issue 9 This issue saw a new leadership team take the helm in the form of Juljia as Head Writer, Kiki as Art Director and Elaine, as Editor-in-Chief. Flip over for more information on us and what motivated us to join AM-Unity! As a team, we made a pact to keep ensuring AM-Unity delivers on its promise of shining a spotlight on human rights issues, as well as updating our readers on Amnesty International's key work in human rights activism. AM-UNITY continues to be a space where fellow activists can flex their creative muscles. Going forward, our issues will continue to encompass core themes. In issue 9, we worked tirelessly with our team of writers and artists to bring you stories on the role of corporate responsibility in human rights violations. What are some of the issues around this within Australia and across the world? Who is being affected? And more importantly, what can you do to help make a difference? Thais Sabino talks us through the fashion chain and the treatment of factory workers, and Thomas Abilgaard questions the accountability of private firms ‘looking after’ our prisons. Juljia interviewed Kon Karapanagiotidis, the CEO of the Asylum Seeker Resource Center (ASRC). We hope this issue raises some questions for you as much as it did for us and join us on Facebook and Twitter for some heated debates.
Elaine, Kiki & Julija
2
Meet the team
elaine mead editor in chief
julija veljkovic head writer
kiki havos artistic director
Elaine is a freelance writer and editor, based in Perth. Human rights & Education are her two passions in life and when not working within student support, she volunteers with the Red Cross, delivering workshops in the community about Refugee & Asylum Seeker journeys.
As an aspiring writer with a passion for human rights, Julija has traveled around Asia volunteering for a Cambodian human rights NGO until she decided to test her endurance with Melburnian weather. Hailing from sunny, but ultimately windy, Portugal, Julija completed her Master in International Relations and has since then volunteered for the refugee cause with the ASRC. Julija also spends her time practicing yoga...and failing when it comes to chocolate.
Kiki is a student at the University of Melbourne currently undertaking her Masters of International Relations.
She has written widely on a number of topics and believes that educating yourself and creative pursuits have the power to make lasting change in the world. When not writing you'll find Elaine escaping phone reception on a hike or planning her next travel adventure.
You can usually find Julija perched on a laptop writing away... or on a hike, taking in some of Australia's wilderness and trying not to get bitten by a snake.
With a background of film and creative writing, Kiki is passionate about art advocacy and the need for creative arts within politics. Kiki admires graphic novels and comic books, and additionally hopes to one day create her own focused around human rights and environmental justice. In between her studies, Kiki enjoys swimming, music and coming up with ideas for films she's often too busy to write
3
Meet the team
writers
artists
Elaine Mead 'What do human rights have to do with corporate responsibility?' pg. 5
Kiki Havos @scrybe_
Thais Sabino 'What's hidden in your wardrobe?' pg. 6 Erin Wills 'System of slavery still enforced by new UAE law' pg. 9 Lea Marcel 'STOP ADANI!' pg. 13 Angela Devore 'Agricultural giant Monsanto destroys Indigenous livelihoods & the environment' pg. 16 Julija Velkovic 'Ferovial earns millions from Australia's torture of refugees on Nauru' pg. 18 Thomas Abilgaard 'Who is involved in Australia's private prisons?' pg. 21 Sabina Kozinska 'The future is green' pg. 24
Asia @asiakwin UB @ubtopia Mahla Karimiyan @mahla_karimian
corporate responsibility & human rights
what do human rights have to do with corporate responsibility? Human rights are about protecting values of dignity, respect and and equality, for every individual. Human rights are intrinsically linked in how we operate as a community and a wider society, and that includes how businesses and corporations conduct themselves and respond to allegations of human rights violations. While the enforcement of human rights standards is the government's responsibility, there is a growing acknowledgement and accountability towards corporations internationally, that they have a distinct responsibility in promoting, protecting and respecting human rights, no matter what. Human rights link to corporate activity in a number of economic, social and environmental ways. Socially, corporations have the responsibility to act without discrimination when it comes to their workers, and economically, they need to abide by labour rights and pay fair wages for the work their employees carry out. Environmentally, corporations, especially those in manufacturing industries, have a whole host of human rights responsibilities, including access to clean water and the ability to access land to grow crops.
