Australian Immigration Policy is argued and supported at the same time throughout its history, depending on the views of the governing political party. The main characteristic of the Australian Immigration Policy has been to keep the nation safe, which was obvious in the White Policy, where migrants from the southern Europe were not welcome in Australia. The discrimination of White Policy lasted until 1970es when it was finally abolished. The modern Australian Immigration Policy does not display any discrimination based on race, gender or disability and on surface is in accordance with the United Nations Statement on Human Rights. In community rarely, if ever, we can see a refugee with physical or intellectual disability as well as refugee suffering any terminal condition including AIDS. They are considered as a burden to the economy.
Skilled Migrants/Refugee intake
There is obvious welcome to skilled migrants who make 52 percent of yearly NSW intake of immigrants. Australian intake of skilled migrants is the largest in the world and it was 70 percent in 2011. As you can see Australia welcomes skilled migrants as a valuable asset to the economy. On the other hand it is less welcoming to refugees and asylum seekers, who make only 8 % of the yearly intake of immigrants. Australia could afford double intake of refugees and asylum seekers without any threat to the stability of population (O’Sulivan 2011). Basically there is no difference between asylum seekers and refugees, their lives are endangered. Only different labels based on immigration law and legality and illegality of arrival makes asylum seekers and refugees different.

Zorka I hope you get the results you need.
But too understand we ourselves do not understand the issue.
Now in my 66th year I have seen changes just in one lifetime.
The early fears at post ww2 Migration proved wrong, very wrong.
We gained a great deal and many, even including our Prime Minister is a migrant.
I think, firmly,our white Australia policy was Racist.
But like almost every living person, had no part to play in it.
The 1970,s saw boat people, Vietnam refugees, and yes racism,even me, finely balanced with the photos and story's from the communist take over.
A key, concern that many had gold and cash well beyond that most of us had, built concerns *are they refugees or economic refugees*
We know most became an asset for the country, but too a youth no longer controlled as at former home, often ran wild, it remains so today.
Notice a similarity with today?
Before we rush to judge Australians we should look at both sides, refugees, and ask those post ww2 migrants what they think.
I am sure you will find they too are concerned.
Concerned?
About separatism built in differences as seems the case with SOME Muslims and us.
I point too at growing concerns at the open door policy's that once welcomed every one to Europe.
And the growing, seemingly inevitable problems say in France and Briton, but include any country there.
Is Muslim integration an experiment some have put on both sides?
Are we both sides Lab Rats in a Social Engineering trial?
Will we in a century see our concerns unfounded, and that it worked.
Or in far less time live to regret it both sides.
That answer is to be found only in the vast Muslim majority who want only a better life ,it is them who can fix it not us.

By 'White Policy' you clearly mean the White Australia Policy, initially introduced in the Immigration Restriction Act of 1901. That was primarily against Chinese, and other Asians, with a clear intent to block immigration of non-Europeans. While there were worries about post WW2 immigration from southern Europe, that wasn't really part of the White Australia policy. In fact there was a lot of non-British/southern European immigration during the gold rushes, and many families, including mine have such long intertwined connections that apart from some handed down Italian (now often middle) names and recipes, you wouldn't know about the 1850s Italian ancestors.

However I'd agree with you on the apparent contradictions in the present policy or at least the way it's implemented, re skilled migration v. refugees. We only have to look at the convict history to realise that the least likely new arrivals often turn out to produce the most valuable citizens in later generations.

Dear Zorka,

The following website may help you to understand
the immigation policies in their proper context.
Until recent years, racist policies and practices were
embedded within Australian laws and institutions.
It's best to take a look at Australian legislation
and international law - to understand what and why
things exist the way they do today:

http://www.racismnoway.com.au/about-racism/understanding/index-what.html

Zorka lets also ask that you look at Europe.
In fact while I do not think this country has to defend any thing I recommend you do.
Migration both legal and illegal in Europe,of Muslim people.
Goggle that.
Deep and very real issues will be seen.
Not the lunatic from Norway, people not unlike you and me, all of us.
Pretending such thoughts expressed by ordinary folk are dirty is of little use.
Or that the fault, ALWAYS can be found in the country's welcoming refugees/migrants, is male cow dung!

I really appreciate your responses to my thread. I am not judging or criticizing, just trying to get my head around the Immigration Policy.
I do know that Australia has nothing to defend, still is the best country in the world to live in. I have my own bias, to be honest,I am refugee( 7 years in). i was lucky enough to be accepted and supported to live in Australia. I deeply appreciate the help I have received and still I am receiving. Not all of us have been lucky. Being passionate about social justice I do believe that the money skilled migrants earn and spend in Australia should work towards saving more refugees.
I know what is happening in Europe. My family lives there. I do know that Italy and Greece are full of illegal refugees. By the way
, one question?
Why asylum seekers are considered illegal and refugees legal> Basically they want to escape their countries for same reasons?