As long as the poll was conducted as a secret vote, it would return a true result. Then people would not be afraid to vote honestly and without fearing to be called 'racists' or be seen to be not politically correct. Don't hold your breath waiting for such a poll.

We would benefit from more immigration, but only from northern European stock (the same stock that founded and built this country) and dispossessed White South Africans and Rhodesians. Australia doesn't need to be part of a social experiment.

BTW Foxy, what's the difference between Scottish and Gaelic (your post 6 December 2007 5:03:02 PM)? Did you mean Scots, a derivative of Old English? Gaelic Is the Scottish form of Goidelic which includes Gaeilge (Irish) and Manx.

I do find it rather amusing when the anti-immigrationists pop their head up, then:

a) say that most people agree with them.
b) make a series of claims, without really any backing statistics.
c) resort to pretty hateful rhetoric themselves - which is generally what they're attacking in migrants.
d) don't make any effort at an objective analysis of the effects it will have on the economy - this one is particularly amusing, as many of the most vocal opponents of immigration are from the ageing generation, yet without immigrants we haven't the faintest hope of getting anywhere near the number of workers we need in fields such as geriatrics.
e) use spelling mistakes, without considering that perhaps their cultural awareness is less than stellar, while at the same time, talking about the importance of a non-existent mono-culture.
f) accuse posts such as this one of being part of the evil lefty conspiracy, possibly in cahoots with the universities/unions/greens/whatever other establishment they loathe and disagree with.
g) launch attacks on anyone who disagrees with them as liars (and again, no backing)
h) manage to include tangents such as santa, evil elitists, white feathers, traitors - while (and this is really amusing) attacking other posters for 'irrelevance' and having their 'heads up their backside'.
i) act wounded and attacked when people point out the flaws in their argument, while still failing to do more than spray bile.

Sorry SCOTTY. A persuasive, calm, rational argument of the pros and cons, this does not make. Perhaps you should take a panadol and have a lie down until you're a bit more calm.

Jack the Lad wrote: "As long as the poll was conducted as a secret vote, it would return a true result. Then people would not be afraid to vote honestly and without fearing to be called 'racists' or be seen to be not politically correct. Don't hold your breath waiting for such a poll."

Just out of interest Jack, how do you think polls usually work?

Scotty, at your urging I looked at the Roy Morgon site, but I can't find the polls you're talking about. The first search item finding, from 2003, says that, just prior to the election, 15% of Australians saw immigration as a vital issue, but amongst Greens supporters, the figure was 28%, so I think we can assume a goodly proportion of that first figure does not support your original proposition.

In 2006, those that thought immigration was the most important issue facing Australia was up to 5% from 4% in the previous poll.

I'm not sure what I'm looking for here. In late 2001, there were a lot of negative polls about asylum seekers. Is this what you're talking about? Cause if you were, that would be kind of dumb.

Could you post the links to the polls you mean?

TRTL: I agree with many of your statements, and also your conclusion that we require a patient, collaborative debate to address these problems. But how do we enable this? And what are the outcomes? What should be the forum?

I'd be surprised if through these discussions, or a wider community, there was any decision that led to the reduction of immigrants from any particular area - especially the Middle East. So how do we address these issues?

JTL: Why would we benefit from Northern European stock more than Asian, the America's or even the Middle East? I would tender that there has been enormous economic and social benefit from the immigration of Chinese, Malay, Thai, even dare I say it, Iranians, Lebanese, etc.

Are there social ramifications of these groups, of course. Are there ramifications within the Northern European stock ... of course. Are they as noticeable by the media? politicians? Are they newsworthy?

What Scotty does say, and is countered by TRTL, is the tone of this thread certainly isn't assisting. Calling either party irrelevant is wrong - these views are vitally relevant and are better aired than left to fester. The rise of Pauline Hansen in QLD is preferable to the rise of White Supremacists in NT.

Back to my initial question: What can be done to change this? What can be done to improve the current situation? Ignoring right or wrong ... this is Australia's reality - people are feeling this way and its becoming increasingly polarised.

SCOTTY, that's amazing - all the polls you refer to show that 140% of Australians want only Asians and Muslims to be allowed into the country, and that only Aboriginals should be allowed into parliament.

Well, well, well heres a poll on stopping muslim immigrants March 17 2007.http://www.cdp.org.au/fed/mr/0703013f.asp

Over 6000 people polled and not hand picked by leftists to suit thier ends.