The good news is that as more consumers, investors and political figures expect corporations to behave in a socially responsible way and protect human rights, the pressure is on for them to deliver. While many corporations recognise and respect the role they have to play in promoting and protecting human rights, the more we scrutinise, the more we uncover of the exact opposite. There are still many corporations carrying out their business with complete disregard for the ways in which they are violating human rights, with full awareness of doing so. It’s the responsibility of each and every one of us to protect human rights, even in the smallest of ways. Educating yourself as a consumer allows you to make informed decisions about how you’re contributing to our global society.
The impact of corporations on human rights has increased significantly in recent decades, with more awareness, accountability and political scrutiny on how businesses conduct themselves, especially when it comes to private corporations delivering services that were previously only provided by government.
6
WHAT'S HIDDEN IN YOUR WARDROBE? Thais Sabino
BEHIND THE SHOWCASES AND FAST-FASHION COLLECTIONS THERE'S A GRIEVOUS WORLD THAT YOU NEED TO BE AWARE OF. Have you ever thought who is behind the dozens of clothes you have on your hangers, the incredibly attractive prices of a new shirt collection in a showcase, or the production cost of that “great deal” you made on a pair of jeans? Who did make them? Where do they come from? There are more than 14 million people and 170 million children in labour exploitation in the world, and a considerable portion is attributed to the garment industry, according to the International Labour Organisation (ILO). For them, there is no hope. The fast-fashion market pushes the retail prices down and requires the suppliers to produce more with a lower budget. Workers in the garment industry spend over 60 hours per week in factories, frequently without any days off, working seven days a week, according to the ILO. This surpasses the organisation’s set limit of working 48 hours per week. As part of the lowcost production cycle, these workers have a meager wage that makes lifting themselves out of poverty impossible. Their salaries hardly reach US$80 per month, reports the ILO. According to the 2016 Australian Fashion Report, Sri Lanka is considered the worst country in relation to garment workers wages. Followed by Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Pakistan, Vietnam, Cambodia, Philippines, China, Malaysia and Thailand. The apparel industry employs more than 40 million people throughout the Asia-Pacific region, with most of them earning below the minimum living wage. The ILO defines a living wage as the amount that is sufficient for workers to live and afford their basic needs, as well as healthcare and education. It is considered a basic human right. The Asian Floor Wage Alliance (AFWA) calculated in 2013 that a living wage in Sri Lanka would be the total of US$306 per month. Two years later, according to the most recent data of ILO, the minimum monthly salary in the country for garment workers was still below US$70. While in Bangladesh, the ideal wage is US$307 (2013, AFWA), the minimum salary is only US$71 (2015, ILO). According to these two organisations’ data, Indian garment workers should earn at least US$230, and not the minimum reported salary of US$78. The difference between the minimum wage and a living wage is an issue across Asia.
7
Living wage (AFWA - 2013)
450
Minimum salary (ILO - 2015)
250 200 150 100 50 0
300 150 0
ais y a la a M n ihC aid o bm a ais C en o dn iadn I I hs e d a l ak gnaB n La ir S
ais y ala a M n ihC aid o bm a ais C en o dn iadn I I hs e d a lg ak naB n La ir S
* wages per month
Matching this gap would range from less than 1% to 7% of the retail price, as found in a study by the Fair Wear Foundation. If the labour cost to produce a t-shirt in Bangladesh is about US$0.50, it would be necessary to add only US$0.40 per piece to offer this worker a living wage. According to ILO, the labour cost no more than 7% of the total price of one product supplied. This means that the increase on workers wages would not substantially affect the the ultimate price of the clothing item.
