Helping Australians Abroad A Review of the Australian Government's Consular Services

CHAPTER 5

GENERAL CONSULAR ISSUES

Perceptions of the Travelling Public about Consular Services

5.1 As the inquiry progressed, it became very clear that there are many different perceptions among the Australian community of the role, functions and services provided by the Australian Government's consular services. In his letter forwarding his Department's submission to the Committee, then Secretary of DFAT, Mr M J Costello, wrote:

I have felt for some time that there is a gap between public perceptions of what the Department's consular officers should be able to do, and what they actually can do. They cannot deliver people from overseas gaols, pay bail, run rescue missions, overturn custody decisions or flaunt local laws - all tasks which at least some of the travelling public expects of them and which for failure to do they have been criticised in the Australian press and even in Parliament. [1]

5.2 The consultant, Mr Tim McDonald, who was engaged by DFAT in 1995 to review its consular services, told the Committee:

With regard to public expectations, much of what public discussion there is of consular matters is ill-informed and out of touch with the realities of international dealings. There are gaps between what particular members of the public expect and what can realistically be done by governments. [2]

5.3 In his report to DFAT, Mr McDonald wrote:

In assessing the performance of a consular service there will always be areas of judgment, differing expectations of individuals and their responses to similar circumstances. Differing perceptions of where the boundaries lie between individual and family responsibilities and those of the government will always be a source of contention.

Consular officers have to cope daily with the inherent conflicts between principles of service including:

• humanitarian concern and protection of the taxpayers' interests
• consistency in the application of the rules and flexibility to respond to individual needs
• centralised control and local knowledge and judgment
• considerations (and law) of privacy and the need to inform family and media
• accountability and exercise of judgment
• assisting dysfunctional families and the invasion of privacy
• the principles enshrined in The Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and the development of international practice in the face of changing conditions of international travel. [3]

5.4 In its submission to the Committee, Austrade also commented on the expectations of Australian citizens concerning consular assistance:

Generally the Australian public has a rather optimistic view of what assistance consular staff can provide. It is usually assumed, for example, that the Australian Government will automatically fly Australians who are stranded in a foreign country for whatever reason back to Australia at no cost. There is a strongly held view that, as taxpayers, the Government should come to their aid. This causes considerable distress to the citizen and their family, particularly if medical evacuation is required, and can be a particularly difficult situation for consular staff to manage. [4]

And:

Experience at our posts suggests that most Australian citizens seeking assistance have little or no knowledge of the limits of consular assistance. Many are simply ill-prepared to deal with personal difficulties that can arise when 'far from home'. [5]

5.5 A former employee of the Australian Embassy in Washington also submitted:

In my opinion, and I must stress my opinion only, a lot of people tend to be of the opinion that when they are in trouble abroad through their own neglect that the Australian Government through the consulate or embassy will go and bail them out. [6]

5.6 The Committee received evidence that the Australian public's 'rather optimistic view' of consular assistance is not limited to major emergencies. DFAT stated that on occasions consular officers have been asked to procure opera tickets, to provide official cars, and in one case, to take a social security recipient to the bank to pick up a Department of Social Security (DSS) cheque.

5.7 Australian travellers are not the only ones who have excessively high expectations of what a consul can and can not do. A survey in 1995 carried out the by British Foreign and Commonwealth Office indicated that 70 per cent of those asked thought that a consul could automatically get them out of gaol. [7]

5.8 Misconceptions of consular services by members of the public, where these have been recorded in submissions or other documents or in the Committee Hansard for this inquiry, are dealt with during discussion of the particular service in this report.

Australian Government Consular Policy

5.9 The last occasion on which the Australian Government made a comprehensive statement on consular policy was on 27 April 1988 when the then Foreign Minister, the Hon Bill Hayden, MP, addressed the subject in the House of Representatives. He said, inter alia:

• The Government is glad to accept as a primary responsibility the protection of Australians overseas to the fullest possible extent.
• The Australian Government is prepared to do more for its citizens than prescribed in the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and more, in fact, than most other governments.
• The Government has active sympathy for Australians in difficulty but it cannot always meet their expectations either because they require action which is against international law or practice or because they are simply beyond its resources.
• Taxpayers are entitled to expect travelling Australians to act prudently.
• While we may not like or approve the laws of other countries this does not give us the right to flout or ignore them as being in some way less substantial or consequential than ours.
• Like it or not Australian[s] must obey the laws of the countries they are visiting. If Australians do not there is a limit to what their Government can do to alleviate the consequences.
• Consular officers will ensure, as far as possible, that an arrested person receives the benefits of the same laws, administration and protection of rights and redress of injury as citizens of the country where the arrest took place, will ensure access to legal representation and to regular consular assistance, including visits, and that the person detained gets the same facilities as citizens of that country.
• Consular officers cannot intervene in civil cases involving Australians, provide legal advice or achieve the release of an arrested person.
• While the Government may in certain circumstances address the question of release from arrest it is not a consular function. [8]

5.10 As Mr McDonald pointed out, much has changed in relation to consular practice since that statement was made to the Parliament. Nevertheless, many of the basic principles remain the same or are similar to those espoused by Mr Hayden. The consular service has, in recent years, become more prominent in the public arena as a result of a number of high-profile cases given extended airing in the media. These cases involved not only the Foreign Minister but other senior members of the Government in representations to other governments. The raising of the political profile of the consular service would undoubtedly have increased the status of consular work within the Department.

5.11 On 10 February 1996, the Coalition released its Foreign Policy Statement, A Confident Australia. In that statement, the Coalition made several commitments concerning its approach to consular protection:

The principal responsibility of the Australian Government is to take all steps necessary to protect and care for its citizens, including those abroad. It is imperative then that there is ministerial recognition of consular protection as a primary function of Australia's foreign policy rather than merely as a secondary diversion.

In order to assist with the care and protection of Australian citizens abroad the Coalition will take the following steps:

• conduct a full review of Australia's Consular emergency procedures;
• we will enhance and develop the role of the Department's Consular Crisis Centre. Its current responsibilities relate to cases of Australians caught in disaster and emergency overseas. Under a Coalition Government the Centre's role will also include as timely and effective a response as possible to emergency cases involving individual Australians lost, kidnapped or killed abroad. We will reallocate additional resources and specialised training to enable the Centre to carry out the new responsibilities as effectively as possible; and
• upgrade the Honorary Consul system in order to provide Australians with more points of contact in areas of the world not covered by formal Australian diplomatic representation.

A particular focus of consular protection will be to ensure that there is consistent and high quality attention to the family members of those Australian citizens who have been subject to mishap whilst abroad.

5.12 In November 1996, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Hon Alexander Downer, wrote to the Committee concerning the Government's views on consular services. He stated that the Howard Government had 'given the greatest possible attention to our consular obligations to all Australians'. He pointed to the appointment of a Parliamentary Secretary, the Hon Andrew Thomson, to be responsible for consular and aid matters; personal representations made to foreign governments on a number of consular cases; the establishment of the Consular Response Group; and, the continued development of the Honorary Consul program as examples of the Government's commitment to consular service.

5.13 The Committee notes the Government's views on consular services and the measures already implemented, particularly the appointment of a Parliamentary Secretary with oversight of consular matters. However, given the higher public profile for the consular service and the misconceptions which members of the public often have about what the consular service can and cannot do for Australians overseas, the Committee believes it is timely for the Minister for Foreign Affairs to make a further public statement on consular policy and practice.

5.14 Mr McDonald recommended that the Minister for Foreign Affairs, in the context of this Committee's inquiry, make a further statement, taking account of changes that have occurred in consular practice since 1988, 'to redefine the context in which the Department carries out its consular responsibilities and to guide officers in the performance of their duties'. [9] The Committee concurs with this view.

Fees for Services

5.15 It is currently the policy not to charge for any consular service provided by a post or from DFAT in Canberra other than for legal process (including the performance of notarial acts, the taking of oaths, affirmations and declarations and service of documents abroad). [10] The cost of providing consular services is already largely if not fully met from revenue received from the issue of passports, depending on the method of calculating consular costs. In one sense, then, Australians travelling overseas have already paid for the consular services to which they are entitled to receive in times of need.

5.16 The Committee believes that consular services which are currently free of charge should remain free of charge to Australian citizens and those people of other nationalities who are entitled to use Australian consular services under sharing arrangements or in emergencies. It is very much in the national interest for travellers not to be deterred from seeking advice or help from an Australian post overseas, especially where their personal safety may be at stake. The Committee was told that backpackers do not readily seek advice from Australian posts. Many other Australians probably have a similar tendency to avoid Australian posts, even when they are proposing to travel in dangerous areas. Charging for consular services would only deter more people from seeking official advice. This would be counter productive as the time, effort and cost of helping someone who has got into serious trouble by not seeking advice would far outweigh the revenue gained from a fee for service.

5.17 In any event, the Committee believes that the Australian Government has a duty to assist Australians in need of help overseas and that such assistance should be free of charge.

Consular Public Affairs Activities

5.18 As already stated, there appears to be misconceptions and unrealistic expectations amongst a large number of travellers about what consular assistance is available. The prevalence of such views can lead to time-consuming misunderstandings, confusion and frustration for travellers and consular officers, both in Canberra and overseas. A further matter is to ensure that the public know how to reduce the risk of getting into difficulties overseas and that the travelling public is alert to possible dangers before they leave Australia. A more informed and better prepared travelling public would reduce avoidable demands on consular staff thereby freeing resources to assist those Australians in real need.

