A number of posters observe that the volume of anti-immigration postings on this page (and many other discussions) highlight that politicians mustn't be listening since the weight of opinion seems to be so strongly against immigration. I note, however, that much of the protest comes from the same 20 or 30 posters who seem to believe that sheer weight of postings will bend the argument in their favour. Perhaps the real issue is that much of Australian society doesn't air it's views - and it is left to the vocal few to assert their opinions as universal.

Andrew: Full marks for adding something with substance to the discussion about the future state of immigration.

To those asserting that immigration dilutes our cultural heritage - and let me state that I am a 7th generation Aussie, my family was one of those that opened up Sth Australia in its early days - there are a vast number of other factors which shape the dilution of our aussie culture. Mass communications for one thing. On a single issue I can plumb a range of opinions from a number of international sources. This means that my opinions and therefore my world view - and therefore my "cultural framework" are all influenced by a global view of the world.

Yes, there are problems with our current immigration policies. However winding back the clock to policies such as that espoused by BOAZ-David are not the answer either. Yes we face issues with resource scarcity, particularly oil and water, but they can be solved with vision and technology.

As a final point, Jolanda talks about high marks as some sort of problem? Because some try harder that is a problem? So you would reward the lazy through implementing a policy of equally rewarding them with those who try harder? I never finished high school, I studied at night after work for the last 25 years and now enjoy the rewards. I am now working fulltime and completing a doctoral thesis. I have worked hard. Am I to be punished for that? Your view would suggest so.

tribal, As I did say in my post - its not what happened 200 years ago that is the problem, as lots of Countries have had to suffer similar invasions. The problem is what has been allowed to happen to the Aboriginal people since.

Education is the key to change and prosperity!

In Australia - the rich get Private Schools
For Asians there are Selective Schools

For mainstream there are Public Schools

For Aboriginal children - they get “disadvantaged” Schools.
The system also provides ‘disadvantaged’ schools for the poorer people in the West.

Millions of dollars are going to Private Schools. Huge amounts of money is being wasted outsourcing testing for children for placement in Selective Schools (even private school kids) and then ferrying students for hours at the taxpayers expense to attend these schools when they have schools in their local areas. Whilst children with disabilities, special needs and learning and behavioural problems are neglected on the basis of “lack of funding and resources”. The Governments favourite line!

How is that fair? Where is the equality in that? The system is segregating and to make it worse they are discriminating and neglecting and they have the power and the safety net to do anything that they want with students and/or their marks without question or challenge. I know that for a fact as my children have been victims of this systemic abuse and discrimination.

Aboriginal children are so behind in Education – that is where the major problem lies as Aboriginal children cannot get out of the situation that they are in when they are illiterate and they feel they have no hope. It is a vicious cycle.

Morals and obligations in our society have fallen victim to profit, prejudice, spite and greed. Adults need to regain control and set a good example. Neglecting our most vulnerable is not a good example to be set.

I love the Western Way but I do think that is getting out of control and many children are turning to drugs, sex and crime in order to rebel and cope

Andrew Bartlett's responses so far have the tone of "come gather round,I'll tell you Bible stories you've never heard before". Unfortunately, for this mob which he seems to regard as kindies, we've already heard them.
Ludwig makes a very important point about the sugar-coating of humanity applied to the immigration pill: Far more could be achieved by rendering assistance in the country of origin. That rather than the feel-good exercise of importing a miniscule few of the needy. In 1994 Australia agreed, along with other nations and even the reluctant Vatican, that such action was appropriate. Particularly, assistance would be given less-developed nations for taking responsibility, as with developed nations, for controlling their own numbers within their borders. Australia has lagged in this regard - Andrew ignores it.
Froggie, I am glad you are taking the effort to access scientific assessment of Australia's prospects. Please, everybody, do likewise rather than chase pie-in-the-sky. CSIRO has done great service in making Future Dilemmas freely available on its website. Dilemmas Distilled is a good introducion, but the complete publication provides some perspective on the thorough approach to this long and arduous exercise.
Yes, the world's six and a half billion could fit in Tasmania - or in Queensland with the advantage of families on "quarter acre blocks", as economist Glenn withers likes to quote when advocating population growth. And how many could Western Australia hold, or Antarctica? But the real world lies with Future Dilemmas. Andrew Bartlett, discard your white stick and read it!
Yes, we need to have a living, breathing, adjusting society interchanging with the world: please,no more enclaves here! Australia has done well in advancing its own culture, assisted by adopting the more progressive aspects of others. May interchange continue. We do not need to multiply to do that. Why allow ourselves to be bullied into increasing numbers via migration; or by increased birthrates? The Vatican's imperative to "outbreed the bastards" has not improved social cohesion in Northern Ireland; nor in Pacific Island communities and elsewhere.

last word,

"A nation of manicure artists and brickies will not survive peak oil."
Good stuff.

Andrew,

What part do the black uneducated Africans play in our society? Apart from using the money I pay in tax to be on the dole.

What part do the uneducated muslims from the middle east play in our society? Apart from causing trouble.

What the western world needs is more people like Nick Griffin and Jean Marie Le Pen and less people like the current lot of politicians in Canberra.

Pauline Hansen was framed and hung out to dry and the so called "representatives of the people" stood by and let it happen much to their eternal shame. Shame however doesn't play a big part in the lives of the "representatives". It's all about the gravy train.

The New South Wales Government lets the middle eastern trouble makers get away almost scot free.A few token arrests. Why? The gravy train.

This country is bent.

What's the difference between the plight of Pauline Hansen and Nick Griffen? Australian politicians taught the rest of the world how to persecute.

Long live the gravy train and all who ride on it. All aboard.

Having taken in all of the pro-immigration arguments, I stll believe that, apart from importing people with skills we don't have, all immigration should cease,now, until responsible people of all persuasions sit down and hammer out a population POLICY (sorry, Kay,it's the only way to emphasise that we don't have a POLICY). The current shambles is ad hoc.

Politicians and high immigrationists think of economic growth and nothing else. High immigration suits big business - particularly developers and builders, retail giants. When they have made their piles, they can shoot off to live in pleasant, green lands where populations have been sensibly controlled their populations with nil or low immigration suitable for the needs, leaving us with a desert.

High immigration is short sighted. When Australia blows away in the dust like an overstocked sheep paddock, those responsible will be long gone. Their heirs will curse the memory of people who believe that Australia can continue to take more people than it has now. We are already more than halfway past the 12m we have been told is sustainable.

We should find out how countries like Sweden, with around 9m people do so well.

I agree with Sladeb’s thought, “Much of Australian society doesn't air it's views”.
As many people have said, Australians have never been asked for their approval of the high-level immigration policy currently in place. Please correct me if I'm wrong about this.

If that is true, I suggest a referendum about the subject of immigration. It does not appear to be receiving the attention it deserves, with its potential to change Australia. A wide public debate about it should precede a vote about the level of immigration permitted, and from which countries.

Jolanda, what is wrong with selective schools? People go to them based on their ability to undertake higher academic studies.

The following article points out some of the benefits for people of academic ability:

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/07/24/1027497352845.html

A highly academic education just doesn’t suit many children. University education is not the only tertiary education that is worth anything. There are plenty of technical or vocational schools that people can go to, as well as the TAFE colleges. We need bricklayers, plumbers, electricians, nurses, builders, drivers etc, just as much as PhD’s. My point is there are many worthwhile and well paying occupations that do not need a highly academic education.

Instead of “one size fits all”, we should have a system where each child can gravitate towards the type of education and training that really suits its abilities and interests.