Home Blog Page 3

The State of LGBTQI People’s Economic Inclusion: Philippines

42d_lfnhzl
-
0
The State of LGBTQI People’s Economic Inclusion: Philippines

This report is one of a series of four released by APCOM in late 2020 looking at the economic inclusion of people with diverse SOGIESC in four counties in South-East Asia, namely: the Philippines, Lao PDR, Indonesia and Cambodia .

This report provides a detailed summary of the current human rights context in the Philippines and how it relates to LGBTQI people. It highlights that currently the inclusion of the LGBTQI community varies significantly across the country. Currently 18 cities have developed policies to address discrimination faced by LGBTQI people. In 2000 a national anti-discrimination bill was drafted, however it has yet to pass due to a strong anti-LGBTQI lobby.

The research in the Philippines was undertaken by Babaylanes Inc between July and October 2019. The research focused on the human rights situation for the LGBTQI community in the Philippines, their social inclusion and their experiences in accessing education, health and financial services. The research involved focus groups with 23 research participants who were all members of the LGBTQI community in the Philippines.

The research participants acknowledged some progress towards inclusion in the labour market as LGBTQI Filipinos are now visible in politics, the media and corporate industries. However, companies can still legally discriminate against a job candidate on the basis of their SOGIESC. Heteronormative and cissexist conditions were also listed as barriers to inclusion in the workforce by many participants.

Gay and lesbian participants did not report direct barriers limiting access to establishing bank accounts. However, heteronormative assumptions and policies did prevent participants registering partners of the same gender under insurance beneficiaries. Participants also reported barriers in accessing loans due to stigma attached to their LGBTQI identity. Transgender participants reported banking staff not accepting their identity documents.

Discrimination and bullying in educational institutions was widely reported by the research participants. Transgender participants reported the most extreme cases of discrimination. Being misgendered by teachers and strict gendered uniforms were highlighted as prominent issues for transgender students.

Barriers in accessing adequate health facilities were particularly noted by gay, transgender and bisexual cisgender male participants who reported discrimination in HIV testing centres. The prevalence of mental health issues and a lack of counselors who are adequately trained to respond to the particular needs of the community is also highlighted as a primary issue for the LGBTQI community in the Philippines.

Based on the findings the repot offers 13 recommendations that the government, private sector and LGBTQI organisations can implement to address the structural barriers that effect the social and economic inclusion of LGBTQI people in the Philippines.

The State of LGBTQI People’s Economic Inclusion: Indonesia

42d_lfnhzl
-
0
The State of LGBTQI People’s Economic Inclusion: Indonesia

This report is one of a series of four released by APCOM in late 2020 looking at the economic inclusion of people with diverse SOGIESC in four counties in South-East Asia, namely: Indonesia, Cambodia, Lao PDR and the Philippines.

This report provides a detailed summary of the current human rights context in Indonesia and how it relates to LGBTQI people. It highlights that currently there are no specific laws that protect LGBTQI people and there is a strong anti-LGBTQI lobby that is trying to criminalise homosexuality.

The research in Indonesia was undertaken by Suara Kita (Indonesia) between June and October 2019. The research focused on the human rights situation for the LGBTQI community in Indonesia, their social inclusion and their experiences in accessing education, health and financial services. The research involved focus groups with 25 research participants who were all members of the LGBTQI community in Indonesia.

The majority of the participants reported that they face violence, persecution and discrimination as a result of not fitting into the expected gender norms and heteronormative norms in Indonesia. The focus groups highlighted that greater acceptance of LGBTQI people by their families would significantly reduce their vulnerability to violence and poverty. Those that have family support are more likely to obtain higher education and have consisted employment.The report acknowledges that the discrimination faced by members with differing identities within the LGBTQI community varies significantly.

The focus group participants revealed that they face discrimination during every stage of obtaining and keeping a job. Trans women stated that they felt discrimination during the hiring process but also reflected that their low education levels limited their career opportunities. Participants noted that their limited education was, in part, due to their
experiences of bullying and harassment from teachers and students which interrupted their education, resulting in financial hardship and increased difficulty obtaining higher education and skilled employment. Bullying and discrimination instigated by educational institutions was highlighted as a particular issue as several Indonesian universities had recently obliged students to declare that they will not take part in LGBTQI-related activities.