5.19 The Department undertakes a number of activities to inform and educate the public, politicians, industry groups and the media about the consular service. Briefings are given to MPs' and Senators' staff, seminars are conducted for the travel industry and the media is briefed on individual cases and on general consular matters. The Department also distributes a number of publications.

5.20 DFAT publishes quarterly the Consular Newsletter which contains information on travel and related subjects. Although it is intended for the travel industry and is sent to all Australian Federation of Travel Agents' (AFTA) members, copies are also distributed to others who ask for it and to MPs and Senators.

5.21 Since 1975 DFAT has included a guide to travellers with every Australia passport issued. The present publication, Hints for Australian Travellers, contains general information on visas, inoculations, health issues and travel insurance, and warnings on some of the difficulties that a traveller may encounter overseas. The limits of consular assistance are described and information on voting, customs and quarantine matters and the dangers of child sex tourism are included. Locations and telephone numbers for consulates, Honorary Consuls and foreign embassies providing consular assistance to Australians are provided. Hints for Australian Travellers contains advertising to help offset the cost of the publication.

5.22 Although Hints contains important information for travellers, there are limits to its usefulness. As Hints is only issued with new passports, a traveller would normally only receive a copy once every 10 years. It is also often misplaced, lost or forgotten during the ten year period of the currency of the passport.

5.23 DFAT has been addressing this problem. Hints is now available on the Internet and a new pamphlet, Travelling Overseas? has been produced. This pamphlet contains a list of services that consular officials provide to travellers and other relevant information for travellers abroad. It is available at all departure points in Australia. DFAT reported that the pamphlet has been well received at travel industry seminars. However, as the pamphlet had to be funded from the consular budget, Mr Fisher, First Assistant Secretary, Public Affairs and Consular Branch, thought they had insufficient funds to meet the demand from travel agents for copies of the pamphlet. He said they were considering seeking sponsorship for the publication, which would enable a wider distribution of the publication. [11]

5.24 The Committee commends the Department for its production of Travelling Overseas? However, the Committee notes that both Hints and Travelling Overseas? are available only in English and that resource restrictions may prevent the wider distribution of the new pamphlet, for example, to community groups and institutions such as the Youth Hostels Association, as well as the whole travel industry.

5.25 Many other areas of government publish information in a number of languages to ensure that Australian residents whose first language is not English understand fully the information that is being disseminated. The Committee believes it is important for all Australian residents travelling abroad to have access to official travel advice and be aware of available consular services in a language which they fully understand. There is also the matter of access and equity for people who were raised in non-English speaking families. The Committee is cognisant of resource constraints to which the Department is subjected but believes that such constraints should not override the welfare and safety of Australians travelling abroad.

5.26 Mr Fisher told the Committee in March 1997 that they had run a program of seminars for the travel industry to discuss consular activities, travel insurance and other matters. Mr Hamilton, Assistant Secretary, Consular Branch, also said that they had been working with Australian institutions that run training courses for the travel industry to have included in those courses segments on consular services. He reported 'the reaction from many institutions has been very positive. While I am sure they would love us to run the course for them, we are not going to do that, but we will be, wherever we can, putting out information to them.' [12] This approach is aimed at informing prospective travel agents about consular services before they enter the industry rather than a reliance on peak industry bodies disseminating information to their members.

5.27 However, AFTA said that among the general public there is still a widespread lack of knowledge consular services and even how to contact the Department. Mrs Allom of AFTA stated that the Federation often received telephone calls from the public following press statements about the safety of travel overseas as they did not know where to seek further information. The Federation suggested that a 'help desk' be established by DFAT and that the Department should publicise its services. [13]

5.28 The lack of awareness of DFAT's role was also highlighted in a submission to the Committee from the mother of an Australian extradited to the Netherlands. She stated that it was not until three months after extradition that she 'stumbled onto Foreign Affairs' and that on arrival in the Netherlands her son had at first declined consular assistance as he did not understand the role of consular services. [14]

5.29 In evidence in May 1997, Mr Fisher told the Committee that a new unit had been established within the Consular Operations Section whose purpose is to provide better information to the travelling public. Mr Fisher stated:

We have had a lot of talks in our meetings with you about travel advices and it has seemed to us that perhaps we can improve the level of service which we give to the travelling public in providing information to travellers. Up until now, we have had at one extreme, travel advices which have tended to cover those quite serious causes of concern in other countries and then, at the other end of the spectrum, we have been giving advice to people at embassies. But there has been - and I think your hearings have pointed to this - perhaps a bit of a gap in the advice we have been giving to travellers before they leave Australia. [15]

Mr Fisher said that travellers will be able to ring the Department and ask for advice on travelling to particular countries. The unit will gather 'the sort of information which would be relevant to travellers who will actually be visiting a place and who wish to get some advice on that place before they go'. [16] At the time of the May 1997 hearing, the unit had just been brought into operation.

5.30 The Committee welcomes the formation of the information unit. Although detailed information about particular countries has been available from 'geographic desks' within the Department, the information provided by the unit will focus more on the special needs of travellers. The Committee believes that with better preparation, fewer travellers will get into trouble which will in turn reduce the call on consular services. However, the success of the unit will rely on public access to it. It is therefore incumbent on DFAT to ensure that the unit's services are well advertised and promoted.

5.31 The Committee also believes that DFAT should also investigate other avenues for disseminating travel information. The Committee notes that both the United Kingdom and Canada produce a greater range of publications for their citizens. These include information for those gaoled overseas, information specifically for backpackers and independent travellers, advice for next of kin of travellers who have died overseas, information for dual nationals and advice for parents when a child has been abducted. British consular staff also participate in travel fairs (which DFAT staff also do) and the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office produces television information films (fillers) which are broadcast free to air as community service announcements.

5.32 In his submission to the Committee, Mr Tim Wilson in highlighting the role of the Government to forewarn travellers about the dangers of entering countries like Cambodia, suggested that:

Maybe this could be done by community awareness advertisements on T.V. and newspapers sponsored by the Government, similar to drink driving campaigning which has proved to have successful results. [17]

5.33 The Foreign and Commonwealth Office also produces a range of small information pamphlets for a number of countries which list a number of 'do's and don'ts' specific to each country. Dr John Flynn in evidence on his detention under a little publicised Indian antiquities law, stated to the Committee that:

I did suggest in conversation with the consular officers that the general travel warning was so vague and so elastically expressed that it could mean almost anything. I suggested that the government might consider publishing little notes about information that was important for Australian tourists in each country with the specific warnings relating to that country. [18]

5.34 Although there are resource implications, the Committee believes that DFAT should also explore these other suggestions. In particular, the Committee believes that there is a need for information directed specifically at backpackers and independent travellers. It is often this group of travellers who will go 'off the beaten track', have limited financial resources and may decline to take out travel insurance. It is this group which will probably be reluctant to seek an up-to-date Travel Advice from the Australian post in the country in which they are travelling.

5.35 The Department is now using the Internet to bring Travel Advices and Hints to a broader audience. DFAT submitted that for the week 16-22 February 1997 the DFAT home page recorded 56,771 total hits. This is an average of 8,110 hits per day and 357 hits per hour. However, DFAT pointed out these figures show total use of the site, not just visits to consular services, as hits include visits to the home page, directories, title pages and logos. Moreover, the figures include access to the home pages by departmental staff as well as international visitors.

5.36 DFAT provided a breakdown of hits during the sample week by origin with 27 per cent from Australia, 17 per cent from US commercial sources, 10 per cent from networks, 5.6 per cent from US educational institutions, 20 per cent from other origins and 18 per cent unknown. The consular travel advice section was the most frequently visited part of the site, with the media, press release and speeches pages the next most visited part of the site. This was followed by departmental publications. [19]

5.37 The Committee believes that access to Internet information will benefit travellers who have access to the Internet, the number of whom is growing rapidly. This is an economical means of disseminating consular advice and information and as Mr Hamilton noted, 'presumably it is more likely to be tapped into by younger persons than older people'. [20] However, DFAT's task is to make its web site widely known, not only to the travel industry but also to the travellers themselves.

Travel Advices

Policy and practice

5.39 The Consular Branch of DFAT is responsible for issuing Travel Advices 'to alert Australian travellers and the travel industry to the potential dangers in visiting certain countries or regions'. A Travel Advice normally suggests one of the following graduated courses of action to travellers:

• exercise due care
• maintain a high level of personal security awareness
• consider deferring non-essential travel
• consider avoiding all travel. [21]

5.40 The Travel Advice also refers readers to the Department or the relevant post for more information. As at 16 January 1997, 49 Travel Advices were current.

5.41 The Department submitted that Travel Advices are not issued for all areas which may be potentially dangerous for travellers. It uses the following points to decide whether there is justification for issuing a Travel Advice:

• the nature of the threat posed to foreign visitors;
• the number (and prospect) of Australian visitors to the country/region;
• the number of Australian residents in the country/region;
• the profile of the situation in the local and international media;
• the capacity for local authorities to deal with the particular situation; and
• the reliability of the information on which assessments are based. [22]

In evidence, Mr Fisher explained further:

The point is: at what level do you make a threshold before you issue a travel advice? We have set our threshold fairly high. We have not put out, for example, a travel advisory on New York. People often say to us, `Why don't you?' The reason is that we have tried to keep our travel advisories at a threshold where we think the problem is at a stage where government needs to draw the attention of the traveller to that issue. We vacillate about New York and, indeed, Miami as places where we might think about putting out travel advisories. We try to couch our advisories in very general terms so that we have this broad coverage. We do not try to come in on very small specific things.