THEY HAD TO DIE TO BE HEARD The working conditions in the fashion industry in third world countries were brought to the forefront by human rights organisations after a tragic accident in Bangladesh, in 2013. The building known as Rana Plaza, where four clothes factories used to operate, collapsed, killing 1,136 workers. Since then, campaigns and investigations have been forcing companies to adopt policies related to their suppliers, in order to guarantee human safety and human rights. At that time, only 43% of companies were concerned about where their fabric was produced. In 2016, the Australian Fashion Report showed that this portion increased to 79%. After the tragedy, the minimum wage on the garment sector increased by 87% in Bangladesh. The case has also impelled changes in countries such as China and Cambodia - where the minimum salary doubled in the past five years..
FAR FROM THE END Although this progress needs to be acknowledged, it is only the first step towards a fair trade. This system needs a certification which assures that products have been sourced following social and environmental standards, and are 100% traceable, from retailer to the cotton farm. Unfortunately, according to the Australian Fashion Report 2006 (report is outdated- use something more recent), only 5% of companies know where all of their raw materials originate from. The beginning of the supply chain and its working conditions are, in most cases, unknown. Traceability is the key to build a garment industry free from labour exploitation, with safety and fairness to workers. It should impact on the brand credibility and be differential on the products people choose to buy. We do not need more deaths to start this debate and we should be conscious about our actions, especially the next time we purchase a product.
8
9
System of Slavery Still Enforced by New UAE Labour Law Erin Willis
“HE [THE SPONSOR] SLAPPED ME AND BANGED MY HEAD ON THE WALL, THEN SPIT ON ME. HE BEAT ME WITH A CABLE ON MY BACK AND PUT A KNIFE TO MY FACE. AFTER BEATING ME UP HE LEFT.”
How the Kafala System Harms Migrant Domestic Workers in the UAE This is just one shocking statement from Human Rights Watch’s 2014 report ‘I Already Bought You’, based on interviews with 99 female domestic workers in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The report highlighted the vulnerability of female domestic workers in the UAE, the systems that make these abuses possible, and the lack of labour protection available to the workers. In 2017, the United Arab Emirates’ (UAE) Federal National Council adopted a draft law that regulates recruitment and addresses terms and conditions of employment for 19 categories of workers, including domestic workers. The bill, once ratified, will ensure that domestic workers benefit from labour protections similar to other workers in the UAE. IHowever, one system that is reinforced by the bill is Kafala – an archaic visa sponsorship system that impacts migrant workers in Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Lebanon and Jordan, by delegating responsibility for migrant workers to their employers.
As domestic work is undertaken in private households, Kafala particularly poses a risk to these women whose employers are responsible for determining their working and living conditions, in isolation to the broader labour market and without facing scrutiny from shareholders or the public. Associate Professor Joo-Cheong Tham, an expert in labour law from Melbourne Law School says that migrant domestic workers are particularly susceptible to abuse and exploitation as a result of this dependence on their sponsor:
“Domestic migrant workers are so often susceptible to abuse and exploitation by their employers because of their vulnerability , in particular their relative isolation and dependence upon their employers for food and accomodation."
Human Rights Watch (HRW) reports that ‘at least 146,000 female migrant domestic workers are in the Emirates – primarily from the Philippines, Indonesia, India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Nepal – cleaning, cooking, and caring for families’.
