The main vested interest being government: votes, replacement with a more docile Left population, and who-knows-what rewards from Big Business. The government is the real villain because it has the control to fill the country to breaking point; the others have to beg, buy or bitch to the government to get more customers.

Divisive multiculturalism helps the goal of divide and conquer as a bonus for the poor- character, self-serving politicians now infesting Canberra.

Australia has never been poorer or more divided. Too much government, not enough productive private enterprise, which has been shut down or sent overseas.

Import more people. Export the means of sustaining them.

Stop illegal immigration (Abbott). Let the legally arrived stay here as illegal ferals long after they should have gone home, and probably for good - protected by the vested interests that want cheap labour and whatever more sinister reasons that the illegals cannot complain about to authorities because they are not supposed to be here.

It's well past time for the author's “ordinary Australians (who just) watch laws being selectively enforced, loopholes openly exploited, and obvious abuses tolerated because powerful sectors benefit financially, confidence in institutions deteriorates”, to do something about it.

Voting One Nation at the next election is the only hope. However, despite the polls, my guess is that the ordinary Richard heads, who have supported bad government for generations, will back down in fright and vote the same way they always have.

A good article that I (mostly) agree with. While there is undoubtably an element of racism in some people’s hostility to migration, we should be able to have a reasonable discussion on the level and composition of our migrant intake without resort to accusations of racism. For most of the past 100+ years Australia has very successfully welcomed and integrated migrants, but there are signs that our policies are no longer operating in the interests of the community as a whole. The article makes a good case that part of the reason lies with vested interests.

Hi Rhian,

I think the allocation of the migrant intake based on the various classification is fair and reasonable, made up of 71% skilled stream, 28% family stream, 1% special category. The overall target set at 185,000, is also not unreasonable, given our needs and population. I think those screaming; "cut mass migration" are simply politically motivated, if not downright racist, there is no policy calling for "mass migration". Post Covid there was a surge in new arrivals, created by the closed door created during the pandemic, that number is steadily being brought under control. Anyone calling for zero migration is out of touch with the economic reality, and Australia's obligations. Also calling for a White Australia Policy, is detached from reality, such a policy would go nowhere near filling the skills shortages we desperately need to plug.

The intake of migrants has to move away from willy nilly & go towards targeted intake. By this i mean a percentage of various groups not just 200,000 of one 20 each of all others. Some groups are literally out-breeding Australians & others yet still more are brought in. Govt must take into consideration by how much some groups multiply once here. An equilibrium must be maintained if the Demographic is to be truly multicultural. multiculturalism does not mean being outnumbered by one or two groups within only a few years. That'll only result in a non-Australian Monoculture. Some will want that but Australians don't !

HI Indy,

Australia has a planned immigration policy, given our requirements the target number is 185,000. This idea that there is a migrant cohort that "out breeds" is another furphy propagated by the racists elements within society. The section of the population that breed are women aged around 30. The problem we have with the native born Anglo European Australian population is their mean age is estimated to be around 45, making for a substantially reduced breeding capability which makes their replacement capability substantially reduced. To maintain a productive economy, Australia needs productive people, and the only way they can be sourced is through immigration. There is no other alternative if Australia is going to maintain a high standard of living. Some people want immigrants sourced from within the Anglo/European world under a White Australia Policy, that is unrealistic given the skill requirements needed, there would not be anywhere near the number of suitable applicants required.

another furphy propagated by the racists elements
Paul1405,
So, now it is racist to draw attention to one group out-breeding another in the adopted Nation ?
By what you're saying people from Islamic countries who state that their agenda is to in their words "to be in every home & those who don't submit will be slaves or worse" are racist ? Are you calling muslims racist ?
What we need is a referendum before the next election to let Australians decide who comes here & not the government & the UN etc. Multiculturalism could be a good thing if compatibility was under more scrutiny. You sound like an immigration agent, what are your preferences of migrants ? The ones who want to start a new life here or the ones who pay you more money & promise to vote for Woke administration ?

Calling people racists just because they object to mass immigration and the obvious divisions and security threats it causes is the pathetic weapon of no-argument/no brain morons.

Personally, I don't care if I am actually a racist or not. I don't care what anyone thinks of me or my opinions - particularly anonymous morons I don't know and, thankfully, will never know.

Net Zero emissions need to be dumped, and Net Zero immigration introduced.

Neither of these things will happen under the uniparty, and Australia, like the rest of the West - apart from the U.S - will look like an end of the world movie scene.