We also try not to be too prescriptive to the travellers. The Australian traveller is a free agent and can travel wherever they like. There are very few places where we actually tell people to avoid. There are a few. Somalia is one, as is Bougainville as of this weekend. South Sudan is another. We have not put out a `Don't travel' to Zaire. We have for Rwanda recently and Burundi at times. [23]

5.42 A recommendation to not travel to a country is only taken where the level of lawlessness or danger by war or insurrection is felt by DFAT to place travellers at risk of life or limb or where there is no local authority to preserve law and order or where there is outright war. [24]

5.43 Some criticism was levelled at DFAT during the inquiry because it either did not issue a Travel Advice for a specific area or for the Travel Advice system not being comprehensive enough. Mr Sam Maresh criticised DFAT for not issuing a Travel Advice regarding Kupang in West Timor following the death of his brother Ben. [25] The death of an Australian overseas, whether or not he was murdered, does not necessarily justify issuing a Travel Advice for that area. In the case of Ben Maresh, there was no evidence given to the Committee that Australians generally have been at risk in Kupang. In these circumstances, and the lack of clear evidence surrounding Ben's death, it was, in the opinion of the Committee, quite reasonable for DFAT not to issue a Travel Advice for Kupang as a result of his death.

5.44 The Travel Advices issued by DFAT are not as comprehensive as those issued by some governments, such as those of the USA or the United Kingdom. DFAT argued that those two countries have a broader web of diplomatic representation and greater resources with which to provide a more comprehensive Travel Advice system. They also have substantially more citizens travelling abroad than Australia.

5.45 In its submission, DFAT questioned the need for a more comprehensive Australian Travel Advice system, arguing that it was not aware of consular cases arising from the inadequacy of Australian Travel Advices. That may have been the case although one can never be sure that consular cases did not arise wholly or partly as a result of inadequate Travel Advices. In a dynamic world, where many areas are beset with security problems for travellers or where dangerous situations can arise quickly, it is important that Australian travellers have the best information available about the security of areas to which they propose to travel. This has added cogency with more and more Australians travelling overseas and visiting areas which may pose security risks for travellers.

5.46 There are, of course, constraints in establishing an ideal Travel Advice system. As pointed out by DFAT, it does not have resources available to provide a system as comprehensive as that of the USA or the United Kingdom (the Foreign and Commonwealth Office issued over 430 advices in 1995 covering 122 countries). Some compromises have to be made or other arrangements entered into by the Department to improve the system. Mr Fisher told the Committee in March 1997 that:

Certainly most Western governments that I know of have them [travel advice systems]. Some of them are less comprehensive than ours; some of them are more comprehensive than ours. Probably the most comprehensive would be the British, and the Americans are pretty comprehensive. The British have a very big staff working on this. They put out a much greater number of travel advices covering in a lot more detail the issues which they want to put out. We get copies of the Canadian and British ones. We do not get the American ones regularly. We cross-reference a bit with them. They get ours. Where we think there is a gap, we try to cover it. [26]

5.47 Mr Fisher went on to say that following a meeting with US consular officials the previous week, arrangements to exchange consular advices with the US should be put in place fairly quickly. The Committee understands that the new information unit within the Consular Operations Section will draw on UK and US travel advices where necessary in providing travel advice on request, sourcing the advice back to the country of origin.

5.48 DFAT drew attention to associated effects from having a Travel Advice system. It said:

The Department's primary responsibility is to protect the interests of Australian travellers. Nevertheless, it is aware that Travel Advices may have other effects. A Travel Advice may impact on the travel industry, for example through discouraging potential clients from travelling to a particular country or through triggering decisions on travel insurance refunds. Other governments may see them as having a detrimental effect on their tourist industry, or imply a lack of confidence in their security measures, and react adversely. Thus the Department is conscious of the need to be able to defend assessments made in Travel Advices in the face of critical reactions from foreign governments. [27]

5.49 When a country protests about a Travel Advice, DFAT stated:

We do say to countries who protest about the text of a travel advice that this is not a reflection of our relations, it is not a sign of good or bad relations, it is not a sign that we are about to change relations. It is nothing to do with a bilateral relationship. It is a factual assessment of what we think we should be saying to the Australian traveller, and it does not have any political content at all.

We have held that line quite strictly because, ... a number of countries, including countries which are very friendly with us, have said from time to time that they do not like the terms of the advice, they think this will impact on their tourist industry and their tourist industry is important to them economically. The argument is a very strong one, as far as they are concerned. But we do not pull our punches, if you like, on a travel advisory because of political factors; we simply say to other countries that there is just no connection between the two. [28]

5.50 A Travel Advice might discourage some travellers from travelling to a particular country but will not necessarily dissuade those people from travelling, perhaps to an alternative safer destination. Moreover, the negative effects of a Travel Advice would not be nearly as pronounced as those resulting from a well-publicised Australian death or from an Australian taken hostage overseas.

5.51 Travel Advices should not be issued lightly and the assessments should be able to be defended from criticism of relevant governments. Nevertheless, as DFAT pointed out, its primary responsibility is to protect the interests of Australian travellers and this responsibility overrides the sensitivities of other governments.

Dissemination of Travel Advices

5.52 DFAT issues Travel Advices in the form of departmental media releases. Their subsequent publication through the media is therefore dependent on editorial decisions in print and electronic media newsrooms. Obviously, the extent and nature of their exposure in the media depend largely on their newsworthiness.

5.53 DFAT includes Travel Advices on its Internet site (as media releases, not in a separate section specifically for Travel Advices) and has them placed on the Galileo, Fantasia and Abacus computer reservation systems used by most travel agents. [29] The text of Travel Advices are included in the consular newsletter which goes directly to travel agents. [30] The existence of Travel Advices is included in DFAT's publication Hints for Australian Travellers, which is given to all passport recipients. [31]

5.54 The Manager of AFTA, Mrs M Allom, told the Committee that DFAT faxed Travel Advices to AFTA which put them on AFTA's Internet site within hours of their receipt. AFTA also published Travel Advices in its bi-monthly magazine. [32]

5.55 She said that 60 per cent of travel agents in Australia (about 2,500 of 4,000) belonged to AFTA and they wrote 90 per cent of the business. There was one large travel agent which was not a member of AFTA. [33] With regard to Internet access by AFTA members, Mrs Allom said:

It is quite a new concept in the industry. Our members are just now starting, over the last 12 months, to access and become connected to it. I would say that, at the moment, probably only 30 to 40 per cent would have access, but that is growing rapidly because the CRS companies, the computer reservation system companies, are now all changing their systems to a [W]indow[s] based product, and that then can be linked to the Internet. [34]

5.56 DFAT drew attention to the problem of travel agents not accessing the Travel Advices and not passing on relevant information to their clients. DFAT had asked AFTA to include in its training courses the need for agents to give clients the text of relevant Travel Advices. However, the Department advised that it had no way of knowing whether information in Travel Advices is passed to clients by travel agents. DFAT reported, however, that at a meeting with travel agent representatives, it was suggested that it would probably take only one case of a client suing an agent for negligence for not drawing attention to a relevant Travel Advice, for most agents to begin passing on such information to clients as a matter of course. [35]

5.57 The Wilson family in their written and oral evidence to the Committee criticised DFAT for not distributing Travel Advices to places in Phnom Penh where backpackers tended to stay. In its submission, DFAT acknowledged difficulties in ensuring that Australians, proposing to travel to areas subject to Travel Advices, have the benefit of reading the Advices before finalising their travel plans. It referred to three proposals put forward by the public and the media for improving dissemination of Travel Advices, including placing them in hotels frequented by Australians, distributing them concurrent with visa issue, and making them available at foreign airports and arriving passengers.

5.58 DFAT went on to comment on these proposals:

There are obvious difficulties with each of these suggestions. Our Embassy in Phnom Penh attempted last year to put a copy of the Cambodia Travel Advice in each hotel in Phnom Penh (just one relatively small city) but found the exercise both enormously time consuming and not effective. After all, do travellers read hotel notice boards? Foreign - not Australian - governments issue visas to Australian travellers and those governments could not be expected to dissuade travellers by cooperating in the process. Equally, foreign governments could not be expected to facilitate issue of generalised warnings to travellers at the time of their arrival. Additionally, targeting airports would not reach those travellers arriving via overland routes etc.

The methods suggested above are clearly impractical and ineffective. Not only do they target travellers after they have travelled or after they have decided to travel but they are time consuming and haphazard. [36]

5.59 The Committee agrees that the above proposals are impractical and ineffective for the reasons given by DFAT. The placing of Travel Advices in hotels in Phnom Penh was obviously done at the suggestion of the Wilson family, who also put the same proposal strongly to the Committee. Apart from the question of the effectiveness of such a practice, which would be very difficult to evaluate, posts do not have the resources to undertake such tasks, other than in very exceptional circumstances. One should also not lose sight of the fact that travellers, too, have responsibilities to ensure their own safety and that of their families. Although many travellers, especially backpackers, may not want to visit an Australian embassy or high commission to obtain travel advice, this does not override the onus on them to do so, particularly in a country or region where there are obviously areas that are dangerous for visitors.