Both trans men and trans women found it difficult to access banking services as their applications were rejected if their appearance did not match their identity card. Accessing loans was also described as difficult for the same reason. Lesbian, gay, bisexual, queer and intersex research participants did not face significant obstacles in accessing banking services.

Stigma and discrimination was reported as prevalent in the health sector in Indonesia. For example, gay men had been turned away from receiving dental treatment because they were accused of having HIV. However, the focus group participants also noted some positive health care services available for the LGBTQI community. Mental health concerns were found to be the most severe amongst the transgender research participants due to their exclusion in Indonesian society.

Based on the findings the repot offers 12 recommendations that the government, private sector and LGBTQI organisations can implement to address the structural barriers that effect the social and economic inclusion of LGBTQI people in Indonesia.

The State of LGBTQI People’s Economic Inclusion: Cambodia

42d_lfnhzl
-
0
The State of LGBTQI People’s Economic Inclusion: Cambodia

This report is one of a series of four released by APCOM in late 2020 looking at the economic inclusion of people with diverse SOGIESC in four counties in South-East Asia, namely: Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR and the Philippines.

The report provides a detailed summary of the current human rights context in Cambodia and how it relates to LGBTQI people. It highlights that currently no Cambodian government ministry has policies that directly target the LGBTQI community and that there are no anti-discrimination laws that protect the community.

The research in Cambodia was undertaken by Micro Rainbow International Foundation Cambodia and was conducted between July and October 2019. The research focused on the human rights situation for the LGBTQI community, their social inclusion and their experiences in accessing education, health and financial services. The research involved focus groups with 32 research participants who were all members of the LGBTQI community in Cambodia. However, none of the participants involved in the focus group discussions identified as queer or intersex.

The focus group participants stated that they felt that the situation for the LGBTQI community in Cambodia had improved in recent years, particularly noting that the Cambodian government had accepted (but not yet implemented) all nine recommendations in relation to sexual orientation and gender identity or expression from the latest United Nations Universal Periodic Review. However, the research also acknowledges that myriad forms of violence and discrimination, including a lack of laws that protect LGBTQI rights, continue to be critical issues in Cambodia.

The research participants declared that they were discriminated against within their families; at school; in their workplaces; at healthcare facilities and from financial institutions. Participants unanimously stated that their LGBTQI identity prevented them from finding or maintaining consisted employment. Experiences of bullying and harassment from family members, teachers and students was also noted as a factor contributing to participants experiencing interrupted education, resulting in financial hardship and increased difficulty obtaining higher education and skilled employment. Participants also reported feelings of mistrust towards public health institutions as they do not currently provide LGBTQI-sensitive treatment.

Based on the findings the repot offers 17 recommendations that the government, private sector and LGBTQI organisations can implement to address the structural barriers that effect the social and economic inclusion of LGBTQI people in Cambodia.

LGBTIQ+ Inclusion in Humanitarian Action: LGBTIQ+ vulnerabilities and capabilities in crises

Elena Robertson
-
0
LGBTIQ+ Inclusion in Humanitarian Action: LGBTIQ+ vulnerabilities and capabilities in crises

This brief document outlines IPPF’s commitment to LGBTIQ+ people in sexual and reproductive healthcare and rights (SRHR) in humanitarian action. The document identifies four initiatives in which IPPF has been involved. All four initiatives aim to include LGBTIQ+ people in humanitarian contexts, and include disaster risk reduction (DRR) work in Nepal; the 2018 Pride in the Humanitarian Summit (PiTHS) consultation; distribution of trans-friendly dignity kits in Sri Lanka; and partnering with Tonga Leitis Association in response to Cyclone Gita.

The article includes a summary of the key points from a focus group discussed with LGBTIQ+ community members around ensuring sexual and reproductive health services are available and accessible in humanitarian contexts.

The overarching message of the brief is that the LGBTIQ+ community recommends humanitarian agencies and actors meaningfully engage with LGBTIQ+ people as leaders, participants, staff and volunteers across all areas of humanitarian action and DRR, and that partnering with LGBTIQ+ organisations presents important opportunities for inclusion, accountability, and policy development.

