As a retired migration practitioner, I found this article refreshing because it confronts a reality that Australia's political class has spent years avoiding.
Migration policy cannot be separated from welfare policy, housing policy, infrastructure policy, and ultimately citizenship itself. Whether one agrees entirely with Milton Friedman or not, he identified a tension that remains unresolved today: a large welfare state and very high migration levels inevitably interact.
The article is particularly strong on the distinction between contribution and entitlement. Australians have historically been remarkably welcoming of newcomers who come here to work, build businesses, raise families, and become citizens. What is causing public concern today is not migration itself, but the scale and pace of population growth at a time when housing affordability, infrastructure capacity, and public finances are under obvious strain.
One point often overlooked is the humanitarian program. Australia has now granted well over one million refugee and humanitarian visas since the end of the Second World War. That is an extraordinary record of generosity by any international standard and something Australians can be proud of. But generosity does not eliminate limits. A nation facing housing shortages, stretched services, and significant public debt has a legitimate right to ask whether previous levels of humanitarian intake remain sustainable.
The article is also correct to challenge the assumption that migration is a cost-free economic policy. Governments have become accustomed to using population growth to support headline GDP figures while paying insufficient attention to per-capita outcomes, housing supply, and living standards. As practitioners, we see visa decisions made one application at a time, while communities experience the cumulative consequences.
Perhaps the most important point is that citizenship should mean something. If citizenship marks membership of the Australian political community, then it is entirely reasonable to expect a period of contribution, self-reliance, and commitment before access to the full range of taxpayer-funded benefits.
Reasonable people will disagree on where the line should be drawn. But what is becoming increasingly difficult to deny is that migration levels, welfare settings, housing affordability, infrastructure capacity, and social cohesion are all connected. Australians are not asking for less compassion. They are asking for more realism.
The public mood has shifted because the facts on the ground have shifted. Politicians ignore that reality at their peril.
Australians, when polled, have been for reducing immigration since the 90s. Mass immigration started being a thing in the last year of the Keating government, and has increased every year since (with the exception of the WuFlu panic). As a libertarian minded person, the other factor I consider is that most of the migrants we bring in are from much more statist cultures making our job harder.
One Nation belled the cat decades ago. Australians are finally waking up and realising that there is a toll to be paid for all this largesse. GDP per person has been falling, and taxes continue to rise against a backdrop of high inflation and tone deaf politics from the major parties.
My parents came out from Italy in the early 50’s with very little money and no English but they both managed to find plenty of work and integrated. When they married they became successful market gardeners and NEVER once had handouts from the government of the day, paid their taxes till the day they died AND became Australian citizens before I was born. They would be turning over in their graves watching our beautiful State (Victoria, where else) and country going to the dogs! 😡
Your parents and many other immigrants came with a great culture of hard work and contribution. You should be proud of them and generally Australians have welcomed these immigrants. However, all cultures are not equal, nor equally of value in Australia. It is not an Australian role to make up for the deficiencies of any other source nation for nor to blindly accept their emigrants who see Australia and welfare here as their solution.
As a retired migration practitioner, I found this article refreshing because it confronts a reality that Australia's political class has spent years avoiding.
Migration policy cannot be separated from welfare policy, housing policy, infrastructure policy, and ultimately citizenship itself. Whether one agrees entirely with Milton Friedman or not, he identified a tension that remains unresolved today: a large welfare state and very high migration levels inevitably interact.
The article is particularly strong on the distinction between contribution and entitlement. Australians have historically been remarkably welcoming of newcomers who come here to work, build businesses, raise families, and become citizens. What is causing public concern today is not migration itself, but the scale and pace of population growth at a time when housing affordability, infrastructure capacity, and public finances are under obvious strain.
One point often overlooked is the humanitarian program. Australia has now granted well over one million refugee and humanitarian visas since the end of the Second World War. That is an extraordinary record of generosity by any international standard and something Australians can be proud of. But generosity does not eliminate limits. A nation facing housing shortages, stretched services, and significant public debt has a legitimate right to ask whether previous levels of humanitarian intake remain sustainable.
The article is also correct to challenge the assumption that migration is a cost-free economic policy. Governments have become accustomed to using population growth to support headline GDP figures while paying insufficient attention to per-capita outcomes, housing supply, and living standards. As practitioners, we see visa decisions made one application at a time, while communities experience the cumulative consequences.
Perhaps the most important point is that citizenship should mean something. If citizenship marks membership of the Australian political community, then it is entirely reasonable to expect a period of contribution, self-reliance, and commitment before access to the full range of taxpayer-funded benefits.
Reasonable people will disagree on where the line should be drawn. But what is becoming increasingly difficult to deny is that migration levels, welfare settings, housing affordability, infrastructure capacity, and social cohesion are all connected. Australians are not asking for less compassion. They are asking for more realism.
The public mood has shifted because the facts on the ground have shifted. Politicians ignore that reality at their peril.
Australians, when polled, have been for reducing immigration since the 90s. Mass immigration started being a thing in the last year of the Keating government, and has increased every year since (with the exception of the WuFlu panic). As a libertarian minded person, the other factor I consider is that most of the migrants we bring in are from much more statist cultures making our job harder.
One Nation belled the cat decades ago. Australians are finally waking up and realising that there is a toll to be paid for all this largesse. GDP per person has been falling, and taxes continue to rise against a backdrop of high inflation and tone deaf politics from the major parties.
My parents came out from Italy in the early 50’s with very little money and no English but they both managed to find plenty of work and integrated. When they married they became successful market gardeners and NEVER once had handouts from the government of the day, paid their taxes till the day they died AND became Australian citizens before I was born. They would be turning over in their graves watching our beautiful State (Victoria, where else) and country going to the dogs! 😡
Your parents and many other immigrants came with a great culture of hard work and contribution. You should be proud of them and generally Australians have welcomed these immigrants. However, all cultures are not equal, nor equally of value in Australia. It is not an Australian role to make up for the deficiencies of any other source nation for nor to blindly accept their emigrants who see Australia and welfare here as their solution.
I am extremely proud of them and the culture they epitomise.