"Host countries often contribute to this vulnerability through labour migration policies that rely upon employer sponsorship, labout laws provide inferior rights to domestic workers and also ineffective enforcement of these laws
10
Kafala enables sponsors to legally control workers, as without permission, workers are not allowed to change jobs, quit jobs or leave the country. Sponsors also have the power to cancel a worker’s residence visa and have the worker deported if they leave a job without permission. According to the International Labour Organisation (ILO), migrant domestic workers are often subjected to precarious recruitment processes in which their contracts may be altered on arrival in the host country, their passports may be confiscated and for which they are charged excessive fees, often taken on as a debt by the workers and their families. The control that employers have over migrant domestic workers in releasing them from their contract and the cost of using these recruitment companies means that migrant domestic workers are then often trapped in a situation where they are forced to stay and work excessive hours, in poor conditions and for low wages, to repay the debt. This creates a debt bondage situation, a practice that is similar to slavery which is to be abolished or abandoned under the Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery. While the bill adopted is a step forward for providing domestic workers in the UAE labour protections, it is not enough to adequately protect migrant domestic workers who are subject to the Kafala system in the UAE and other Gulf States. Kafala enables migrant domestic workers to be trapped and controlled (essentially enslaved) by their sponsors and leaves these workers vulnerable to exploitation and abuse. It is time for the United Arab Emirates and Gulf States to abolish the Kafala system and provide appropriate protections and freedoms to their migrant worker population, particularly female domestic workers.
12
STOP ADANI! Lea Marcel
A Campaign for Human and Environmental Rights Ask anyone what springs to their mind when they hear Australia and be assured that ‘Nature’ will be on top of the list.Australia is famous for the immensity of its country, its breathtaking landscapes, its wide diversity of flora and fauna, its glamorous beaches and inhospitable desert. It is also the incredibly lucky recipient of the Great Barrier Reef, one of the seven wonders of the natural world. It is larger than the great wall of China, and the only visible living thing on Earth visible from space.
The Great Barrier Reef is not only a phenomenal wonder to behold, it is also the host of a wide ecosystem comprising over 3000 individual reef systems and coral cays, as well as the provider of thousands of jobs in Australia. The reality is that the beautiful picture depicted might never be again. Australia’s nature is in great danger as the government of Queensland and the Federal Government have allowed the Indian company Adani to construct the Carmichael mine in the Galilee Basin. The Carmichael mine project if constructed will be one of the biggest in the world. It will include six open-cut puts and underground mines across an area five times the size of Sydney Harbor with the capacity of producing sixty million tonnes a year. In a world urgently needing to transition to renewable energies, endangered by global warming and environmental instability due to fossil fuel consumption, the Carmichael mine project stands as an absurdity. especially in relation to Australia’s environment. the famous
A Campaign for Human and Environmental Rights
climatologist Michael Mann has warned that ‘if we continue using fossil fuels by the middle of the century, the heat waves we are today experiencing will become typical summer day, furthering the stress put on the coral reef around the world already seriously endangered by increased bleaching, global warming of the ocean, and CO2’. Additionally, once extracted, the coal would then be transported to India by coal ships passing through the World Heritage Area. Ultimately it can be concluded that the construction of the Adani mine is a deadly recipe for the great barrier reef. Not only is the construction of the Carmichael mine endangering the environment, human rights are also at stake. Indeed, the mine would be constructed on Aboriginal land of the Wagan and Jagalingou people, who have not given their consent for the construction of the mine on their country. Moreover, Adani’s work ethics are highly doubtful and the company is currently facing trials for fraud and money laundering, environmental and social devastation, and corruption. In a public statement, Adani also claimed that the mine would generate 10,000 jobs, with 7.5% of the benefits given to indigenous communities. However, a report highlights the fact that only 1464 net jobs would actually be created. The truth is that the construction of the mine would lead to the loss of thousands of jobs linked to tourism and farming.
Finally, the government also promised to hand Adani $1 billion from public funding, in order to build a railway to transport the coal to Abbot Point shipping terminal; an action strongly opposed by the majority of Australians. The government’s determination to keep pushing for the project therefore stands against the democratic voice of the people as well as environment safety. In order to stop the mine from being constructed, numerous individuals and advocacy groups have been actively protesting through public demonstrations, awareness raising actions, documentary screenings, constitution of local groups, and applying pressure on local MPs and the Federal Government. The StopAdani Campaign has rallied thousands of Australians and individuals from all over the world, and will keep thriving. Thanks to this incredible mobilization, several Australian banks have backed out from funding the construction of the mine. However, raising awareness of the struggle comes at a critical turning point as the Federal Court has recently rejected the latest bids to stop the construction of the mine from going ahead. However, this turndown will not stop advocacy efforts to find a legal solution to stop Adani.