Demographers are now saying the birthrate of Australians has reached the point of "no return". The same thing is happening in other white countries. That should please the self-hating whites. On the other hand, these fools are in for a big shock if they think that the non-whites who take over will be kind to them because they did the dirty on their own race. I'm glad that will be out of here by the time the s..t hits the fan.

At the very best, Australia's mass immigration and multiculturalism is based on dangerous naivety. Although evil intent by the political class is more realistic.

Being proud of being tolerant - that's the rest of us - is stupid when it includes tolerance of the intolerant, i.e Islamism and antisemitic mobs on our streets.

Different races, different languages, different values do not work. Parallel societies do not work. Integration and assimilation no longer occurs: hasn't done since the days of post-war immigration of Anglos and Europeans, the people that are now being confused by the Left as the same as the inappropriate sort now flooding the country.

Hi Paul

I mostly agree about the permanent stream. The family reunion part may be a bit generous (I’d support only partners, dependent children and carers having an automatic right of residence), but the emphasis on skills is good. And while the target of 185,000 is higher than it used to be until about 2010, we absorbed similar numbers in the 2010s without too much pressure. I also support our humanitarian migration scheme.

However, net overseas migration has been about double that target, averaging 370,000 in the past 4 years. While there is no technical definition of “mass” migration, and the term is rather hyperbolic, it is not without some justification.

The article points out that much of the surge in immigration in recent years has been long-term temporary arrivals, mostly students. I have no problem in principle with our unis taking overseas students, but I have some concerns about recent trends.

The first is the sheer numbers, which have put pressure on infrastructure and housing (especially rentals). As the article points out, our universities benefit from this trend financially while the wider community bears the costs.

The second is that long-term temporary visas are being used by some as a backdoor entry, either by people who never really came here principally to study, or those who extend their stay by obtaining a succession of “temporary” visas, or those who overstay their visas. I wouldn’t stop people transitioning from temporary to permanent visas – someone who comes here to study, gets an engineering degree and wants to stay would probably be welcome. But temporary migrants transitioning to permanent should meet the same criteria as other applicants for permanent residency.

The third is that these temporary migrants do not pass the same vetting and character checks as permanent arrivals.

This could be fixed fairly and painlessly. By tightening the rules on visa hopping, enforcing the rules on “students” actually studying, identifying over-stayers and sending them home, and perhaps setting caps on future student visa numbers, we could cut net overseas migration while leaving the skilled stream untouched.

I mostly agree about the permanent stream.
Rhian,
Has anyone ever looked at the situation in the countries from which so many "refugees" come to Australia & indeed to all Western Countries ? Are the people in those countries better off for shedding so many of their country men ? Are their economies improving ? Don't they become more peaceful ? Or are these "refugees" not actual refugees ?
Do the countries that send all these refugees still receive international aid ? Shouldn't a slice of such aid go to the host country to help towards the influx of "refugees" ? When will the UN & the IMF actually start doing something realistic to stop theses migrations to the West ? Let Westerners go to these countries & help rebuild them instead of just perpetually fleecing the West ? I suppose if Westerners went there & brought these countries up to a good standard, they'd then be accused of being exploitive Colonialists again ! Or, is the islamisation of the Globe sanctioned by the powers in World politics ?

Indy
To answer your questions:
“Has anyone ever looked at the situation in the countries from which so many "refugees" come to Australia & indeed to all Western Countries?” – yes, countless times in detail
“ Are the people in those countries better off for shedding so many of their country men?” – no but the refugees are better off for getting out
“ Are their economies improving ?” - no
“ Don't they become more peaceful ?” - no
“ Or are these "refugees" not actual refugees?” – Australia’s refugee intake are screened intensively. Those that are accepted are genuine refugees.
“Do the countries that send all these refugees still receive international aid?” – their governments mostly don’t, but charities and international agencies try to help people directly wherever there are humanitarian crises.
“ Shouldn't a slice of such aid go to the host country to help towards the influx of "refugees"?” – refugees in host countries get UN and other international support. Some other international aid is offered to help major host countries – e.g. the EU provides funding to Türkiye, which hosts about 2.5 million refugees.
“ When will the UN & the IMF actually start doing something realistic to stop theses migrations to the West?” – not much they can do. The vast majority of refugees don’t go to “the West” but remain countries near their place of origin in Asia, Africa and South America.