5.60 DFAT drew attention to a number of options to improve dissemination of Travel Advices, which have been under consideration:

• The Department itself might take steps to publicise the issuing of Travel Advices by purchasing advertising space in newspapers or on television and radio programs. However, the cost of this would be substantial.
• A telephone/fax 'help-line' could be established to provide both the travel industry and potential travellers with details of which countries were the subject of Travel Advices. Again, there are obvious resource and staffing implications.
• Travel Advices could be put on the Internet thus facilitating direct access to the actual texts by interested individuals. Travel Advices currently appear on the Internet as Departmental press releases rather than as Travel Advices.
• The Department could include, with every passport issued, a list of countries subject to a Travel Advice with a Departmental number to ring for further information. This would, again, have resource implications but, more importantly, passports are valid for 10 years so most travellers would not have access through this channel to up to date information.
• Relevant travel programs (eg Getaway) and publications (eg Lonely Planet series) could be encouraged to mention Travel Advices in their programs/publications. The Department has made preliminary contact with the media on this. Needless to say, the danger of travel is not always a subject that the industry wishes to stress, and Advices need to be more up-to-date than publication in books would normally allow. [37]

5.61 The Committee believes that the strategy DFAT should adopt in disseminating Travel Advices is to ensure that they are available from a number of sources on a continuing basis and then to promote the location of those sources and the need for travellers to consult them.

5.62 The purchase of advertising space in the print or electronic media would not only be an expensive option but would also only provide transient information to the public. It might provide information about a particular region at that time but would not provide continuing information about the situation in that region. It would therefore be hard to justify pursuing an option which potentially offers only limited benefits.

5.63 The Committee is astounded that, until recently, Travel Advices only appeared on DFAT's Internet site under the heading of departmental press releases and not in their own right. Travel Advices, which might affect the safety of Australians travelling abroad, have to be highlighted on DFAT's home page and not just buried among press releases.

5.64 The provision to recipients of passports of a list of countries subject to Travel Advices would be ineffective because the information contained in the Advices often dates quickly. Moreover, lists would need to be regularly updated as new Travel Advices are issued and old ones revised. More importantly, recipients should be advised about the Travel Advice system and where they can find information in the future.

5.65 A similar approach should be taken to promotion of Travel Advices in travel programs and publications. The Committee agrees that Travel Advice information can become dated quickly rendering ineffective its use in travel programs and publications. Such programs and publications should, however, be encouraged to explain the Travel Advice system and to tell viewers or readers from where Travel Advice information can be obtained.

5.66 In May 1997, DFAT told the Committee that it had established a unit within the Consular Operations Section for the purpose of providing better information to the public. Travellers will be able to ring DFAT to obtain the latest Travel Advice about a particular country or region as well as other information about the places they are travelling to. (See also paragraph 5.29.)

5.67 The UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office Travel Advice Unit, apart from having direct telephone and fax links and an Internet connection, also has a recorded telephone service providing Travel Advices for the 13 of the most popular countries visited by British tourists. Such a service, perhaps with an option to transfer to an operator, would be another method of disseminating Travel Advice information to the public.

5.68 As use of the Internet grows around the world, hotels and information services will increasingly be able to provide travellers with access to up-to-date travel advice during their travels to avoid reliance on advice received before their departure.

5.69 In a submission to the Committee, Medical Advisory Services for Travellers Abroad (MASTA) pointed out that they provide a much more comprehensive and timely travel advice service, which is based on information from the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Travel Advice Unit and US State Department Alerts. MASTA proposed combining its services with those of DFAT and to use up-to-date technology to provide a more detailed and widely disseminated travel/health advice to the public. In particular, it proposed that the service should be made available:

• At International Australian airports through a Touch Screen Information Service installed and maintained by MASTA.
• To all airline ticket purchasers a printout from Computer Reservation Systems (CRS) showing Latest Health News and Foreign Office Advice. This would be automatically issued for the destinations on their ticket (even people buying tickets on the Internet). MASTA would maintain the accuracy of this information.
• Make provision for the information to be on a 1900 number service. This service is currently restricted by Telstra and hampered by a limited number of information providers using the service.
• A joint stand at major capital city Travel Shows annually with MASTA providing information in co-operation with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

5.70 Underpinning the current Travel Advice system is the need to provide Australian travellers with current and accurate travel advice about those destinations which have been assessed as being dangerous to visitors. In times of financial stringency, with resources for new services difficult to attain, a partial out-sourcing of the Travel Advice system to an interested commercial party with expertise in the same field appears to be, superficially, a sensible approach to adopt by DFAT. Both the content and dissemination of the information would be improved without tying up scarce resources.

5.71 The Committee also notes that the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office is a user of MASTA information in the UK [38] and that MASTA has extensive information on traveller health. Information is disseminated by MASTA to 22,000 GPs through a quarterly newsletter and organisations can access its database through a modem.

5.72 The Committee believes that DFAT should discuss with MASTA whether there is some basis for co-operation in order to enhance advice given to prospective travellers about the countries to which they intend to visit, not only from the point of view of personal security but also the health risks from travelling in those areas.

Financial Assistance to Travellers

Travellers' emergency loans

5.73 Consular officers are authorised to provide small loans to Australian travellers abroad in emergencies. At the present time the loan is limited to $150 per person. If a new passport is required an additional amount is advanced. DFAT summarised the main points covered in the Consular Instructions as follows:

• recipients must be Australian citizens and emergency assistance is normally only available to short-term travellers rather than those who live overseas semi-permanently or permanently;
• Australians have no legal entitlement to financial assistance; it is only given against an undertaking to repay. Individuals with an outstanding loan can be denied a new passport until the loan is recovered;
• emergency financial assistance is designed to assist Australians who find themselves short of funds because of accident or illness, delays in departure due to cancellation of ship, aircraft etc, loss or theft of money and/or travel documents or a delay in receipt of funds from other sources. An emergency loan is available to destitute Australians awaiting repatriation;
• emergency loans are short term measures only. Recipients are expected to take immediate action to obtain funds from family/friends; and
• consular officers may without reference to Canberra lend up to $150; any application for more than this amount must be referred to the Department in Canberra. [39]

5.74 When an amount is lent to a traveller, an annotation is made in the back of their passport. Before new monies are lent, consular officers check the back of the passport to see if any amounts are outstanding.

5.75 DFAT raised two related questions in relation to consular loans of $150: whether the loan should be the same amount in all countries and whether the amount of the loan is sufficient? DFAT submitted that:

Quite clearly $150 in New Delhi or Bangkok has far greater purchasing power than the same amount in Los Angeles or Paris. There is an argument to be mounted for establishing a sliding scale of loans which takes into account the cost of living of the country in which the loan is provided. Such information is available to the Department through the figures on which it bases its cost of living allowances for Departmental officers. [40]

Austrade also questioned the setting of a global limit of $150 pointing out that in Germany this amount is 'insufficient considering the price of accommodation and basic sustenance'. [41]

5.76 In his consultant's report, Mr McDonald recommended that more flexible guidelines for loans be introduced; that the maximum level of advance be increased and the maximum advance be determined to reflect relative costs of subsistence with countries banded into three or four different levels. [42]

5.77 DFAT said in its submission that some recipients have commented that the loan was not sufficient to meet their immediate requirements. However, in evidence Mr Hamilton noted that it was not often that further amounts are requested as 'the $150 does seem to be quite adequate' and often people are only lent $20. [43] Further, each member of a family, including children, may be advanced $150.

5.78 The Committee cannot determine whether $150 is an appropriate level for emergency loans as it does not have the requisite information on the cost of living in other countries. However, as the loan is intended to meet an Australian traveller's immediate needs in an emergency (food, accommodation, etc.), the loan should be set at a level which meets those immediate needs. As flagged by DFAT, a universal loan cannot meet this objective because of wide variations in the cost of living among countries. The loan should have regard to the cost of living of the country in which it is issued. This is probably best based, at least initially, on the cost of living allowances for departmental officers. The amount of the loan should be revised each time the cost of living allowances are revised. Once the new scale of loans has been working for a while, it should be reviewed to assess whether it meets the immediate needs of recipients across all countries.

5.79 The Committee recommends that the global limit of traveller's emergency loans be reviewed to have regard to the cost of living of each country in which it is issued.

5.80 As at 1995-96, the total amount outstanding to the Commonwealth from unrepaid loans was $49,019. The following table shows the loans issued, amounts recovered and the amounts outstanding to the Commonwealth.

Table 5.1: Short Term Emergency Financial Loans to Australian Travellers

1990-91	1991-92	1992-93	1993-94	1994-95	1995-96
No. of recipients	1,155	1,009	1,015	771	689	577
Total funds loaned	$132,000	$99,560	$138,585	$83,076	$92,232	$61,143
Total funds recovered per year	$112,000	$112,294	$97,348	$73,648	$54,394	$64,062
Total funds written off per year	$20,650	$27,065	$24,474	$4,997	$29,229	$9,944
Total owing to Commonwealth		$51,282	$57,063	$64,664	$46,123	$49,019

Source: DFAT submission, p. 68.