CALL TO ACTION! Public mobilisation continues and numerous resources to get involved can be found on the campaign’s website : www.stopadani.com 15
AGRICULTURAL GIANT MONSANTO DESTROYS INDIGENOUS LIVELIHOODS AND THE ENVIRONMENT Angela Devore One of the major issues affecting the wellbeing of indigenous populations around the world involves large corporations taking over their land for agricultural purposes. One such agriculture corporation based in the United States, Monsanto Company, produces genetically-modified (GMO) seeds and owns over a quarter of the global seed market. With agricultural operations in hundreds of locations around the world, Monsanto aims to control the whole food supply chain to maximise productivity and, so they say, feed more people. However, food scarcity is not the underlying problem with global hunger as the world currently produces enough food to feed everyone. The need to increase agricultural production to combat food insecurity is a myth promoted by big agriculture industries to gain profits while giving no consideration to the human rights of indigenous peoples. Monsanto has a history of taking over large amounts of land from indigenous communities in many developing countries to exploit resources, cheap labour and lax government regulations. This ‘land grabbing’ forces local farmers off of their land and undermines local economies. By taking advantage of relaxed land regulations and making deals with local governments, Monsanto strips indigenous people and rural peasants of their right to food and leaves them landless. Once Monsanto has acquired this land, without consideration of the local population, the company then focuses on mass-producing GMO crops, such as soy or wheat. This disrupts the local food and agriculture system, which violates the rights of indigenous communities to food, water, land and a healthy environment.
The mass production of these GMO crops, along with Monsanto’s ownership of the patents to seeds, poses a large threat to the biodiversity of the region. To make matters worse, the growing practices and chemicals used by Monsanto can contaminate the local land, food and water supplies. A growing movement of activists and NGOs advocating for indigenous rights have made small strides in combating this type of land grabbing by Monsanto and other large corporations around the world. This emerging ‘food sovereignty’ movement headed by La Via Campesina aims to protect the rights of indigenous peoples and peasants, by allowing them to produce their own food in a sustainable and culturally-appropriate manner. In Mexico, for example, farmers and activists succeeded by protesting and lobbying the government to block Monsanto in 2014 from acquiring large pieces of land for the production of GM soybeans. The Mexican constitution enshrines the right of indigenous communities to be consulted before any major land agreements are made, and in this case the Mexican government upheld this constitutional right in favor of the indigenous population. This case shines a light on how NGOs and activists can succeed in the fight to protect indigenous peoples’ right to food and hold international corporations accountable to human rights standards. Joining the global food sovereignty movement is a great way to get involved and you can do so by consuming ethically-sourced food, supporting local farmers and campaigning to hold multinational corporations accountable in respecting indigenous people’s right to food.
16
Ferrovial earns millions from Australia’s torture of refugees on Nauru An interview with Kon Karapanagiotidis, CEO of the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre (ASRC) Julija Veljkovic The Spanish multinational giant, Ferrovial, and its Australian subsidiary Broadspectrum, are complicit in reaping vast profits from Australia’s offshore refugee processing centre on Nauru island. Under a contractual obligation with the Australian government until the 31st of October 2017, Ferrovial operates the detention centre on Nauru island, where refugees are detained, imprisoned indefinitely, and exposed to cruel conditions and inhumane treatment. At the heart of the issue is a multinational corporation that remains complicit in the systematic abuse of refugees, yet its power continues to go unchecked. Joining us at AM-UNITY, is the CEO of the Asylum Seeker Resource Center (ASRC), Kon Karapanagiotidis, who offers his expertise on refugee policy and human rights. As a hands-on nongovernmental organisation, the ASRC provides direct assistance to people seeking asylum and refugees. This is done through critical programs such as the food bank, support programs and a dropin legal centre. The ASRC also ensures that the refugee issue remains visible through campaigning and lobbying. Through Kon’s voice, Ferrovial’s involvement in the torture of refugees on Nauru is brought to the forefront of this edition.
