Senator BARTLETT (Leader of the Australian Democrats) (2:24 PM) —My question is addressed to the Minister representing the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs. Is the minister aware of the report into the mental health of children in detention that was released today, which was backed by the University of New South Wales and the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists? Is it true that children as young as four years of age are under the care of psychologists and psychiatrists and that many are taking antidepressants in our detention centres? When is the government going to admit that the detention regime is automatically seriously damaging the mental and physical wellbeing of children? Are the findings of this report, along with many other previous independent reports and findings by doctors, psychiatrists and health workers, an indication that the government, in its regime of detention of children, is acting in clear breach of our obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child? When is the government going to act to protect the wellbeing and welfare of children that the government is detaining for long periods of time? (Time expired)

Senator ELLISON (Minister for Justice and Customs) —At the outset, I advise the Senate that the study to which Senator Bartlett refers involved only 19 children from 10 families, all of whom had applications for a visa refused. Most of the families have also had their applications for appeals refused. Consistent with international standards, this group has not been found to be refugees.

It is the assertion of the government that the researchers have a strong ideological opposition to detention. The authors' objectivity and the methodology used should be questioned. There is inherent bias in involving this group of people who have been found to not be refugees in a study questioning the appropriateness of mandatory detention. It is also worth while remembering, as the researchers admit, that there could have been some exaggeration in the answers to bolster their case. The researchers also admit that there is no way of verifying many of the claims. These are very important points, which should be borne in mind when Senator Bartlett raises this issue.

It is understood that an immigration detention environment has the potential to have an impact on children. It is known, however, that many factors affect children's mental health. Parental support, family structure and relationships, access to development opportunities, including education, and general health all influence a child's mental health. The department and the services provider have sought to ensure that, wherever possible, the effect of risk factors is minimised and protection factors are maximised or enhanced in the immigration detention environment. For example, detainees have access to psychiatric and psychological services. Wherever possible, families are accommodated in family compounds, which provide a more community oriented environment. Children are given the opportunity to go on excursions and there are programs for children, including cultural and lifestyle classes, sporting activities, games and arts and crafts. Importantly, over three-quarters of children in detention are now spending most days outside detention centres in local schools.

Whilst every effort is being made to provide protective factors for children within these detention centres, the government is also taking innovative approaches to alternative detention arrangements. All women and children likely to spend more than short periods of time in detention have been given as a matter of priority the option of accommodation in a residential housing project. In this debate, it must be remembered that it has been the parents' choice to bring their children to Australia illegally, often through dangerous people-smuggling networks. Parents can also decide to return their children to their country of origin.

Senator Bartlett raises an issue which is regarded seriously by the government but, when one looks at this report and the research that has been undertaken, one must take into account those aspects which I have outlined to the Senate. To ignore that is to adopt a biased approach to a very sensitive issue.

Senator BARTLETT —Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Firstly, is the minister saying, as he appeared to, that the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists is not a credible body and that it is acting in a biased way by giving support to this report? Secondly, in noting the minister's statement that all of the children in detention have had their application for protection visas refused, does this therefore make it acceptable for the government to directly cause long-term psychological damage to children just because they have had a visa application refused?

Senator ELLISON (Minister for Justice and Customs) —What I said was that this study only involved 19 children from 10 families, all of whom had had applications for a visa refused. I said that they had a limited area of investigation and that, accordingly, the weight you would attach to that research has to be questioned. I also said there was an inherent bias, and the government does not resile from that. What we have here is a report which purports to condemn the government's policy with only a limited area of research.