursuit of power; of narrow blinkered vision; of politicians with views so entrenched that they refuse to even consider alternatives in the face of compelling evidence. It portrays a media often fawning and sycophantic, publishing the party line. It shows an opposition so short of moral fibre that even if it did disagree, political expediency dictated that it keep silent. Nor is the response an orderly consensual opposition to the policy and how to change it. Refugee advocates are shown as deeply divided with strong ideological differences. |
3
|
|
Through it all, however, shine a few good men and women who could not believe that this was happening in Australia: ordinary people, politicians from all parties, members of the establishment, activists and people who normally did not see themselves as political actors. This initially small group grew and eventually made so much noise that the majority of Australians finally heard what was happening and reacted. It took a long time – too long say many of those who sacrificed long years of their lives to the struggle. |
4
|
|
We hear from individuals who became personally involved in the fight and the book explores why the issue touched them so much. The message is clear. It was because they could not believe that this could happen here. Was this really Australia? Proudly democratic, a staunch supporter of human rights, a firm believer in the 'fair go' for all? Sadly, it was. It was because they engaged with refugees and found that they were humans in need. It was a disbelief that a civilised country would imprison children in harsh conditions. It was a determination not to remain silent. The book documents the actions of some quite remarkable people doing amazing things. People being drawn into a political fight against their will, and about life changing experiences. Some became heroes without wanting it. Others reached for hero status and failed. In the final analysis it was the combined effort of everyone who took a stand that eventually brought change. |
5
|
|
A major message in the book is the tragedy of lives seriously damaged, and even destroyed, of pain and horror, torture and persecution, the degradation of democracy, all for the maintenance of power. It is a sad reaction of a numerically small but wealthy country to a perceived international threat to our comfort and wellbeing. |
6
|
|
Margot O'Neill provides a compelling and useful documentation of events. The story is presented in a way that is both comprehensive and logical. It will make a major contribution to the work of the many activists, academics, politicians, practitioners, policy makers and concerned individuals who wish to ensure that it does not happen again. |
7
|
|
The summaries by the major players reflect pride in their success, but scepticism as to the value of the changes made and the fear that they might not last. The horror and disbelief that had drawn people into the fight has not quite gone away. Refugee advocates watch in fear in case the pendulum swings back the other way. |
8
|
| | | | |
| University of New South Wales |
EILEEN PITTAWAY | |
|
Content in the History Cooperative database is intended for personal, noncommercial use only. You may not reproduce, publish, distribute, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale of, modify, create derivative works from, display, or in any way exploit the History Cooperative database in whole or in part without the written permission of the copyright holder.
|