Last Updated 10 October 2002.
This statement was provided by Harold Bilboe to the National Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention
STATUTORY DECLARATION
I, Harold Bilboe, of [address removed], Psychologist, do solemnly and sincerely declare as follows:
Background
1. I make this statement for the purposes of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission's Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention.
2. I am a qualified psychologist, holding a BA (Psychology), Grad Dip (Psychology), Grad Dip (Clinical Hypnosis), and Masters in Psychology.
3. I was employed by Australasian Correctional Management (ACM) at the Woomera Immigration Reception and Processing Centre (WIRPC) as a Psychologist from approximately October 2000 until December 2001 on a contractual basis. There were some times during this period that I was not working, but the total period for which I was working at the WIRPC during this period was approximately 14 months.
4. I was also employed from 9 January 2002 to 5 February 2002 at the Curtin Immigration Reception and Processing Centre (CIRPC) as a Psychologist.
5. At the expiry of my contract at the CIRPC despite several expressions of interest on my part, I was not offered a new contract. I have no ongoing relationship with ACM or legal claim against them.
6. Within a month of my having ceased employment with ACM, the 3 remaining long-term members of the mental health team also left employment at WIRPC. The contracts of the members of the team were not renewed. I was of the view that the reason that ACM did not offer to renew the contracts of myself, and others in the team was that we had increasingly begun to complain about the poor psychological condition of detainees, particularly children, and their treatment in detention at the WIRPC.
7. I am currently employed as psychologist with NSW Corrective Services at the Mannus Correctional Centre. I have been employed there since May 2002.
8. I have extensive experience in working with children. In particular, I was employed for 9 years in the area of child protection with the NSW Child and Family Services (now DOCS). Prior to that worked at Port Kembla (Lysaghts Employee Credit Union) as a financial counsellor and also worked (voluntarily) as a youth worker and advocate with Wollongong City Council. While in Wollongong I established the first youth refuge in NSW and was given the Wollongong Citizen of the Year Award in 1984 for services to the community in connection with youth work and working with refugees.
Work at the WIRPC
9. I was, to my knowledge, the first psychologist employed at the WIRPC. When I arrived there were no policies, procedures or guidelines for the provision of psychological services.
10. I would have expected to receive a full set of policies and procedures covering the provisions of psychological services and a full set of psychometric tools to deal with the range of clinical assessments likely to be relevant in that environment. These were things that a normal service would have on hand but none of them had been purchased. I put in submissions and requests and no response was received.
11. This meant that clinical assessments had to be made on the basis of my own clinical experience, rather than with the use of proper psychometric assessment. Children presented daily with symptoms of trauma and required clinical assessment. While I was often able to make appropriate assessments on this basis, this would have been more difficult for people with limited experience, and was not optimal. It is not how I would have expected to operate in, for example, a correctional environment.
12. I was employed on 80-hour fortnight but worked on average 140 hours. I was never paid overtime, nor was I able to take time in lieu. I was, in fact, criticised for working excessive hours and contracts were financially reduced along with conditions. However, even in the extended hours I worked, I was simply not able to attend to the needs of all the detainees.
13. Later in my time at the WIRPC almost all of my work hours were taken up with dealing with people who had self-harmed, which left no time for treating other people who required counselling.
14. Initially I didn't have an office. I shared an administration desk. I interviewed people in the open, under trees and sat on steps and begged and borrowed office space from time to time. The first and only individual office consisted of a three metre by three metre demountable site office. This was referred to by officers as "Harold's box". An office was made available 4 months before I finished in the old medical centre. However, we were required to share the building with the education unit and this was unsatisfactory as confidentiality was compromised - people could see who was coming and going and the walls were so thin that people could hear what was being said in other rooms.
Environment at the WIRPC
15. There was a high level of traumatisation with features of acute anxiety and depression amongst children at the WIRPC. There were high levels of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) apparent amongst children detainees (as well as adults).
16. While some detainees, including children, experienced trauma before they were held in the detention environment, the detention environment at the WIRPC was in itself traumatising. This trauma came primarily from:
- Exposure to the violence committed on others and the self-harm of others;
- Being subjected to violence;
- Harshness of physical environment;
- Uncertainty as to length of detention and outcome; and
- Vilification by the government.
17. The main stumbling block for any therapy for detainees was the inability to change the abusive environment in which they were being held. Even if you could identify the problem and provide counselling or medication, you could not change their situation which was the basic cause of their problem.