Safe at School: Education sector responses to violence based on sexual orientation, gender identity/expression, or sexual characteristics in Europe

42d_lfnhzl
-
0
Safe at School: Education sector responses to violence based on sexual orientation, gender identity/expression, or sexual characteristics in Europe

This report, commissioned by The Council of Europe’s Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI) Unit and Education Policy Division, reviews the individual efforts of each member State towards achieving a 2016 Resolution 2097(2016) that calls on States to “ensure access by LGBTI children to quality education by promoting respect and inclusion of LGBTI person and the dissemination of objective information about issues concerning sexual orientation and gender identity, and by introducing measures to address homophobic and transphobic bullying”. The report follows from UNESCO’s 2016 “Out in the Open: Education sector responses to violence based on sexual orientation and gender identity/expression”, which provides an overview of sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, and sexual characteristic (SOGIESC)-related violence educational settings around the world.

The report begins with a review of the prevalence of SOGIESC-based violence in educational institutions in Europe. A quantitative data analysis of the negative consequences of SOGIESC-related discrimination and bullying on young people is presented to highlight economic, mental and physical health, and overall community impacts. This is followed by a chapter on the varying legal frameworks, both European and International, that address violence within educational spaces which have been adopted by member States.

The third chapter highlights the responses adopted by the education sector of each State, excluding 12 who have adopted no response at all. Responses discussed range from national and school-level policies that prevent SOGIESC-based violence, new curricula that is support for SOGIESC-diversity, teacher-trainings, student support, civil society partnerships, and monitoring and evaluation processes. The final chapter offers extensive recommendations to the education sectors of each member State, which partly echo the UNESCO report’s recommendations. They are based on the aforementioned responses, with emphasis on systematically incorporating anti-discrimination and inclusion formatting into policy practice.

Susceptible Lives: Gender-based Violence, Young Lesbian Women and HIV Risk in a Rural Community in South Africa

42d_lfnhzl
-
0
Susceptible Lives: Gender-based Violence, Young Lesbian Women and HIV Risk in a Rural Community in South Africa

This study was conducted to address the common misconception in South Africa that lesbian women are immune from contracting HIV due to their sexuality. The study explores the linkages between perpetration of hate crimes and gender-based violence against lesbians, and HIV prevalence. Homophobia and heterosexism in South Africa mean that lesbian women are at a heightened risk of experience sexual and gender-based-violence. The study uses syndemics theory to reveal the interrelationship between GBV and HIV and how the interactions between the two can create an excessive burden of a disease on an individual that is typically aggravated by marginalisation.

Not only did the researchers seek to explore and under-researched field of study (HIV, GBV, and lesbian women), but also to focus on lesbian women in rural areas. There is a common misconception among researchers in this field that LGBTIQ+ people in rural areas are more likely to hide their identities/sexualities, and thus less likely to experience homophobic/heterosexist hate crimes. This study found the opposite to be true: all eight interview respondents, young lesbian women between ages 19-32, had experienced GBV in some capacity, ranging from physical, sexual, and emotional violence as well as community and institutional violence.

By applying syndemics theory to the case study, the authors determined that lesbian women are more, not less, susceptible to HIV due to intersecting forms of violence and discrimination.

The article concludes with a review of the current state of HIV-related health care available to lesbian women in South Africa. It highlights the need for community engagement through outreach campaigns and education, particularly directed at health care workers, to improve reception of health-care needs of marginalised communities.

Breaking the Silence: Criminalisation of Lesbians and Bisexual Women and its Impacts

42d_lfnhzl
-
0
Breaking the Silence: Criminalisation of Lesbians and Bisexual Women and its Impacts

This 52-page resource identifies the history, extent and nature of laws that criminalise consensual sexual relations between women, and the homophobia anti-LGBT criminal laws exacerbate to the detriment of lesbians and bisexual women. Chapter 2 presents a historical overview of laws and legal mechanisms used to discriminate against lesbian and bi women and the countries that expressly prohibit same-gender relationships between women.

Chapter 3 considers the intersections of gender and sexuality of lesbian and bi women and how these identities shape experiences of discrimination and bias. This section presents data on the specific forms of human rights abuses lesbian and bi women face and how societal gender norms shape these abuses. Chapter 4 includes a graphic representation of the human rights law violations lesbian and bi women face. Chapter 5 explores the limitations of existing research and data collection methodologies. This touches on the relative invisibility of lesbian and bi women with the LGBTIQ+ community.