5.81 Mr McDonald submitted that the record of repayment of loans is good with approximately two-thirds being repaid immediately and 80 per cent being recovered within 12 months. [44] DFAT stated that outstanding loans are pursued. In the last two years, there was 105 per cent and 112 per cent repayment respectively. DFAT also noted that only 20 or 30 per cent of loans extended by Canadian officials to their citizens were repaid. [45] In the case of loans provided by Canadian consular officials under the consular sharing arrangements, DFAT repays the loans to Canada and then pursues the recovery of outstanding amounts from recipients in Australia.

5.82 Although sums are written off annually and DFAT ceases to pursue actively the recovery of the loan, the passport database continues to have reference to the loan. Mr Hamilton said that the Department recovers the debt before it issues a new passport. [46]

5.83 The Committee notes that there has been a significant decline in the issue of loans in recent years. This is presumably the result of easier transfer of funds and use of credit cards. If this trend continues, or even if it slows, increases in the maximum level of advance would be offset by fewer loans issued.

Repatriation and Medical Evacuation

5.84 Australian travellers regularly seek financial assistance from consular officials to return to Australia or to arrange medical evacuation. In 1995-96, 130 Australians were given guidance and assistance in arranging their return to Australia. In the same period, 640 Australians who were hospitalised sought consular assistance while 120 of these were evacuated to another location for medical purposes. The majority of those seeking help with the costs of returning to Australia were assisted by consular officers to make alternative arrangements. Only seven requests for repatriation at Commonwealth expense were actually approved in 1995-96 and to April 1997 in 1996-97, six Australians had been repatriated. In 1995-96, six were evacuated because of a medical condition.

Repatriation

5.85 DFAT is prepared to repatriate Australians who cannot afford to pay the fare themselves. It will not generally repatriate Australians who went overseas without a return ticket or who are living overseas permanently or semi-permanently. Repatriation is only approved when the applicant cannot obtain the money for the fare from any other source, including family and friends. A guarantee of full repayment is sought before repatriation is approved. The applicant's passport is amended to restrict him or her to travelling to Australia and nowhere else until full repayment is made. In addition, the airline ticket is endorsed to prevent any change in destination or refund.

5.86 An applicant who is a single parent travelling with children must prove that they have custody of those children and have the right to remove the children from the country of present residence before any assistance is given. [47]

Medical evacuation

5.87 Travellers are expected to meet the cost of medical services or evacuations through private travel insurance or their own resources. DFAT submitted that medical evacuations to a location with adequate facilities 'are available for Australians who cannot afford to pay for it and whose medical condition demands it'. [48] Conditions and restrictions for loans for medical evacuations are similar to those applying to loans for normal repatriation, as described above.

5.88 DFAT also noted that the RAAF sometimes arranges medical evacuations (medivacs) in Hercules aircraft in the South Pacific. The evacuation is undertaken as a training exercise and so is free of cost to the Department and the patient. However, RAAF medivacs are only undertaken if an aircraft is available and it can be included in the RAAF's training program requirements. [49]

Recovery of loans

5.89 DFAT noted that the number of medical evacuations and repatriations each year are limited, but the amounts involved per person are high. For example, in the 1993-94 financial year the Commonwealth contributed $107,912.12 towards the medical and hospital charges and the cost of the evacuation of a critically ill Australian citizen from China. The family of the traveller undertook to repay the whole of the Commonwealth outlays. [50]

5.90 While recipients of repatriation or medical evacuation loans or their families or friends guarantee repayment of them, 'a sizeable amount expended by the Government is not repaid'. [51] The following table indicates the funds expended by the Commonwealth and amounts outstanding.

Table 5.2: Repatriations and medical evacuations

1990-91	1991-92	1992-93	1993-94	1994-95	1995-96
No. of persons	7	6	16	2	9	13
Total funds used	$30,190	$8,584	$27,136	$91,732	$58,396	$17,955
Total funds recovered	$7,050	$12,116	$9,325	$6,887	$9,553	$575
Total funds written off	$14,800	$1,562	$2,322	$nil	$nil	$4,669
Total funds outstanding to Commonwealth		$69,661	$83,744	$286,011	$256,279	$283,883

Source: DFAT submission, p. 69.

5.91 The Department seeks to recover money owed to it for repatriation and evacuation costs from the traveller. If the person is unable to reimburse the Commonwealth immediately, he or she is given the option of paying in regular instalments. However, under regulation, the Department has no means of recovering that money. The Passports Act requires that passport facilities be denied to persons who have debts to the Commonwealth incurred overseas and thus the only step the Department can take is to deny the recipient a new passport. DFAT raised with the Committee several options for recovery of outstanding moneys from unrepaid loans.

5.92 Repatriation and medical evacuation loans are issued on the strict condition that the loans are repaid. There is therefore an obligation on the recipient to repay the loan. In some cases it may take some time for a recipient to repay a loan, particularly following an expensive medical evacuation. There may also be on occasions special circumstances where the Commonwealth is prepared to write off the loans. However, in all other circumstances, the Department should have the power to recover public moneys from recipients of unrepaid loans.

5.93 The Committee supports an option put forward by DFAT that as a first step, the Commonwealth should have the power to impound a recipient's passport on return to Australia, to be held at the Minister's pleasure, until the loan is repaid or at least other arrangements are put in place for recovery of the money loaned. Alternatively, the passport should be endorsed to prevent further use pending repayment of the loan. This would at least prevent the recipient from travelling overseas during the currency of his or her passport, except in special circumstances, while still owing money to the Commonwealth.

5.94 As many Australians are dual nationals and have one or more other passports, or the recipient of the loan may not intend to travel overseas again, other measures should be put in place to recover outstanding loans. On the assumption that many recipients of loans may not have much money, any recovery action should take account of the financial means of the recipient. The Committee therefore does not favour using recovery measures such as the Small Claims Tribunal but prefers the more sensitive option suggested by DFAT in its submission, which is used by some European countries. This would involve:

putting in place legislative arrangements ... whereby, with the applicant's consent, emergency financial assistance can be provided and the debt registered against existing Government entitlements (eg tax refunds, social security payments) or added to the applicant's future tax liabilities. [52]

5.95 This option would take account of a recipient's ability to repay the loan and transfer the task of recovery to an agency which has the expertise and experience to handle such matters. The Committee does not believe that it would be appropriate for DFAT to administer recovery procedures. The Committee understands that similar arrangements are in place to ensure a divorced parent pays maintenance for his or her ex-spouse and child(ren) in the custody of the other parent.

Australians with Mental Illness

5.98 DFAT drew the Committee's attention to the problems of dealing with cases of mentally ill travellers. DFAT was not able to indicate to the Committee the number of cases of mentally ill travellers assisted by consular officers as it is a longstanding principle of the Department that, 'because consular officers at our overseas missions and posts are not professionally qualified to offer opinions or to make judgements about the mental conditions of their consular clients, Departmental records of consular cases do not identify, even for statistical purposes, cases where psychiatric conditions of Australian citizens may have been a relevant factor'. However, DFAT stated that anecdotal evidence from experienced consular officers indicated that a high proportion of consular repatriation cases involve persons whose mental condition appears to be a significant or dominant problem. [53] The time and resources needed to assist these travellers is considerable.

5.99 DFAT also noted that some travellers have come repeatedly to the attention of consular officials over long periods of time because of their mental illness and gave the example of one traveller who had been repatriated four times at Government expense and approximately four times at his family's expense. This matter was also raised with the Committee in written submissions, with the Arpke family submitting that a family member had for 12 years been travelling to South East Asia only to be returned to Australia in a poor medical condition, often with the assistance of consular officials. [54]

5.100 The Schizophrenia Australia Foundation (SANE Australia) submitted that there are three groups of mentally ill travellers:

• those who travel without problems and with the support of their family and friends;
• those who travel because they are becoming ill and restlessness is a symptom of emerging illness; and
• those who become ill because they travel due to stress, time and routine changes, lack of and treatment particularly medication. [55]

DFAT also noted that a person's mental deterioration may be exacerbated by the person's involvement with illicit drugs.

5.101 It is the travellers in the last two groups that come to the attention of consular staff but as DFAT noted, usually not until some problem has developed. Often the condition of a traveller who is mentally ill will come to the attention of consular staff because a local health authority has intervened or friends or fellow travellers are concerned about the persons condition. As pointed out in evidence, those suffering from mental illness will often not seek help for themselves because they are already too ill or are perhaps suffering from a persecution complex or are paranoid.

5.102 DFAT said that repatriation is not always required: in many cases, people with mental problems often resolve them by resuming their medication or seeking medical assistance. In some instances, travellers are admitted to institutions for treatment and then are returned to Australia if that is their wish or that of their next of kin.

5.103 When a traveller is repatriated to Australia, if required, DFAT will arrange for a qualified person to escort the person home or a team may come from Australia if a medical evacuation is needed. [56] The payment of a return to Australia under these circumstances would have to be met by the traveller from their own resources or through travel insurance or by the traveller's family or friends. The Commonwealth would only meet the expenses of the repatriation or medical evacuation of a mentally ill traveller if they met the criteria and on the conditions described in the section above.

5.104 Several issues were raised in evidence concerning mentally ill travellers: the training of consular staff in dealing with mentally ill travellers; the effects of the Privacy Act; and, measures to prevent persons with mental illnesses from travelling.

