Dear Hasbeen,

My husband and I are planning a trip to Sydney
towards the end of April. We shall be visiting
Parramatta, Lidcombe, and other Western suburbs
and travelling by train to the city as well so
I shall write and tell you of my experiences in
Sydney on our return.

We've travelled all over the world and been in
all sorts of places with all sorts of people -
including living and working for over ten years
in Los Angeles. We've had encounters with people
of various colours and outlooks - and we've never had
any problems. Most people are just that - human beings
getting on with their lives.

Dear Paul,

Thank You for your last post.

It is very much appreciated.

Hi Foxy, City to Lidcombe/Parramatta on the Western Line is a good service. We catch that train often from Redfern, my partner 'T" has relo's living at St Mary's near Parrmatta who we visit. You can catch the train, and unless your very unlucky nothing ever happens out of the ordinary, and most of the time, the train is full of the so called "Disagreeable" people.

Dear Paul,

I used to know the area very well indeed.
We had friends in St Marys. And Parramatta
was my old stopping ground. It will be great
to go back and visit. Catching the train from Parramatta
to the city used to be a daily exercise. The only problem
in those days used to be overcrowding during peak hours
and the occasional attempted grope from the odd male -
who was soon put in his place by other travellers.
Ah, those were the days and we were all city travellers together.

Wow, travelling on Sydney's trains, sure brings back some great memories ! When I was stationed at Penrith LAC I travelled each shift (except nights) out to Penrith and back from Strathfield Station. Generally speaking no problems, I could bury my head in a book, and I'd arrive at Penrith quite happy. Driving out was both draining and tedious, along the old Parramatta Road, from Concord road. Trains were great I reckon !

Fox, "The only problem in those days used to be overcrowding during peak hours and the occasional attempted grope from the odd male - who was soon put in his place by other travellers"

Groping on public transport was never a feature of Australian life. You must be remembering somewhere else or you were on the train with imports who brought their cultural traditions with them.

As an indication of what Aussies were like, as far back as I can remember coastal life and my family holidayed at popular surf beaches a lot, perves were as rare as hen's teeth and strangers touching women were unheard of. It would have resulted in immediate strong action from other men and women (women were not frail princesses then, that was their daughters later) and a trip to the pokey without treatment for the minor injuries gained in the prior 'citizen's arrest'.

Paul1405,

While you feel compelled to stereotype any who demand that the government exercise all due care and discrimination (original OED definition, the correct one!) in the choice of who can enter the country and importantly, remain and gain citizenship, you yourself admit that some who would enter are undesirable.

The immediate meeting point for agreement is that it is highly undesirable and an unnecessary risk for government to entertain taking large numbers of migrants, or displaced people, where the relevant agencies responsible for checking and clearing them do not have the staffs and intel to do the job to the standard required. Also, corruption and ineptitude must be rooted out.
tbc..

continued..

Both sides of government have form for sweeping problems in immigration policies and administration under the mat, and for making decisions that were outrageously wrong and showed contempt for the safety and preservation of the culture and traditions of the public they are supposed to be serving (and not the the way round!). For example, Amanda Vanstone's decision as Minister for Immigration to allow in a Mafia boss sought by the Italian police.

'Diversity' is NOT a goal of immigration. That is to put the cart before the horse. Rather, it is a ideal for perceived fairness. The government is obliged to prefer those applicants who bring needed skills and confidently WOULD fit in best and be immediately productive, not a hopeful 'could' or 'might-possibly-one-day-optimistically-hopefully-with-police-monitoring-constantly', or 'just-join-the-Centrelink-queue'.

Presently both sides of the Parliament are being pushed hard by big business interests to ramp up migrant intakes to new record levels. That is despite:

- sustainability problems, examples being power, water and the tradition of converting prime farming land and low-lying marsh land (think lost valuable fish production for starters) into housing estates and canal developments;

- high levels of youth unemployment and general lack of interest converted into action to train and utilise young people -BOTH sides of the House;

- overcrowding of major cities and resultant problems; and,

- backbreaking tax and user-pays loads being carried by young workers especially to provide the infrastructure that has understandably lagged behind previous record intakes and the usual over-optimistic numbers.

Young couples are not having the children they want and planned for because they have lost permanent work and are carrying the added load of providing infrastructure and housing for migrant intakes that have been too high for decades.