Hi Rhian,

Thanks for the sensible comments on refugees. Our intake of refugees is capped at 20,000 pa. There is another furphy from some, that every migrant is a "refugee", that is certainly not the case. Australia is fortunate that our distance prevents large numbers of undocumented people crossing our boarders. Its true the countries with huge numbers of refugees are countries like Turkiye, Iran with about 6.5 million refugees between them , there are huge numbers of displaced people in Africa and the Middle East. In western countries, its Germany that hosts the most refugees in Europe. Countries like Turkiye are ill-equipped to handle such huge numbers, and millions of people are living in diabolical conditions in refugee camps.

From your reply to me, I agree there has been a surge in immigration, we had an increase post Covid, without the normal decrease resulting from departures. Your explanation is spot on, it wasn't government driven but caused by the unusual situation. Step have been taken to correct the anomaly as is practically possible. The 75,000 illegal people in Australia, are not "boat people", but "plane people". People who arrived legally and are now overstaying their visas. I'm not sure what we do about that, we can have an American style ICE outfit, guns and all, or we can use more subtle methods, besides many of the overstayers eventually leave of their own accord.

The Labor national secretary Paul Erickson has conceded that the government will be fighting One Nation, not the Coalition, at the next election. One Nation has been the focus of attention at the Adelaide Labor conference.

He seems to think that it will be One Nation or Labor, that’s “delivering real change”.

They have delivered change alright: in the form of an unrecognisable, divided sh.tshow that used to be Australia. They want to change the flag, and probably rename the country.

Of course, allowances have to be made for the fact that real loons attend Labor conferences, far to the Left of the parliamentary party; union commissars and thugs and plain nut jobs nobody has heard of.

If you don't like the truth, then post lies!

Here is a whopper!

"The Labor national secretary Paul Erickson has conceded that the government will be fighting One Nation, not the Coalition, at the next election."

"Labor National Secretary Paul Erickson stated that the Albanese government will be fighting both One Nation and the Coalition working together in tandem, rather than fighting One Nation instead of the Coalition. Erickson declared that the Coalition will be unable to govern without One Nation, framing the choice for voters as one between a Labor government or a "chaotic and divided Coalition-One Nation government." Sky News.

My opinion is if One Nation continues on its present trajectory it will do well in Cow Cocky (National Party) regional seats, but fall flat in Labor, Liberal and Teal city seats. The possibility of One Nation continuing as is, is highly unlikely, as it (Pauline Hanson) has shown they are a policy desert, and political fools. They use grievance politics and division as their weapons, rather than articulating sensible policy, (I'm sure Tommy Robertson was a real vote winner in Australia for ON) . The Lovely Pauline is Labor's best asset when it comes to a political fight with One Nation, Barnyard Joy and Mad Robert, marginally more intelligent than Pauline, so is a chimpanzee, are also prone to committing political suicide from time to time. I can't wait for One Nation to wheel out their bevy of candidates at the next election, as the array of Jackboot Johnny's and Nazi Nellie's should do wonders for the parties chances.

Richard Marles has actually announced that China is Australia's “largest security anxiety”. How daring of him. He still spouts the ‘agree to disagree” nonsense, though, and claims that Labor is doing an excellent job of managing the relationship.

‘Managing the relationship” seems to be Labor’s equivalent of sucking up.

There has been one small mercy at the Labor conference. Muslim Ed Husic's request for a Palestinian/Israel debate has been refused.

Perhaps, just perhaps, Labor has got the message that foreign affairs that Australia doesn't have a dog in, have no place in domestic politics, or for politicians, who are paid to concern themselves with Australians, not foreigners.

If YOU can't justify the redneck'd immigration nonsense that ONE NATION and the LOVELY PAULINE spew, than change the topic to what's said at the Labor conference. Well done ttbn.

As for Australia's relationship with China, Labor has made mistakes in some other areas, but their policy on the China relationship is something they have managed effectively. Unlike the Noaltion in government, which with a belligerent attitude, made a total hash of it. One Nation in government would declare war on China, while at the same time sucking up to Daffy Donald by going to war with Iran. These One Nation fools and supporters are totally out of touch with how the world works.

Paul 1405 is a perfect representation of the 101 Albanese Lies about immigration, and could easily be replaced by AI.