What is your response to the current situation of Ferrovial and Broadspectrum’s complicity in reaping profits from Australia’s refugee processing system on Nauru? Two million dollars are spent on each man, woman and child in Nauru, and they remain traumatised, mentally unwell and broken by their experiences of detention. What we are seeing that is so disturbing are multinationals like Ferrovial profiteering off the human misery and torturing of people. Of course, working in an environment that damages people on a daily basis makes you complicit in their suffering. But for corporations like Ferrovial that runs Nauru…for them it is just dollars and cents.
Can you elaborate more on the human rights violations that occur in detention centres like Nauru and Manus? At the heart of Manus and Nauru, there are people being raped and killed. We have had more people killed on Manus then safely resettled. We have appalling conditions in terms of food, protection, safety, and the standards of care. We know these conditions are established for the purpose of breaking people and making them intolerable for people. What is so problematic about Manus and Nauru is that the detention is indefinite and there is no processing. It is punitive, the conditions are inhumane, cruel and undignified, the place is not safe and there is actually no resettlement outcome. In fact, there is no safe outcome. You could even say that the Australian government has kidnapped these refugees as these men are being held hostage. They have no freedom of movement.
What about the idea of corporate responsibility and accountability? How likely is it that Ferrovial will be held accountable for its involvement in operating Nauru? [Ideally], Ferrovial could insist that the conditions on Nauru are improved. They could demand that these men are safely and humanely transitioned. The likelihood of them doing this is very small. If they were serious to begin with, they would have already broken the contract or refused to honour the contract. They could have spoken out about it. Of course they have a duty of care to make sure that these men are transitioned into housing, employment, into something safe or some sort of future. They are happy to make billions of dollars, but what happens after?
At the end of the day, when that contract ends, the government is not going to care. They will find another contractor for Nauru. There is always another vulture capitalist looking to make money out of the misery of refugees. What does this tell us about the paradox of the principle of human rights versus the reality of the situation with refugees on Nauru? We live in a world where white people think they should have human rights and control everyone else’s. And then they want globalisation when it comes to the easy movement of cheap labour,and cheap products, but not when it comes to human beings seeking freedom and a better life. And that’s the problem. There is such inherent racism in refugee policy. Let’s look at it this way: if the refugees where white farmers in a leaky boat, they wouldn’t be getting locked up on Manus or Nauru. The only thing research has shown that works is leading a value driven conversation about refugees, which re-frames the refugee issue as a humanitarian one. Where they are not seen as a burden, but as an opportunity.
19
How then, can we, as the Australian community take action and challenge corporations like Ferrovial? I always say to people, you actually have an incredible amount of power. It is our voice that matters. Corporations are quite fragile and vulnerable. They are vulnerable to brand perception and brand integrity. It can take one tweet, one story to undo a brand. Social media is pretty powerful. Tweeting and asking them, what do you say to the latest death, and torture of a refugee, they hate that. Sharing content on Facebook that provokes them to respond. They are incredibly sensitive to bad PR. They hate it and fear it. So boycott, divest, make visible what they are doing. That is super powerful. We are their customers, they follow us. You can also make sure your superannuation is not going anywhere near there- just look at who you bank with. One thing corporations understand is their brand and, bottom line, their shareholders and their profit. Most corporations in this space see the dollars and not the cents.
