Doug PollardGay Tamil Refugee / Gay Bloodban Reviewed
Transcript - Andie Noonan - Freshly Doug 23/09/2010
DOUG: Now it is time to talk to the Editor of (the) Southern Star Observer as it says on the masthead – Andie Noonan, good morning Andie.
ANDIE: Good morning Doug, how are you?
DOUG: I’m pretty good; you’ve snuck an extra word onto your masthead.
ANDIE: Yes, I know. Sneaky – wasn’t it? It makes more sense this way.
DOUG: Well, it does. Sooner or later I expect their both going to be called: Star Observer and we’re going to forget about where they come from. But for the moment this is the Melbourne edition?
ANDIE: Yes.
DOUG: (and)All over your front page you’ve got a story about a gay refugee who’s actually been moved from Sydney down to - - -
ANDIE: To Melbourne.
DOUG: What’s the story here, Andie?
ANDIE: This is a bit of background – yes, Leela Krishna is a gay Tamil refugee. Leela’s quite out and has in fact, been in contact with the Sydney gay and lesbian community and has had lots of dealings with – they’ve gone to visit him, they’ve had communication at some point while he’s been in Villawood - - -
DOUG: M’mm, m’mm.
ANDIE: - - - he’s been granted refugee status in April this year.
DOUG: Hang on a minute – if he’s got refugee status why is he still locked-up?
ANDIE: That’s a very good question and this is – this gets to the nub of the issue, Doug; he’s still waiting for his security check and this is the key issue that – m’mm, refugee rights groups are really calling the government to account on because there’re still a whole lot of refugees who have been granted the status. But they’re still behind bars because the security checks take such a long time and now, he’s been in there since April. Since he was granted refugee status. There’s talk people have been in there 16-months waiting for security checks so, the length of time that people are waiting – it’s ridiculous, really - - -
DOUG: This is a little odd, isn’t it – I mean, why grant the man refugee status before you clear him on security grounds because it seems fairly obvious to me – probably not to the federal government, but it seems fairly obvious to me – if someone doesn’t pass a security check you don’t give them refugee status?
ANDIE: Yeah - - -
DOUG: Not the other way ‘round.
ANDIE: - - - well, a lot of people agree with you and one of the things that – m’mm, that some of the activists around this area are saying is there should be a situation where people can house people and particularly in this case, where Leela’s had dealings with the community in some ways. I know that certainly, when I was speaking to the Community Action Against Homophobia group who staged a protest over this they said, well, look – we’d be happy to house Leela, ‘this is ridiculous that he has to be locked up’ - - -
DOUG: M’mm.
ANDIE: - - - the other issue on this front is that he was assaulted while he was in the maximum security area of Villawood, on August 3 – so, this is after he’d been granted this status. Now, he had discussions with the Department and it was decided that he would be moved down to Melbourne instead of to the – to the housing section; apparently, he was told the housing section’s only for families – you know, women and children.
DOUG: Ah, ha. Well, there’s two problems with that, isn’t there; one, is why is this secure housing only for heterosexual families with children - - -
ANDIE: M’mm.
DOUG: - - - and the other one is, why should he be any safer from assault or homophobic abuse in the Melbourne detention centre than he is in the Sydney one?
ANDIE: Exactly and very good questions. This issue of the housing and Mark Goudkamp of the Refugee Action Coalition brought this very point up. He said this points to a problem with the actual model of who is allowed to go into the housing section of the detention centres. Because the nuclear family just doesn’t work for everyone, it’s not fair to move people around simply because they don’t fit into the right ideals – you know - - -
DOUG: It’s very old fashioned, isn’t it?
ANDIE: - - - or otherwise.
DOUG: You know, it’s sort of: women and children first into the lifeboats - - -
ANDIE: Yes - - -
DOUG: - - - kind of thing?
ANDIE: It’s interesting to see what will happen with this and obviously, it’s very topical at the moment – hugely so – the Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young has spoken-out against this particular case and said that he should be remaining in Sydney and if there is any problem with homophobia, inside the detention centre – which I understand is a problem for Leela – then it should be deal with. By the detention centre staff and the Department.
DOUG: Yeah. Of course, it’s exceedingly stressful to be stuck inside these places. As we’ve heard over and over again, I think we ought to have learnt this lesson by now. It’s extremely stressful to be lock-up in these places with no idea of when you’re going to be let out.
ANDIE: M’mm.
DOUG: That’s a huge problem, no matter whether you’re straight, gay – whatever.