5.105 SANE Australia noted the need to ensure that consular staff had adequate training in the recognition and management of acute mental distress. Mr Hamilton told the Committee that the consular training course included a segment on mental illness. As part of the course, a visit is made to an institution in Goulbourn where staff of the institution provide a briefing 'to try to bring them up to a basic level of understanding how to deal with people who have such problems'. [57]

5.106 The implications of the Privacy Act on assisting mentally ill travellers are discussed in Chapter 4.

5.107 The Arpke family raised the matter of the point at which consular officials would intervene. They submitted that when they requested that Mr Arpke be returned to Australia for medical assistance they were told that he had merely to ask for assistance and they would return him to Australia. [58] However, they pointed out that if he were in a psychotic state he could not ask for help. Ms Hocking of SANE Australia commented when someone has become mentally ill, he or she may deny that anything is wrong, 'so it is a very tricky and difficult situation to get help early, unless someone knows the person well and is familiar with the surroundings they are in'. [59]

5.108 Families of people who suffer from mental illness and travel by themselves overseas have sought the co-operation of DFAT in denying them passports to prevent further overseas travel. In one case noted by DFAT, the family of a traveller has refused to pay the costs of repatriation of the traveller taking the view that 'the Government has a responsibility to them and to [the traveller] to deny him access to the necessary travel documents'. [60]

5.109 DFAT submitted that:

While the Department is sympathetic to these requests the Passport Act does not provide for the withholding of a passport on the grounds of mental illness. This issue was the subject of deliberations by an Inter-Departmental Committee which concluded in 1979 that it was neither feasible nor desirable for the Government to take any legislative or administrative measures to overcome problems caused at overseas posts by Australians suffering from mental illness. This policy was reviewed and supported by relevant Departments (Attorney-General, Health, Social Security, DFAT) in 1982. The Department's legal advisers continue of the view that there is no role for passport administrators in determining the eligibility of passport applicants in terms of mental health. [61]

DFAT suggested that family members of a person suffering from a mental illness might try to prevent the person from travelling overseas under a State/Territory Mental Health Act. In the absence of any determination under a Mental Health Act, a passport would only be denied a traveller if he or she had failed to reimburse the Commonwealth for the cost of a previous repatriation. This, of course, would only occur when the passport came due for reissue. However, the Arpke family told the Committee that they had tried, unsuccessfully, to use the guardianship law in NSW to stop their family member from travelling overseas.

5.110 Ms Barbara Hocking of SANE Australia said that there were no easy solutions but there was a need to balance the rights of people whose illness is well managed to travel freely, as opposed to the right to treatment of people who are becoming ill or who have become ill while travelling. As well, the rights of families to information and to have their social and financial status maintained should be preserved. [62] Ms Hocking suggested that people who have had one or more experiences of repatriation on medical grounds, owing to a relapse of a pre-existing mental illness, might be asked for a medical certificate/statement from a practising medical practitioner before a passport or ticket is issued. Such a statement would be to the effect that the person is able to travel and is prepared with medication and that provision has been made for appropriate support for the journey. A further suggestion from SANE was to make payment of social security conditional on compliance with medication and other treatment. This would require the implementation of a system of monitoring.

5.111 In evidence, Mr Graham Lamphee of the Department of Social Security (DSS) stated that the Privacy Act also precluded the DSS from giving out information about a person to a third person unless, for example, the person has signed an authority for an agent to enquire. It would be only in exceptional circumstances that information could be disclosed under the public interest exemption under the Privacy Act. If a person, who was in receipt of a disability support pension because of mental illness, indicated to the DSS that they were going overseas, Mr Lamphee stated:

We would just regard that as another customer going overseas. The circumstances would have to be extremely unusual, I would suggest, before we would be in a position to provide another authority or a next of kin with a warning, if you like, that this client was going overseas. There would have to be extremely exceptional circumstances. [63]

5.112 The Committee believes that the two measures (impoundment of passport and debt recovery arrangements) recommended in relation to the non-payment of the costs of repatriation and medical evacuation should also apply to Australian travellers with a mental illness, whose loan repayments should not be handled in a different way to that of other Australians.

Return of Remains of Deceased Australians

Policy and practice

5.113 DFAT estimated that there were about 2,000 Australian citizens (including dual nationals) who died overseas in 1994-95. Of these, DFAT provided some degree of assistance in 643 cases.

5.114 When an Australian post overseas is notified of the death of an Australian, the post cables details of the death to Canberra. If the next of kin is not already aware of the death, DFAT arranges with State police to notify the next of kin and to provide a consular contact in the Department. DFAT submitted that:

The Department provides assistance on matters such as the arrangements for the disposal of the remains, including quarantine clearances, the return of personal possessions, as well as obtaining and forwarding death certificates and police autopsy reports. Where the deceased has an insurance policy for overseas travel, the company will normally assume responsibility for the disposal of the remains ... [T]he Department is sometimes asked to initiate or become involved in enquires concerning the cause of death and to sort out problems associated with unpaid medical bills.

Where practical, families are advised to contact an Australian funeral director to make the necessary arrangements but Departmental assistance is available if the funeral director should run into difficulties. For the most part, entire reliance on an Australian funeral director is practical only when the deaths occur in Western countries. Although there are some exceptions, when the deaths occur in less developed countries, most of the arrangements are made by consular officials who will try to meet the wishes of the family as best they can. Often the family's unfamiliarity with local practice (legal requirements, time limits on the disposal of remains, and religious practices, for example, no cremation in Islamic countries) makes decision-making harrowing for families and friends and demands tact and patience on the part of consular officers in Australia and overseas.

Where no next of kin can be located, and subject to any known wishes of the deceased, the Department will arrange for an economical, but dignified, disposal of remains locally at government expense. [64]

5.115 According to the Australian Consular Instructions, where DFAT arranges and pays for the burial or cremation of a deceased Australian overseas, the Department will seek to recover the costs involved from the estate of the deceased. [65]

Cost of repatriation of human remains

5.116 When the death of an Australian overseas is covered by travel insurance, most or all of the costs associated with burial or cremation of the remains overseas or repatriation of the remains for burial or cremation in Australia are borne by the insurance company. Mr Ken Maurer of the Australian Funeral Directors Association (AFDA) told the Committee:

I know a lot of people do take out holiday insurance, but most of the holiday insurance packages these days sit at about the $A5,000 mark that you are allowed for repatriation of human remains back to Australia. You are flat out trying to retain that in places like Finland and other places where deaths occur. [66]

5.117 Mr Maurer explained the nature of the costs involved in repatriating human remains to Australia:

You have got a funeral director's charges to deliver the casket to the airport, and that can vary depending on the type of coffin that is used, and then you have the airfreight component. And airfreight from Sydney to London is between $14 and $16 a kilo. With normal human remains, embalmed in an ordinary wooden type container and wrapped in a polythene container, you would be looking at an average weight of roughly about 100 kilos. If you were to use zinc, you would add another 25 to 30 kilos. If you were to use lead you would be adding at least another 80 to 90 kilos. By the time you multiply that out, the bottom line becomes the airfreight. [67]

5.118 Mr Maurer said that a funeral director in Australia would prefer to be contacted by DFAT or the family before arrangements for the repatriation of the body have been finalised so that the Australian funeral director could negotiate with his counterpart overseas to ensure that the client is receiving the best price for the repatriation. He explained:

We get such frightening variations of costs that it is absolutely alarming. With respect to one gentleman we had coming out of Paris, they wanted about $US10,000 just to get him to the aircraft. We said, 'Excuse us, there's absolutely no way in the world we are going to entertain that'. We went past the consulate and went directly to the funeral director, using one of my secretaries who could speak fluent French ... She went through the negotiations and we ended up getting the price down to about four and a half thousand dollars. That bypassed the consulate scenario. [68]

5.119 Problems sometimes arose when the deceased did not have travel insurance and repatriation and funeral costs were the responsibility of his or her family or estate. It has been incumbent on DFAT to inform the family of the deceased of their financial responsibilities early in their contact with them. DFAT drew the Committee's attention to the fact that:

The bereaved family often expects government assistance with the costs of the return of the body to Australia, which can amount to anything up to $27,000. Some hospitals will not release a death certificate until medical bills have been paid and financial assistance in this respect is also sought on occasion. The need to elicit financial commitments in the Department's early contacts with the families can generate an impression of an unfeeling and mercenary government bureaucracy. [69]

Requirements for repatriation of human remains

5.120 Mr Foley told the Committee that it is better to contract a repatriation service company rather than a funeral director overseas, where this is possible. He said that the 'services they provide are purely an embalming service to prepare the deceased and a shipping container that meets the requirements of the airline'. He warned that these companies too charge widely different rates for their services. [70]

5.121 Airline regulations require bodies to be embalmed before transhipment by air. In some cases, however, a State Coroner may request a body to be shipped to Australia without being embalmed so that the embalming did not distort the results of an autopsy to be carried out in that State. Autopsies, where they are required, are normally conducted in the country where death occurred but sometimes a body might undergo an autopsy in Australia, particularly where cause of death is uncertain or where there are suspicious circumstances surrounding the death.

5.122 Both Mr Foley and Mr Maurer told the Committee that there is no standardisation for the shipment of bodies, even in Australia. He said that a body shipped to Heathrow from Adelaide or Melbourne is required to be carried in a zinc container while one shipped to the same destination from Sydney can be carried in polythene. Some countries require the coffin to be placed in a wooden crate. Both of them favoured polythene, which could be hermetically sealed and which was lighter and less expensive than zinc or lead containers.