18. It was, and remains, my view that had the conditions that existed in the WIRPC for children existed in the general community, the children would have been removed from that environment. Children were both being abused and likely to be abused in the WIRPC - emotionally, psychologically and physically. This was known to both ACM and DIMIA.
Exposure to violence
19. Children were significantly traumatised by the exposure to violence in a number of forms at the WIRPC. These were factors outside their control. It was impossible to shield children from these influences because of the nature of environment at the WIRPC. There was simply nowhere for children to be moved.
20. Children witnessed repeated acts of self-harm by adult detainees (such as cutting themselves with razor blades and lip-stitching), hunger strikes, numerous attempted suicides by hanging, disruptive and abusive behaviour, mass demonstrations, destruction of property, riots, use of batons, shields and tear gas by ACM officers and use of water cannons on detainees.
21. Children saw the destruction of the areas in which they played and undertook activities, such as the education facilities. The loss of their areas and things in them such as their artworks caused them distress.
22. Children were also subjected to personal violence during disturbances. I saw tear gas used 2-3 times on groups that included children. I also saw a water cannon used 4-5 times on groups involving children during demonstrations. On one occasion when there was a riot in 2001, a water cannon drove through a fence while women and children were present.
23. I also saw adolescent children cuffed behind their backs and carried by their elbows on a number of occasions. I saw this once during a major demonstration and during other minor demonstrations. Detainees were cuffed behind their backs. This is a practice that is not used in other correctional centres. Children were released from the handcuffs once it was determined that they were children, but the marks from the cuffs were still visible on their wrists. Plastic flexicuffs were used.
24. There were numerous effects of these experiences on children. These included withdrawal, nightmares, bedwetting, serious sleep disturbance and loss of appetite.
25. As time progressed, incidents of self-harm amongst children increased. The response to the high levels of trauma to which children were exposed changed from being withdrawn to self-harm. By the time I left, self-harm was almost universal amongst unaccompanied minors (UAMs). Amongst those children in detention with their parents, the main problem was loss of appetite or a refusal to eat.
26. There was no evidence at all that children were being starved by their parents. Parents may not have been going to meals because of loss of appetite or because they were bedridden with depression, but children would be taken to meals by others where possible.
27. Amongst the self-harm that occurred while I was at the WIRPC, there was lip stitching amongst adolescents. There was no evidence of which I was aware to suggest the involvement of parents or adults in the stitching of children's lips. The only time I heard of these allegations of the involvement of adults in stitching the lips of children was from the Minister for Immigration.
28. The violent incidents to which children were exposed increased exponentially the longer people were in detention. With longer periods of detention came increased desperation and increased violent and inappropriate behaviour by detainees.
29. Accommodation at the WIRPC was also inadequate and inappropriate for children. While I was employed at the WIRPC, children and families were kept in compounds with large numbers of single adult males with no effective supervision. This exposed children to an unacceptably high risk of sexual and physical abuse.
30. There were a number of occasions on which families were moved into Sierra compound where high risk and disruptive detainees were kept, when their cases had been rejected on appeal. This was a completely inappropriate environment for women and children. I recall one family in particular that had 3 girls and they could not leave their room while they were there.
31. The programme under which women and children were allowed to live in designated houses in the Woomera town was extremely selective and was only available at a primary visa stage. It therefore seemed to be stepping-stone to getting visa rather than a programme designed to help women and children. Children at risk were not moved there, despite recommendations from the psychological team.
Harshness of conditions at the WIRPC
32. There was no grass and no adequate recreation facilities for children. In the latter part of last year some playground equipment was finally erected. Some lip-service was given to making the environment better, and token gestures such as the painting of buildings and planting trees were made, but the basic situation remained unchanged. Community groups donated some toys for the use of detainees while I was there.
33. Initially there was no real access to television, radios, cassettes, newspapers, magazines and books for children or adults. This improved by the time I had left - although this had the disadvantage of exposing detainees to vilification of them in the media.
34. The focus of the WIRPC was on security and this was reflected in the changes in fences over time to high palisade fences and razor wire.
35. The model upon which the WIRPC was run was a correctional one. The guards had prison backgrounds and were used to dealing with criminals. Accordingly I observed that many of the officers treated detainees as if they were violent criminals. There were some changes to a less correctional model during the first 12 months that I was at the WIRPC but this did not last.
36. There was inadequate education available to children of all ages. The level of education fell well short of a minimum standard for children. I observed children go backwards in leaps and bounds because of the destructive environment and the lack of any basic education programme.