ANDIE: Exactly. Leela’s quite interesting in a sense, ‘cause he’s being quite open about it. I understand he’s quite open about his sexuality and he’s sought out the gay community in Sydney. But if you think of someone who perhaps, isn’t out of the closet and they’ve got to conceal that that would be an extra difficulty, added on to the pressures already there. So – yeah, it’s a very difficult situation. It’s a difficult issue, across the board for everyone involved.
DOUG: Yes, it is; well, let’s hope we get some resolution on that soon and hopefully, we’ll be able to hook him up with gay groups down here, in Melbourne. On the same basis as Sydney.
ANDIE: Yes. I know that – m’mm, the CAAH are certainly in talks with Melbourne groups to get that all sorted so he’s got at least, some people to communicate with down here and hopefully - - -
DOUG: Good - - -
ANDIE: - - - he’ll be out soon.
DOUG: That’s the: “Communication Action Against Homophobia”, yeah?
ANDIE: Yes.
DOUG: Okay. Now, the other story that is a big story in the paper this week, the review of the blood ban now this is a story that’s been rattling on – gosh, I can remember doing stories on this years back - - -
ANDIE: [laughs]
DOUG: - - - on the Rainbow Report with Michael Cain down in Tasmania - - -
ANDIE: Yeah.
DOUG: If you’re a gay man and you’ve had sex in the last 12-months you’re not allowed to give blood.
ANDIE: Yep.
DOUG: The argument here is that we do unsafe things and therefore, our blood is not safe if we’re sexually active. But they don’t actually test to make sure and they allow heterosexuals to get up to all sorts of things and don’t ask them what they’ve been doing and they’re allowed to donate.
ANDIE: Indeed; this is – kind of, the first positive news that’s come out, really. ‘Cause – and as listeners would be well aware, Michael Cain who was campaigning on this went to the Tasmanian tribunal and contested this policy by the Red Cross and lost that case. Many people perhaps thought that that might be the last we’d hear of it for certainly, the immediate term. But - - -
DOUG: Now they’re going to review it - - -
ANDIE: - - - yeah - - -
DOUG: Why have they suddenly decided to do that, do you think?
ANDIE: It’s hard to know – I mean, there’s talk that it’s happening in the States. I know there’re various other countries in Europe have got a lot further on this than Australia has. But I think the fact that the US was willing to review this is something that’s shifted, perhaps - - -
DOUG: M’mm, m’mm.
ANDIE: They haven’t said that that’s the reason behind it. But usually it takes someone else to lead the way [laughs]
DOUG: So, the Red Cross are conducting the review themselves. Yes?
ANDIE: Well, no. Which is interesting - - -
DOUG: Oh?
ANDIE: - - - yes, it’s independent in a sense that the review committee will be chaired by an independent chair. Someone from – actually, the Dean of Medicine from Monash – and then it will include a whole raft of people, an ethicist, an epidemiologist – and there’ll also be representatives from the gay and lesbian community. I’m not sure who at this stage, they’ll be - - -
DOUG: I gather they’re being a bit picky about that.
ANDIE: Well, that’s the other thing. These positions have to be approved by the Red Cross - - -
DOUG: M’mm.
ANDIE: - - - but essentially, though, they will come to the table. Not necessarily with their Red Cross hats on. They are independent in that sense. So the other thing is, it will be taking public submissions. In the review process, the public will have a chance to have a say; then, the final policy will be reviewed by lawyers and whatever decision is made will still need to be approved by the Therapeutic Goods Administration then – yeah, we’ll see where that goes. But I guess, it’s the best-case scenario that could be here and I know that Michael Cain has said this is probably the best thing that could happen from here, to move forward on this issue.
DOUG: Well, it does at least sound as though they’re going to take some genuine evidence, now – whereas, in the previous (it) seemed to be based on assumptions. The assumption that what gay men did was inherently risky and therefore, our blood donations ought to be banned. This is going to be looking at actual evidence; so, that’s definitely a step forward.
ANDIE: Yes and I know that in the tribunal there was evidence from either side – I mean, you can use a raft of statistics and apply them - - -
DOUG: Yeah.
ANDIE: - - - to – whichever, so – m’mm – hopefully, it’ll be a little more level headed than a court room [laughs]
DOUG: Okay. Well, let’s hope so and of course Southern Star Observer will be keeping us up-to-date with that story as will you?
ANDIE: Indeed.
DOUG: Andie, thank you very much for joining us this morning - - -
ANDIE: Thank - - -
DOUG: - - - it’s nice to talk to you on air, again
ANDIE: - - - you. Me too - - -
DOUG: After all this time.
[laughs]
DOUG: That’s Andie Noonan, there. The editor of Southern Star Observer, talking about the Red Cross blood ban.