5.123 Mr Foley said that the Funeral and Allied Industries Union of New South Wales prefers its members not to handle lead containers. Where lead containers are used, the Union might insist on the transfer of the body into a non-lead coffin. This still leaves the problem of disposing safely of the lead containers. [71]

5.124 The Committee believes that there is scope for greater co-operation between DFAT and the AFDA. Such co-operation would have benefit for the Department by reducing consular involvement in the detail of arrangements by involving funeral directors to a greater degree; by identifying members of professional associations overseas who carry out work of a high standard; by establishing a mechanism for exchange of information by members of AFDA and consular officials; and by setting up points of contact in case of a disaster overseas involving Australian nationals. Families of deceased Australians would also benefit as early contact with a funeral director, when arrangements are being made for the return of remains, may assist in keeping costs down.

Access to Consular Assistance

After hours access at overseas posts

5.125 Consular problems are not restricted to business hours. Each overseas post makes arrangements for a duty officer to attend to urgent consular matters outside of business hours. Such arrangements cause difficulties in small posts where there are few staff available for rostering as after hours duty officer.

5.126 DFAT consultant, Mr McDonald, reported that:

The Department maintains a 24 hour communications operation and is currently examining a Canadian system for a centralised emergency number for consular inquiries which can be accessed from almost anywhere in the world and to which after hours calls to posts can be diverted.

Such a scheme has attractions in terms of service to travellers, improved coordination, consistency of advice and lowering overtime demands on posts. It is the basis on which the travel insurance industry operates. It would require the establishment of a 24 hour service in the Department, linked through the Communications system, to replace the existing Duty Officer arrangements. The resource implications would need to be evaluated in terms of the existing availability of technology, potential savings at posts and on Duty Officer overtime, and the benefits of improved service to travellers. [72]

5.127 Mr McDonald went on to recommend that 'a study be undertaken of the costs and benefits of the introduction of a 24 hour consular advisory service in the Department linked with a centralised inquiry service relayed from posts where the necessary technology exists'. [73]

5.128 Mr Thompson, Director, Consular Operations Section told the Committee that the Canadian system:

is now being put in primarily for the reason of offering consistency of service worldwide and to ensure that after hours calls are handled by people who know what they are doing and are experienced with it. They have been able to find that 99 per cent of calls after hours can in fact be dealt with by, in their case, Ottawa. So we would say we could deal with it in Canberra.

...

With a diminishing resource base which the Canadians had as well they found that being relieved of those after-hours duties was the lifting of a huge burden and welcomed very much by their posts. Weekend duty is the most annoying part. You cannot even escape your job on the weekend. I am sure that there are other people in that situation as well. But it has been grasped by the Canadians and they have found that if anything it has been cost neutral to them by the reduction of overtime and after-hours call-outs and these sorts of costs that went with it. [74]

5.129 However, DFAT pointed out that the Canadians maintain a very comprehensive network of 24-hour leased telephone lines so that there were no additional costs imposed by the new centralised system. The introduction of a system of switching calls to Canberra would impose costs on the Department both for the phone lines and the allocation of an additional four people to be on duty to fill the rotating shift arrangements to make it up to a 24-hour service. As well, DFAT indicated that there were technological problems to be solved and that in some countries it was difficult to get an international telephone connection. [75]

5.130 DFAT reported to the Committee in May 1997 that a trial of the 24 hour consular operations centre is expected to begin in late June 1997.

'008' number for DFAT

5.131 In a number of submissions the cost of keeping in contact with the Department and overseas offices and agencies was raised. Although it is not possible to subsidise the cost of overseas telephone calls, the Committee believes that the Department should provide a free call service for callers to the Consular Branch from within Australia.

5.132 The Committee recommends that DFAT establish a free call service for callers to the Consular Branch from within Australia.

Consular Crisis Centre

5.133 The Department has established a Consular Crisis Centre. This is activated to deal with major emergencies and natural disasters around the world. In the event of a crisis, the resources of the Consular Operations Section are mobilised and augmented by those of the Passport Inquiry System and the computer resources of the Passport Information and Control System (PICS). It also enables relatives to register their concern for Australians travellers who might be in a particular disaster area. For example, the Centre was activated after the January 1994 Los Angeles earthquake. More than 6,000 calls were handled over three days. The Crisis Centre is only activated in the event of a major disaster.

Travel Insurance

5.134 DFAT and the Insurance Council of Australia told the Committee that about 30 per cent of Australian travellers overseas are uninsured. This group includes travellers who do not see the need for travel insurance, those that are not eligible for travel insurance because they are travelling for more than one year as most policies are limited to one year duration, those that have a pre-existing medical condition and those who are deterred by the cost of insurance. Mr Fisher also pointed out that some travellers to the United Kingdom do not take out insurance because they are covered by the UK National Health system. They may have cover while travelling in the UK, but such insurance does not apply to travel to and from the UK. The Insurance Council of Australia also pointed out that private health insurance in Australia provides very little cover, if any, for medical expenses incurred overseas.

5.135 Further, travellers who have taken out insurance may not be covered while overseas because of the exclusion clauses contained in the policy. For example, the policy may not cover accidents which occur while undertaking certain recreational activities or where claims are due to civil commotion or war-like activities. [76]

5.136 Mr Fisher told the Committee that 'the fact that travelling numbers have gone up so steadily but that the amount of consular work ... has not gone up so geometrically is due to the expansion of travel insurance'. [77] However, if problems arise for a traveller who does not have travel insurance, consular officers may have to expend significant time and resources assisting the traveller. A medical evacuation arranged by Austrade for an uninsured traveller took 20 days to be organised and involved the consular officer in many activities from hospital visits to negotiation of the price of air travel.

5.137 Mr Fisher indicated that travel insurance is an issue raised by departmental officers in seminars with the travel industry. He noted that some of the bigger travel agencies have a 90 per cent coverage by travel insurance and with many now requiring clients to sign a waiver to indicate that travel insurance was offered by the agency but explicitly declined. The Australian Federation of Travel Agents said that it now recommends to members that clients who decline insurance should sign a waiver.

5.138 The need to provide insurance coverage to some groups currently excluded has been recognised. The Federation stated that it had identified the need to offer insurance over an extended period of time to backpackers. The Federation has been working with the insurance industry to establish a system where a traveller can register in a foreign country to have their insurance extended. [78] The Committee believes that such extended cover should be made available to people undertaking extensive travel overseas.

5.139 Although the proportion of travellers covered by insurance has increased, there will always be some people who are not covered, including some excluded from coverage and who, when difficulties are encountered, will require consular assistance. The Committee recommends that the Department should continue, with the travel industry, to highlight the need for adequate insurance cover for travellers. Further, the Department should consider seeking the co-operation of the Insurance Council of Australia in providing briefings on travel insurance issues during consular training programs.

Communication with Families

5.140 The issue of the level, type and nature of communication between DFAT and families of Australians in receipt of consular assistance abroad was raised during the inquiry.

5.141 The Committee received some expressions of gratitude for the help and support provided by consular staff. For example, the father of a young man imprisoned overseas expressed his gratitude to the consular officers, both in Canberra and overseas, for their assistance and for the many phone calls to the family after consular visits to their son.

5.142 DFAT officers not only maintain telephone contact with families but also visit the families. Following the kidnapping of Ms Kellie Wilkinson, the Consular Desk Officer visited Mrs Gabrielle Wilkinson in Caloundra, Queensland. Consular officers had almost daily contact with Mrs Wilkinson over the months that followed and Senator Evans also made contact on several occasions. Similarly, in the case of Mr David Wilson, a consular officer visited the family on the day after it was confirmed that David had been abducted. Senator Evans also briefed Mrs Young (David's mother) and Mr Peter Wilson (David's father) on developments in the case.

5.143 However, criticisms were also leveled at consular officers about their attitude to families, the amount of information provided, the way in which information was provided and the amount of guidance offered to families.

5.144 The Lindner family submitted that families should be allowed to nominate more than one member of the family, living at the contact address, to be a spokesperson at any time. Dr Lindner argued that the usual DFAT practice of having only one person nominated in a household was an unnecessary restriction that could lead to further distress, for example, when the nominated person was having difficulty coping with the situation. [79] The Committee notes that DFAT does maintain more than one contact when there are divided families or there are other reasons for information not being passed on. However, DFAT should give consideration to having a second contact in a household.

5.145 The Lindner family also commented on the lack of help received from DFAT when they attempted to contact Interpol concerning the disappearance of Mr David Lindner in Iran. The Maresh family voiced disquiet about contacting the AFP on DFAT's advice only to be told by the AFP that DFAT was the appropriate agency to address their concerns. The Committee believes that, in a consular case, if officers think that a person should be referred to another agency in relation to some aspect of the case, the officer should initiate the contact on behalf of the person. It depends, of course, on the circumstances, but in the Maresh and Lindner cases, neither should not have been required to contact the AFP to involve Interpol.

5.146 Mr Peter Wilson indicated to the Committee that initially the consular officer 'did a pretty good job' but as the case progressed his concerns were not listened to in a sympathetic manner. Further, the family was not kept informed by DFAT of all events. [80] His son, Tim Wilson, noted that a great deal of the information they received was through the media.

