{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016492578339747113, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0038482682792743265, 'mean_word_length': 5.167796610169492, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Time for a new approach to refugee health in Australia

The national political agenda has recently been dominated by issues concerning refugees. While this is nothing new, the topic has attracted great attention during the recent Australian federal government election campaign. Also pertinent to the climate of the debates was the recent change in leadership of the Labor Government, and the subsequent action on policy directives around refugee issues. In particular, a conscious and deliberate effort to resettle refugees in rural and regional areas has been raised on the agenda. Once again, this matter is not new and has been pursued previously by the Government. However, the prospect of renewed efforts regarding this initiative has gone relatively unnoticed in social and media debate in light of seemingly more urgent debates about asylum seekers arriving by boat. On the later issue, discourses and debates have been dominated by arguments about national border security on one hand and the need to uphold and protect the human rights of asylum seekers on the other. But what of the human rights of those who have been granted visas and are currently resettling in Australia? There are matters of concern for this population that should not be overlooked in the midst of more topical debates concerning asylum seekers. The Government’s reasons for promoting the resettlement of refugees in rural and regional areas are primarily about promoting growth and development in those areas. Australia’s response to refugee resettlement in rural and regional areas could be strengthened with a new and equitable approach based on a human rights framework. Such a framework could provide comprehensive, appropriate and sufficient support to meet the broader and resettlement needs of refugees and communities beyond the acute phase. For instance, such a framework could make provisions for basic health and social care (invoking, as examples, Article 25 and 26 of the Declaration of Human Rights), and support to address employment and education (as examples of key human rights). Additionally, it could allow for initiatives to promote social connection and inclusion, invoking Article 27 of the Declaration, as well as culturally appropriate gendered and group based initiatives to promote long term gender and family inclusiveness in communities (invoking Articles 16, 22, 27, 29 by way of examples). Any failure to meet these basic human needs in either the s hort or longer term phases of resettlement would be a failure to address Australia’s human rights obligations, and would be to the detriment to those resettling and the broader community. We are currently presented with a new era in governance, and new opportunities to address pre-existing issues concerning refugee health and wellbeing. This includes the creation of a ministerial position focused on social inclusion. A fresh approach that evokes human rights is needed to enhance the social inclusion, health and wellbeing of refugees, and to achieve the benefits this has to offer. Such an approach would also contribute toward meeting Australia’s international human rights obligations. In the worlds of the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, “How we develop and manage our immigration policies reflects what we value as a people and how we think of ourselves as a nation”. It also serves national interests by fostering selfsufficiency and capacity building among individuals, and rural and regional communities. It is important that we embrace such an opportunity to benefit our nation’s citizens, and to enhance our position as responsible global citizens.