This resource includes useful graphs and tables, including a map of countries that criminalise lesbians and bisexual women as well as a table of country Gender Gap Index scores of criminalising versus non-criminalising countries.

We deserve human rights: Interview with Emma Yaaka

Elena Robertson
-
0
We deserve human rights: Interview with Emma Yaaka

Emma Yaaka (he/him) is an LGBTIQ+ advocate who has worked to provide medical services and information to LGBTIQ+ refugees in Kenya and the US. In 2015 Emma began working for RefugeePoint as their Ugandan Liaison for the LGBTIQ+ community. Emma has used his training as a nurse to advocate for health services for refugees with a variety of organisations in Kenya and in the US. In the US, Emma works for the Heartland Alliance Refugee and Immigrant Community Services. Emma also recently started a YouTube channel to help the LGBTIQ+ refugee community access relevant health information.

How did you become an LGBTIQ+ activist?

I became an LGBTIQ+ activist through being a part of the community. I went through some difficult experiences, as I was mistreated and discriminated against for being part of the LGBTIQ+ community. This made me become stronger. I gained the opportunity to become an LGBTIQ+ leader through working and volunteering with friendly and welcoming organisations that empowered me with training and support to stand up for others.

In 2015, Refugepoint was looking for an Ugandan Liaison for the LGBTIQ+ community who had a medical background and could serve as an interpreter and advocate. I was chosen because of my Nursing/EMT background, fluency in Ugandan languages, and my leadership qualities. I advocated for equal access to medical services for urban LGBTIQ+ refugees in 30 different areas in Nairobi, Kenya and its outskirts. I mobilised LGBTIQ+ health training. I was placed in government hospitals to help refugees to access medical services and I supplied/delivered free medications to refugees who could not afford to purchase prescriptions. I also advocated for resources and funding for reliable work like starting up businesses, I supplied condoms and lubricant for safe sex, I accompanied refugees to hospitals to ensure that they receive adequate services, I identified very vulnerable LGBTIQ+ individuals living with disabilities and mental health challenges and referred them for additional support, I made referrals for housing assistance to LGBTIQ+-friendly agencies, I contacted mental health services in partnership with other organizations providing services to LGBTIQ+ individuals, and I partnered with local legal human rights agencies such as RCK (Kitua cha sharia) and KAPLET to release LGBTIQ+ individuals who were criminalized for their identity to be released from jail, given their rights, and represented in court.

What inspires you to advocate for social change?

LGBTIQ+ people are human beings, and we deserve human rights just like everyone else. LGBTIQ+ people are often misunderstood, mistreated, and that puts us in a very vulnerable position. We need a voice. Most of the time our voices are not heard. Our rights are violated in terms of social services of accessing adequate education, health, social life, legal support, and housing. All these needs inspire me. The pain I have experienced inspires me to stand, fight, advocate and encourage service providers to change and understand Queer communities.

What have some of your experiences been working with the queer refugee community?

Positive experiences:

  • Seeing people succeed in their goals of becoming self-sufficient
  • Saving people from unsafe environments and threats.
  • Personally, gaining experience and understanding a lot about the unique needs of LGBTIQ+ community
  • Standing in the position of connecting LGBTIQ+ people to different community projects and to available resources, encouraging and supporting them to fulfil their goals.
  • Personally, I gained experience of being trusted from different agencies, and my voice was recognized and made an impact of moving towards acceptance.
  • LGBTIQ+ people trusting me as their community leader up until today; I am still serving and supporting LGBTIQ+ people with my small amount of resources, including money, food, rent.

Negative experiences:

  • Personally, not being adequately supported by the stakeholders of LGBTIQ+ organizations to learn more about the needs based on my experience.
  • I sometimes get denied services because of the work I do. I get judged by organizations and people because of my work with LGBTIQ+ people. This puts me in a position of fear for my personal safety.
  • I observed LGBTIQ+ people being denied resettlement because of language barriers, lack of confidence, and ability to express their story in a particular way, that lead to them being denied resettlement and even integration. Their only choice is to go back to the unsafe country of origin. UNHCR lacks an appeal process; once they deny you, you fail permanently.
  • As a medical professional, it was difficult to witness the high rate of HIV and other serious medical problems (TB, Hepatitis B) because there are no proper sexual education programs. There are high rates of cases, especially in black males, which go unreported.
  • Because of a lack of resources, LGBTIQ+ individuals are forced to create their own CBOs (Community based organizations) and focus groups, and it’s difficult to access appropriate funding.