5.147 DFAT stated that it did not believe that it was in the best interests of the families involved in situations such as the David Wilson hostage crisis to pass on every piece of information. Much information was unsubstantiated and proved to be incorrect or misleading. With the two cases that occurred in Cambodia, even information received through official channels was unreliable and in the Kellie Wilkinson case information that the hostages were still alive was sometimes generated by the Khmer Rouge in order to confuse investigators and extort money. It was also possible that some of the reports containing positive information were 'derived from a culturally based desire to be the bearer of good tidings'. [81]

5.148 It is only natural for families to crave information about their family members. Although DFAT's desire to pass on only substantiated news is understandable, this is often not enough for distressed families. In the David Wilson case, this practice raised questions about DFAT's motives in the minds of some family members and only served to heighten tensions in their relations with the Department.

5.149 As a number of Australian journalists were covering the hostage crisis in Cambodia, news bulletins were being filed and presented almost daily in the print and electronic media. The Wilson family claimed they were receiving more information about developments in Cambodia from the media than was received from DFAT. It is therefore understandable that the Wilson family thought that DFAT should have provided more information than it did. The Committee believes that DFAT should at least have informed the family about information being disseminated through the media and adding their qualifications about its reliability. Inevitably, the family would want to obtain DFAT's assessment of the information. By not providing or commenting on to the family information freely available through the media it only reinforced their concerns about the handling of the case.

5.150 The Maresh family listed several complaints about their experience of Government agencies. These are discussed in Chapter 8. However, as a general comment, consular officers have to be very careful to avoid as far as possible any misinterpretation of their message on the part of the people to whom they are talking. The Committee understands that consular officers are under a great deal of stress themselves when dealing with families involved in consular cases and often must ask questions and bring up matters such as costs of return of remains or other services which may appear callous and uncaring to the family involved. They also have to be very sensitive to the concerns of grieving or distressed families. Although the Committee received some criticism of assistance provided by consular officers, the Committee believes that overall consular officers provide a very good service to the travelling public and their families in Australia within the constraints imposed on them.

Counselling

5.151 The Committee received clear evidence of the trauma and grief suffered by families and others involved in cases where there has been a death overseas or other distressing event involving a family member. Some families in these circumstances spoke of the need for counselling services to be provided.

5.152 The Department has, in the past, sought to help families contact counselling services, generally as a result of requests for counselling rather than as a general policy of offering information about counselling services to distressed families. The Department submitted that it recognises there may be a requirement for counselling services for some families among the many cases it deals with annually. Mr Hamilton then went on to say:

I think it would be reasonable to ask whether the Department has a core competence ... in this area. Clearly I do not think we have, as currently established. The question then of whether we should lead people to counselling is obviously one that arises. It is a direction that we would like to go in but we have found some difficulties with it because the reaction of people when you ask them if they need counselling is not always positive. That is one difficulty. Another one is that, on those few occasions when we have tried this, people actually have not really taken it up. So we have another difficulty that it does not actually seem to be quite right. [82]

He went on to say that although a mechanism for referring families to counsellors has been considered, 'it is not an easy question or issue for us to resolve' but 'probably the best thing we can do is to finally negotiate a form of words that we will use for everybody and hope that we do not get too much criticism for suggesting that people might be in need of psychological counselling'. [83]

5.153 The Department's consultant, Mr Tim McDonald, also addressed this issue, noting that the focus of consular services has been on Australians overseas, their families at home being a secondary consideration. However, he concluded 'I think in today's age the question of the welfare of the family has to be taken much more seriously. Importantly, the problem does not end when the person overseas dies.' [84]

5.154 The Maresh family suggest that a DFAT officer with counselling skills speak immediately with the deceased's family to begin to document the circumstances surrounding the death, offer assistance to the family and 'when an Australian citizen dies overseas in traumatic circumstances, the DFAT should offer counselling'. [85]

5.155 The trauma and grief experienced by families in these circumstances and the sometimes inexplicable circumstances in which a death has occurred contribute to a great sense of loss of control. Family members in these circumstances are likely to respond to the high levels of anxiety which may also affect their relationship with consular officers and ultimately the way in which they view the assistance provided. The Committee agrees with Mrs Maresh that families in such circumstances should be referred to counsellors experienced in dealing with such stress in order to assist with their loss. In Mrs Maresh's words this would 'Assist them to help with their pain and suffering'. [86]

5.156 The Committee considers that it would not be appropriate for DFAT to provide counsellors. Furthermore, it would be more appropriate for families to receive counselling from a local counsellor. The Committee understands that State and Territory Governments and Coroners' Offices have counselling facilities.

5.157 The Committee also notes that the Department provides counselling services for staff. Consular staff have a very heavy workload, dealing with stressful situations and anxious and grieving families. During 1994 and 1995, for example, the consular section dealt with the kidnapping of Ms Kellie Wilkinson and Mr David Wilson, judicial proceedings involving Mr James Peng, Dr John Flynn and Mr Robert Bowra and the death of Mr Ben Maresh as well dealing with many other cases.

5.158 In such situations staff are placed under tremendous personal stress. The Department has been working toward implementing a more formal approach to counselling services for consular staff. Staff will receive training in dealing with stressful situations and also in dealing with their own stress that results from the type of work they undertake.

Footnotes

[1] Mr M J Costello, letter to the Committee dated 30 October 1995.

[2] Committee Hansard, p. 281.

[3] Mr Tim McDonald, Measures which the Australian Government Might Take to Improve the Handling of Consular Matters, September 1995, included in the DFAT submission, p. 90.

[4] Austrade submission, p. 5.

[5] Austrade submission, p. 7.

[6] Mr S McDonald submission, p. 2.

[7] Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Annual Review of Consular Work 1996-96, p. 3.

[8] Mr Tim McDonald, op cit, pp 90-1.

[9] Mr Tim McDonald, op cit, p. 91.

[10] Fees for legal process are specified in the Consular Fees Regulations under the Consular Fees Act 1955 and are payable for a consular act other than a consular act performed at the request, and for the purposes, of the government of a foreign country. Fees range from $5 for marking an exhibit to an affidavit or declaration in writing to $25 for each hour or part of an hour spent in taking evidence under a commission or order from a court.

[11] Committee Hansard, p. 11.

[12] Committee Hansard, p. 471.

[13] Committee Hansard, pp 210, 216.

[14] Mrs N Sheridan submission, p. 2.

[15] Committee Hansard, p. 654.

[16] Committee Hansard, p. 654.

[17] Mr T Wilson submission, p. 38.

[18] Committee Hansard, p. 258.

[19] DFAT answers to questions on notice, 1 May 1997.

[20] Committee Hansard, p. 322.

[21] DFAT submission, p. 75.

[22] DFAT submission, p. 75.

[23] Committee Hansard, p. 473.

[24] Committee Hansard, p. 473.

[25] Committee Hansard, p. 165.

[26] Committee Hansard, p. 471.

[27] DFAT submission, p. 78.

[28] Committee Hansard, p. 467.

[29] DFAT submission, footnote, p. 76 (DFAT 'told by Fantasia that some 90% of travel agents have on line access to these systems')

[30] Committee Hansard, p. 465.

[31] DFAT submission, p. 76.

[32] Committee Hansard, p. 212.

[33] Committee Hansard, pp 219-20.

[34] Committee Hansard, p. 215.

[35] Committee Hansard, p. 465.

[36] DFAT submission, p. 77.

[37] DFAT submission, pp 77-8.

[38] Committee Hansard, p. 610.

[39] DFAT submission, p. 67.

[40] DFAT submission, p. 68.

[41] Austrade submission, p. 8.

[42] DFAT submission, p. 97.

[43] Committee Hansard, pp 490, 492.

[44] DFAT submission, p. 97.

[45] Committee Hansard, p. 490.

[46] Committee Hansard, p. 491.

[47] DFAT submission, pp 68-9.

[48] DFAT submission, p. 69.

[49] Committee Hansard, p. 18.

[50] Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee, Examination of Additional Estimates 1994-95, Additional Information Received, Vol. 1, p. 163.

[51] DFAT submission, p. 69.

[52] DFAT submission, p. 69.

[53] DFAT letter to the Committee dated, 7 April 1997.

[54] Arpke submission, p. 1.

[55] SANE Australia submission, p. 1.

[56] Committee Hansard, p. 21.

[57] Committee Hansard, p. 22.

[58] Arpke submission, p. 2.

[59] Committee Hansard, p. 585.

[60] DFAT submission, p. 70.

[61] DFAT submission, p. 70.

[62] Committee Hansard, p. 584.

[63] Committee Hansard, p. 447.

[64] DFAT submission, pp 22-3.

[65] Australian Customs Instructions, Part 1, paragraph 22.9.4.

[66] Committee Hansard, p. 197.

[67] Committee Hansard, p. 194.

[68] Committee Hansard, p. 195.

[69] DFAT submission, p. 23.

[70] Committee Hansard, p. 195.

[71] Committee Hansard, p. 194.

[72] Mr Tim McDonald, op cit, p. 93.

[73] Mr Tim McDonald, op cit, p. 93.

[74] Committee Hansard, p. 15.

[75] Committee Hansard, pp 15-6, 479.

[76] Committee Hansard, p. 596.

[77] Committee Hansard, p. 13.

[78] Committee Hansard, p. 211.

[79] Committee Hansard, p. 226.

[80] Committee Hansard, pp 146-7.

[81] DFAT submission, p. 26

[82] Committee Hansard, p. 334.

[83] Committee Hansard, p. 334.

[84] Committee Hansard, p. 284.

[85] Mrs D Maresh submission, p. 8.

[86] Mrs D Maresh submission, p. 8.