Take action With Kon’s insights comes hope. Get involved, take action and publicly expose corporations like Ferrovial. Start a social media campaign, or join projects like ‘No Business in Abuse’, which is focusing on corporate complicity in abuses within Australia’s immigration system. You can sign a petition with them or donate. You can also sign a petition that hits the majority of Ferrovial’s funding: Norway’s pensioners. Indeed, US$283 million of Norwegian people’s money is funnelled into the pockets of Ferrovial through Oljefondet, Norway’s pension fund. You can write an open letter asking Norwegians to write to Oljefondet and get their money out of Australia’ detention camps. Finally, you can get involved on a more long-term basis with organisations like the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre by either donating to one of their support programs, or volunteering with them. In Kon’s words, ask yourself, “how do you use your voice?’. This means leading a values-led conversation, that talks about refugees as human beings, that has a humanitarian frame and that is solution-focused.
thanks to form that can incite change. Remember, your voice takes onwith a powerful
20
Who is involved in Australia’s Private Prisons, how much blood is on their hands? Thomas Abildgaard Issues surrounding the privatisation of Australia’s prisons rarely raise their head in public policy debate, overshadowed perhaps by public prison tragedies such as those at Don Dale, or by the ongoing bipartisan horrors committed in our name on Manus and Nauru. Our prisons running on incompetence, misguided cruelty, and opportunistic political racism is easy to place within the rubric of the Australian political experience, but there is something essentially American in the idea of turning incarceration into a stream of profitable economic activity. It may be easier to envision Piper Chapman turning her nose up at a plate of cost cutting brown mush in Orange is the New Black, but the reality is that Australia, not the USA, incarcerates the world’s largest proportion of its prisoners in privately operated prisons.
As of 2016, private contractors now operate nine out of 101 Australian prisons, incarcerating 18.5% of the total prison population. While one of the key arguments for privatisation is the purported innovation and quality driven by an injection of competition into stagnant public institutions, only three firms are currently contracted to operate in Australia and it is difficult to gauge their services, costs and outcomes due to a lack of transparency, perpetuated by state governments and these companies. All three make bold claims and promises to uphold human rights, provide suitable conditions for prisoners and produce positive outcomes. However, many of their facilities spanning across the globe has been followed by scandals, riots, labour violations, abuses, poor services, poor outcomes and deaths in custody. So who are they?
21
g4s
G4S is a multinational security services firm based in England who operate Mount Gambier Prison, Port Phillip Prison, and the William Lopes Centre, a secure institution for mentally ill offenders. Wherever they have operated scandals and accusations have followed. In England, poor conditions, medical care and staffing levels were found to have contributed to four riots in their Birmingham prison. In Australia G4S are perhaps best known for the 2008 death of Indigenous elder, Mr. Ian Ward, who was left in the back of un-air conditioned transport van.
serco While this tragedy resulted in a delayed multi-million dollar settlement and the 2011 stripping of G4S’ prison transport contract in WA, G4S have been allowed to continue to operate in Australia. Their contract was passed to Serco, described as, ‘Jumping from the frying pan into the fire,’ by then Aboriginal deaths in Custody Watch Committee deputy chairman Marc Newhouse. Serco is another multinational with an appalling record of poor standards, abuses and deaths in custody. Serco operates WA’s Acacia Prison, QLD’s Borallon Correctional Facility, along with the Christmas Island and Villawood detention centres. Their facility on Christmas island has been particularly notable for poor conditions, poorly trained staff, violence and endemic cases of self harm.
geo group
GEO Group has fared better, at least in Australia. A Florida based multinational, they operate NSW’s Junee Correctional Centre and Parklea Correctional Centre, QLD’s Arthur Gorrie Correctional Centre, VIC’s Fulham Correctional Centre, and the soon to be opened Ravenhall Correctional Centre, so far with only a few security breaches. In the USA on the other hand, they have had civil class actions filed against them by the families of dead inmates, accused of substandard care and conditions, and made large donations to Pro-Trump super PACs which have resulted in complaints filed with the Federal Elections Commission.
