Why corporate leaders can no longer ignore asylum seekers - Women's Agenda

Why corporate leaders can no longer ignore asylum seekers

Business and the society in which business operates are not mutually exclusive. In truth, the success of business depends absolutely on the health of society. Key to this is enlivened debate: rich public discourse promotes healthy democracy and builds a thriving business environment. With that in mind, the time has arrived for corporate Australia to enter the asylum-seeker debate.

The Federal Budget has just offered nearly $400M in savings on changes in asylum-seeker detention centres. Recently, Prime Minister Tony Abbott urged European leaders to adopt Australian policy on mandatory detention and offshore processing.
 
As these developments occur, important business questions on Australia’s asylum-seeker policy go unanswered: questions of economic impact and compromise and the international vulnerability of Australian companies. The opportunity for corporate leaders is simple and clear: agree or disagree, but engage. Shareholders, employees and customers should expect this.
 
There was a time when the most awkward conversation any Australian corporate leader could have overseas was on the question of white treatment of indigenous Australians. To avoid seeming, well, colonial, the Australian could seize the opportunity to reach into the empathy of the audience, leaning on them to acknowledge that the issue of white settlement and peace with indigenous populations has rarely been managed anywhere with humanity. It was another time, they could say, and you experienced it in your own countries. They could then set out their vision for the future, the thrust being: we acknowledge historical inequality, we’re working hard to address it, and here’s our reconciliation action plan and our work in indigenous communities. We see this as a business issue. In short, you can be assured that you are trading with a thoughtful organisation which understands that business is dependent on society.
 
On asylum seeker policy, that shot is not on the board. When this question thickens the air in an international forum, there can be no appeal to empathy in the audience: no other developed nation deals with asylum seekers the way we do. The more likely scenario is an embarrassed Australian CEO rushing to distance himself or herself from the “tiny hearts” image of Australia in the audience’s mind. 
 
But using what? A hastily-constructed defence of the Australian approach to an audience from smaller countries who accept more boat arrivals? Or a whispered aside that we don’t agree with the current state but it’s not safe to say so? Or, like a celebrity on a chat show, do we simply pre-empt discomfort by providing a list in advance of “don’t ask, don’t tell” topics, including this one? 
 
Now that the international community has heard from our Prime Minister on Australian policy, “don’t ask, don’t tell” won’t hold.  And shareholders relying on corporate leaders to form strong international trading relationships should expect a more thoughtful approach.
 
Australian corporates are responsible to, and served by, the communities in which they operate. By virtue of their scale and their broad reach across a relatively small population, corporate leaders have immense power to lift debate, panel-beat solutions and enrich their societies.  This is not, necessarily, an act of corporate social responsibility. For example, mining companies, by business necessity, have developed a view and entered the debate on how best to serve indigenous communities.   
 
In local markets nationwide, banks and power companies, telecommunications operators and property organisations all benefit from migrant populations, some of them asylum seekers. They also employ thousands of them.
 
New arrivals set up homes, open bank accounts, switch the power on and start their Australian lives. Via the provision of specialized interpreter systems, employment of culturally-aware specialists and the customization of products, corporates are already engaged in the debate on migration and in some parts, in the asylum seeker system. But only implicitly. Explicit leadership seems a simple next step.
 
Outgoing Chief of Army, David Morrison, has described himself as a feminist. When he discovered unconscionable treatment of women within his organization, he had a choice: he could deal with it quietly in-house or he could take a public stance and enrich Australian society by offering solutions and leadership. The choice he made was unprecedented and brave. As he departs the role, his legacy is clear: he recognized his power to enrich Australian debate. He understood that his organization has a symbiotic relationship with society.  
 
Most of our corporate leaders are parents, some have strongly-held religious beliefs and many are from migrant backgrounds. It is difficult to believe that they are disinterested in the issue of migration generally and the specific treatment of asylum seekers. 
 
The consequences of corporates not engaging in this debate may not emerge for some time: will we look back and say that silence was acquiescence? If so, then what can we learn from that? If not, then why wasn’t an official position taken? Either way, why didn’t corporates see a business responsibility to enrich Australian debate?
 
The opportunity is clear for all corporate leaders: pull together your best thinkers, your government relations advisers, your community representatives. Agree, or disagree, but engage. And serve your shareholders, your employees and your customers by lifting Australian consciousness.
 

×

Stay Smart! Get Savvy!

Get Women’s Agenda in your inbox