How long have you been involved in this work?

I have been involved in LGBTIQ+ advocacy for about 5 years

What are some of the challenges you have faced working with or advocating for the queer refugee community, or other LGBTIQ+ groups?

Language is a big barrier because I work with refugees from all over, and I don’t always share a language with them. In Nairobi there were language barriers with LGBTIQ+ people from Yemen, Ethiopia, Somalia, Sudan, Afghanistan, non-Swahili speaking Tanzanians and Congolese. Here in America, people are mostly resettled from Central African Republic and Togo.

A huge challenge in Nairobi was transportation. It was difficult to reach the areas where most LGBTIQ+ people lived because they lived in the outskirts of the city for safety reasons. In both Nairobi and here in the U.S, I deal with stigma and with prejudice against LGBTIQ+ people and those who work with/advocate for them.

In Kenya, there were very poor medical and legal services specifically for LGBTIQ+ people because all of the providers were non- LGBTIQ+ and they used to preach their beliefs to LGBTIQ+ people. This limited most LGBTIQ+ people from seeking medical services. There were very limited resources (financial assistance and funding) to support LGBTIQ+ people with education, better medical services, jobs and businesses to work towards self-sufficiency. The lack of security/safety led to detentions, threats, evictions, rape and blackmail in the LGBTIQ+ communities.

The US, my third country of resettlement, has drastically reduced the number of refugees allowed to resettle here. The resources are also very limited in providing proper care, services and basic needs before individuals can become self-sufficient. In Kenya, because the US government reduced settlement slots and funding to support LGBTIQ+ people financially, there is a delay in the resettlement process. This is increasing rates of mental health challenges including suicide, HIV-AIDS (because LGBTIQ+ refugees are resorting to sex work due to a lack of resources for survival), and many people are resorting to returning to their unsafe countries of origin just to survive. This is exacerbated during this time of COVID-19 outbreak and once people resort back to their original countries, they have no home. They sometimes end up being killed, arrested, mistreated or tortured.

Here in the US (and in Kenya too), locals are not always welcoming of LGBTIQ+ individuals. They face discrimination, insults, assaults, and denial of services. Resettlement is a very long process.  Approval to get to a third country of resettlement can take many years. Refugees generally remain in the camp for 3-6 years without adequate support. In Nairobi the camps are homophobic.

Does a specific project come to mind that you’d like to share, where you were working for the inclusion of LGBTIQ+ people in a humanitarian or development context? If so, what was the project? What happened?

I opened a YouTube channel as a platform to help both LGBTIQ+ people and non- LGBTIQ+ refugee communities to break down information into understandable pieces with reliable accent and language interpretation here in the US, Chicago, IL. I provide information that I feel is beneficial to the refugee communities, and I am planning to bring talented LGBTIQ+ people on the platform to share their stories, talents, and seek resources to promote their talents. The Chicago Reader wrote an article about my YouTube channel. I am currently streaming out of my bedroom using my phone with borrowed cameras while going outside for some interviews. I am saving some money for cameras. 

If there was one change that you would like to see for the queer refugee community, and/or the inclusion of other LGBTQI+ people what would that change be?

We need health experts to be trained to understand LGBTIQ+ people so that they can receive equal services.

Young LGBTIQ+ people who have not been able to complete their education because of discrimination back in their countries should be given the opportunity to finish their education in a safe environment, and to accomplish their life goals so that they can be tomorrow’s professionals who can lead in the fight for LGBTIQ+ rights.

Trans individuals in trans/homophobic countries are at the highest risk of assault, threats, and discrimination. They need protection through resettlement or integration in safe and welcoming places.

The public needs training and information about the LGBTIQ+ community. Activists need to be heard and recognized, and appropriate legal action must be taken for mistreatment.

In what ways do you believe humanitarian and development organisations can support the inclusion of the queer refugee community and/or other LGBTQI+ people?