Under Albo, net migration over 2022-26 was 1.6M, vastly higher than anything we've ever had before, and vastly higher than anything that voters want. That's the problem. Not racism. Or Pauline. Or Barnaby's dog

Hi Steve S,

Either you are a liar, or simply misled by the extremes of One Nation; "Under Albo, net migration over 2022-26 was 1.6M" The figure from the ABS for 2022-2026 was 1,302,000 almost 300,000 less that your contrived figure. Add in 2021/22 year, a net decline in immigration of 94,000 ABS figure, and that gives a net total of 1,208,000. Official figures show annual migration has fallen significantly from its 2023 peak.

People who want to beat the drum for One Nation, a racist and bigoted extremist political party, are free to do so, and as Herr Goebbels is credited with saying; "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it". GOOD LUCK WITH THAT.

Rhian,
Thank you for the detailed information & as I have no way of checking on the validity of your disclosure I have to take your word for it all. Did you not have any info on the last two sentences in my post that you omitted to comment on them ?

Indy

Although your last few sentences included question marks, they were not really structured as questions so I took them to be comments.

I don’t know how an option to “let westerners go to these countries and sort them out” could work. There are semi-government and not-for-profit aid agencies that work is some countries, but they will usually not co-operate with violent and repressive regimes, and their personnel would be at risk if they tried. In other cases, it would take far more money and resources to “sort them out” than we are willing to offer. Western intervention can cause more problems than it solves. There are a few occasions when it might – I hold faint hopes that the Board of Peace proposed for Gaza might set it on the road to reconstruction and peaceful co-existence with Israel – but they are rare.

“Or, is the islamisation of the Globe sanctioned by the powers in World politics?” – that seems an unprovable conspiracy theory of little relevance to a discussion of Australia’s recent migration.

Here are some sources of information on refugees
http://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/refugees-by-country
http://www.unhcr.org/refugee-statistics
http://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/research-and-statistics/statistics/visa-statistics/live/humanitarian-program

Rhian,
Have a look at this ! Would appreciate your view on that !

https://www.facebook.com/reel/2198662364319051

Indy
I think that is a bonkers rightwing conspiracy theorist.

Picking on Indians seems particularly silly. I think the story of Indian migration to Australia is an example of our multiculturalism at its best and most successful.

To me, the key principle guiding our migration policies is that they should be designed to benefit the existing population. Here are some data from the latest census showing that Indian migration ticks than box:

Bachelor degree or higher:
Born in India: 66%
Born in Australia: 23%

Educated to year 9 or below:
Born in India: 2%
Born in Australia: 8%

In the labour force:
Born in India: 79%
Born in Australia: 66%

Professional occupation:
Born in India: 32%
Born in Australia: 23%

Work in hospitals or aged care:
Born in India: 10%
Born in Australia: 6%

Median weekly personal income:
Born in India: $1,015
Born in Australia: $805

Source: http://abs.gov.au/census/find-census-data/quickstats/2021/7103_AUS

It’s hard get data on an ethnic group’s negative contribution, as we do not have national data on e.g. crime rates by place of birth. The nearest I could find is from Victoria, which records the birthplace of people in prison. Victoria also has the largest Indian population of the states. The latest data show Indians comprising 1.3% of Victoria’s prison population, compared to 4% of the population as a whole.

http://www.crimestatistics.vic.gov.au/crime-statistics/latest-victorian-crime-data

Rhino,
thank you for the figures. Yes, as far as education goes the majority of educated Australians are not in the race as indoctrination has overtaken education. These pseudo intellectuals of course make up the greatest majority of Labor Left supporters.
What would be the Indian percentage represented in the Islamic community in Australia ?

Indy

The data you ask for is in the link I provided.

The majority of Indians in Australia are Hindu (51%) or Sikh (22%). The ABS indicates 28,104 Indian-born Australians are Muslim. That represents 4.2% of the Indian population in Australia or 3.2% of all Muslims in Australia. There are far more Catholic Indians in Australia (71,135) than Muslim Indians.

Rhino,
Again, thanks for the info. So, there are presently 28,000 confirmed Indians in Australia who are part of the ideological demographic who seek to work towards dominating this Nation rather than be simply a "multicultural" component that desires to fit in with the population.
It'd be interesting how many of the 71,000 will be divulging their religious affiliation in the census ? I have actually assisted an Indian couple to get residency here as they are indeed fine people but sadly a minority of those who didn't bring their ideological baggage with them.
Do you support the agenda to create a World Caliphate ?

Rhian, apologies about misspelling your name, damned predictive text !