22
All three of these contractors have been accused of exploiting prisoners as cheap labour. Seven centres in the UK, two each operated by Serco, G4S, and GEO, were found to be forcing their inmates to work and remunerating them with as little as one pound an hour.
When one horrible tragic incident occurs they may lose that contract, but it then will go to one of the few other companies, the wheels of injustice keep turning. If that is the price of efficiency, we must ask ourselves and our governments, is it worth it?
These are the people currently looking after 18.5% of the Australian prison population — 6000 Australian citizens. They are multinational corporations motivated to produce profit for shareholders above all other concerns and they are guilty of many cases of abuse, neglect and poor care.
take action Please write to your local MP today urging them to phase out contracts for privately run prisons in Australia.
23
The Future is Green Sabina Kozinska
It’s hard to believe that the first ever flight happened just over a century ago, in 1903. Since then aviation has made remarkable progress and flying has almost become our second nature. Even travelling within Australia it is much quicker and more convenient by plane. Let alone going to Europe, Asia or visiting some of our closest overseas neighbors. Aviation helps us move around the world and ship goods. It also serves people in need by transporting refugees to safety. As a result, it is one of the most profitable businesses of the 21st century, having a major influence on our lives. What we often forget is the impact aviation has on our environment. Airplanes run on fuel and it does not look like they can switch to fully electric power any time soon. Aviation also produces hazardous waste when the aircraft are stationary. Most of it is simply burned and not even segregated. If you have ever been out on the Tarmac, you have surely been deafened by the noise a plane makes when it starts the engines. Imagine what it means to people living close to airports or birds crossing an airplane’s path. These are only a few detrimental effects aviation is guilty of. Thankfully, the industry is well aware of its corporate responsibility and has taken necessary steps to mitigate them. Both airlines and international aviation bodies are working hard on creating and implementing plans for the industry to go greener in the near future. The International Air Transport Association (IATA) is the trade organization for 275 member airlines which represent 83% of the world’s air traffic. It creates standards and best practices for aviation and remains dedicated to addressing the environmental issues. In 2015, with the support of ClimateCare, the association launched a project called IATA Offset Program which urges airlines to outweigh the effects of the pollution it causes.
The foundations of this initiative are basic yet realistic: there is no similar alternative to travel by air at the moment and we are unable to significantly reduce the carbon dioxide levels produced by modern aircraft. But we can do something for the communities affected by it or invest in research looking for ways to reduce it. Virgin Australia takes part in the carbon offsetting program through its Fly Carbon Neutral strategy. And they are very proud of it. All the funds are directed to projects verified and endorsed by the Australian government. One of them is The New Leaf Carbon Project under Tasmanian Land Conservancy. The initiative protects thousands of hectares of native forest so that the trees can absorb carbon dioxide and, thus, lower its concentration in the air Qantas is our flag carrier, “the spirit of Australia”. It is the biggest airline Down Under in many aspects: by fleet size or number of international routes. Its status and reputation bear a lot of responsibility, especially on the environmental front.nd Qantas doesn’t disappoint. It boasts one of the “greenest” environmental programs in the world called Future Planet which comprises of very diverse areas: from investing in the research on aviation biofuels to reducing plastic on every flight or using new technologies (such as LED lighting) in the passenger cabin. Qantas is currently the biggest offsetting airline in the world, having started in 2007. One of the projects supported by our national airline helps ensure that the North Kimberly region doesn’t suffer from uncontrollable and dangerous wildfires. This is also done in cooperation with the Indigenous owners of the land and using their traditional methods.
.
24
Flying is a fascinating topic. But, being a human rights organization, why would Amnesty International even care? Because we strongly agree with the UN Human Rights High Commissioner that “without a healthy environment, we are unable to fulfil our aspirations or even live at a level commensurate with minimum standards of human dignity.� And it is uplifting to see that the aviation industry takes corporate responsibility seriously, investing in a greener future for us and our planet.
25