37. I advocated the use of the Catholic school in town to provide a regular educational programme from 8.30 to 3.30pm each day. In my opinion this would have been a significant improvement, however, I understand that there were community objections to the proposal.
38. Sometimes children were able to have an excursion to Breen Park in the Woomera Township, but this happened neither regularly nor often.
I also part of a team that arranged for the children to go to the movies on one occasion. This was conditional that the staff made sure the movie theatre was cleaned up afterwards.39. Diet was also inadequate for children. They were required to eat the food provided to all detainees. There was no culturally appropriate diet and no freedom of choice. Fruit was restricted to one piece per person and extra could not be removed from the dining room. Milk was restricted and only after much debate that families were allowed to have yoghurt - which is a staple part of many detainees' diets in their own countries. On occasions, I would eat with the detainees and on one occasion (I cannot specify the date) I refused to eat the food and complained.
Uncertainty
40. The uncertainties surrounding length of detention and the processing of visas was a significant traumatising factor for all detainees. The children absorbed the stresses of the community in the WIRPC.
41. I was especially concerned about the level of advice and assistance provided to UAMs in the visa process. This appeared to be inadequate and significant anxiety and confusion was expressed to me by UAMs.
42. From my observations, UAMs did not receive any legal advice or assistance until their second interview with DIMIA, which may not have taken place for 6 weeks after having been taken into detention. At their first interview, when they were screened in or out of the protection visa system, they were not, to my knowledge, provided with legal advice or representation by a lawyer or other advocate who was acting solely in their interest. They received legal advice for the second interview, but their contact with the legal advisers was sporadic and infrequent.
Vilification in the Media
43. I was also very concerned about the effect on detainees and children of vilification of asylum seekers that appeared in the media. Much of this took the form of negative stereotyping and allegations made by politicians. The portrayal of asylum seekers as criminals and bad people caused children significant distress. Children asked me: "Why do they say we are bad people?" and "Why do they call us criminals?"
Breakdown of Family
44. I saw parents age daily in detention as a result of the stress of detention. Over time many lost their ability to function effectively as parents and I saw family relationships break down. Parents felt guilt for what they thought they had done to their family in bringing them into this environment.
45. Where parents developed depression, they were often put on medication, which further affected their ability to function. I was of the view that there was an over-reliance on medication in treating detainees with depression.
46. One effect of this on children was to become obsessed with getting a visa to save their family.
Responses to child abuse and neglect
47. Initially when I started at the WIRPC there were inadequate procedures for dealing with child abuse. There was no policy for reporting child abuse. We were lead to believe that we were within a federal jurisdiction and there was no need to report incidents to the South Australia Family and Youth Services (FAYS).
48. This changed when the Flood Report was released in February 2001. From this time on I felt that the procedure for dealing with child abuse was adequate. Where there were allegations of child abuse, children were moved away from alleged perpetrators (but not removed from the centre) and the matter was reported to FAYS.
49. Because I regarded the environment in which children were held as abusive I raised this with ACM. I was told this was a DIMIA matter. I raised this with DIMIA and I was fobbed off. My colleagues and I expressed the view in clear terms that children should be removed from detention because they were either being exposed to abuse or a likelihood of abuse.
50. I regarded the failure to remove UAMs, over whom the Minister for Immigration was guardian, from the WIRPC as a matter of particular concern. There did not appear to be a competent and independent advocate for UAMs.
Conditions at the CIRPC
51. The main difference with the CIRPC was that there was greenery around. However, there were still minimal activities available.
52. The feelings of helplessness and hopelessness were still prevalent, although the level of desperation was less.
53. While I was employed at the CIRPC there was an incident of grave-digging by adults. They dug graves and lay in them as a form of protest. This was witnessed by children.
54. At CIRPC the UAM management programme was different to that at the WIRPC. There was more documentation and a management plan for each UAM. These plans identified needs but in many ways these needs could not be addressed simply because they were in detention. It was a start but identifying these needs it created more frustration for clinicians although it did create a document trail.
55. The education programme at the CIRPC appeared to be more structured within the compound for adults and older children received education in town for older children, which was an improvement. However, for younger children there was no real difference I could see in the inadequate levels of education and in my view the projected educational outcomes for children were again poor.
I make this solemn declaration by virtue of the Statutory Declarations Act 1959 as amended and subject to the penalties provided by that Act for the making of false statements in statutory declarations, conscientiously believing the statements contained in this declaration to be true in every particular.
Signed on 16 July 2002
Site navigation
Change font size: 