Organisations need to have specific programs within their agencies to serve LGBTIQ+ communities, and there needs to be peer-reviewed or on-the-ground evaluations to prevent the misuse of funds. It’s important that these programs have people from the community, or who are sincere allies, as part of the staff and oversight. Even resettlement agencies need to have specified treatment and programs to serve LGBTIQ+ people because they have specific needs. For example, Trans individuals and/or HIV + individuals require additional time and treatment to properly adjust in a medical and psychological sense before they are expected to be completely self-sufficient. Also, developmental organisations should support and work with existing local LGBTQI+ CBOs, groups and experienced individuals like activists/advocates, and government.

An intersectional analysis of gender amongst Rohingya refugees in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh

42d_lfnhzl
-
0
An intersectional analysis of gender amongst Rohingya refugees in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh

This research report investigates gender roles and inequalities among the Rohingya community living in Cox’s Bazar. The research is notable for its inclusion of Rohingya with diverse SOGIE and recommendations around actively including Hijra in consultation and planning processes.

Conducted immediately prior to the Covid-19 pandemic, this paper looks primarily at the gender roles of men and women Rohingya refugees as well as gender roles in the Bangladeshi host community. The paper found that, overall, while there is very high gender inequality in the Rohingya refugee community, women and girls have greater opportunities for employment and out-of-home mobility in Cox’s Bazar refugee camps than they did in Myanmar. The paper covers findings in the following thematic areas: gender roles; meaningful participation and leadership; WASH and MHM; emergency food security, vulnerable livelihoods (EFSVL) and Nutrition; Health; Education; Protection, SGBV and Child Protection; Accountability; Vulnerability and Priority needs; and Relationships between Rohingya and host community.

The paper first introduces key issues in humanitarian response and the objectives of the research project. The paper then moves into the findings on the above topics. The paper presents the gender roles in the household in Myanmar as compared to in refugee camps. This section focuses on the impacts of male unemployment and lack of educational opportunities.

Page 33 contains a specific section on the impact of displacement on Hijra (third-gender feminine identifying group) Rohingya and Bangladeshis. This specifically looks at how the influx of Rohingya refugees post 2017 has altered the employment landscape for Bangladeshi Hijras, and the total lack of income generating opportunities for Rohingya Hijras. This section highlights the specific issues of lack of individual registration for Rohingya Hijras.

The remainder of the report covers the themes listed above, often mentioning the lack of data on the specific experiences of Hijras. The report concludes with overall findings (recommendations are at the beginning of the paper) and annexes with breakdowns of participants.

Briefing Paper: The Homophobia and Transphobia Experienced by LGBT Sex Workers

42d_lfnhzl
-
0
Briefing Paper: The Homophobia and Transphobia Experienced by LGBT Sex Workers

This briefing paper was written in collaboration between Global Network for Sex Work Projects and MPACT Global Action for Gay Men’s Health and Rights, based on in-depth research in ten countries on the experiences of lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans-feminine and trans-masculine sex-workers. A total of 87 sex-workers from Australia, Austria, Botswana, Cameroon, Indonesia, Jamaica, Pakistan, Peru, Ukraine and the USA, contributed to the in-depth research that comprises this paper. They include both documented and undocumented migrants, those living with HIV, and people from rural and urban settings; the majority age range is 18-50.

The paper provides an overview of the findings of the impact of the varied levels of criminalisation of sex-work and/or LGBT communities in the countries, compounded by double discrimination due to the social stigmas surrounding sex-worker and LGBT identities. These findings are broken down in sections beginning with (a) Criminalisation of sex work and LGBT communities; then (b) Policing of LGBT sex workers; (c) Access to healthcare; (d) Vulnerability to Violence; (e) Social, cultural political and religious barriers that impact LGBT sex workers; (f) Discrimination from within communities; (g) LGBT migrant sex workers; (h) Allies and Safety; and (i) Potential alliances for development.

The briefing ends with a list of recommendations for national governments and policy makers, NGOs, donors, and religious and cultural leaders, to address the the double marginalisation these communities face based on the intersection of sex work and their LGBT identities.

1234...25Page 3 of 25

Powered By

Contact Us

About Us
Contact Us
42degrees@edgeeffect.org
Submit a Resource

Support Us

42 Degrees is currently self-funded by Edge Effect. Startup funding was provided through the Not In Kansas Anymore project, an Australian aid initiative implemented by Edge Effect on behalf of the Australian Government. The views expressed on this site are not necessarily the views of the Australian Government.