AUSTRALIA is arguably the world's most successful immigration nation. However, we cannot take our continued success for granted or be misguided about the reasons for our success. We must continue to decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come.
Our focus on merit-based, non-discriminatory and orderly immigration, and the values that underpin these measures, has helped us overcome the barriers of diverse nationalities and ethnicities to create a nation with a clear sense of national identity.
The Liberal Party has been in the vanguard of these efforts and remains so today. Robert Menzies embraced the ambitious and positive program of postwar immigration and signed the Refugee Convention. Harold Holt abolished the White Australia policy. Malcolm Fraser established SBS, migrant resource services, English language instruction and the special offshore humanitarian program.
Opposed by Gough Whitlam, Labor and the unions, Fraser also responded to a regional refugee crisis, resettling more than 50,000 Indo-Chinese refugees, while stopping boats coming to Australia by establishing offshore processing in places such as Galang in Indonesia.
John Howard increased skilled migration from less than 30 per cent to almost 70 per cent of the permanent program, while doubling the size of this program and halving community concerns about immigration levels being too high.
On our borders, Howard also stopped the boats, while resettling about 150,000 refugee and humanitarian entrants. When he left office, one in 400 protection visas went to those who had arrived by boat. Today that figure is one in five.
Today we face new challenges.
The level of social dislocation arising from Europe's failed immigration policies is now obvious to all and is concerning many Australians. The most serious example is the rise in home-grown terrorism from isolated ethnic and religious communities.
However, we must be careful to address our own challenges, not appropriate those of other continents. Germany and Britain did not follow Australia's planned migration path and have paid the price. In both cases migrants have significantly higher rates of unemployment and lower skills and qualifications than the balance of the population.
By contrast, in Australia we have chosen migrants who are more likely to be successful.
In Australia, our migrant population and their children have achieved equal or better in education, unemployment, labour force participation, median full-time earnings and even incarceration, compared with the rest of the community.
Of course, we should have policies that promote acceptance, reject discrimination, provide support and recognise our diverse backgrounds. We should continue to be conscious of removing barriers to participation in the Australian community. In fact, we should be more insistent about that participation. Our first priority must be to protect the integrity of our immigration program.
Immigration is not a welfare program; it is a nation-building program that seeks to add to our national wellbeing. This program must be driven by our national interest, in selecting those most able to make a contribution.
The government's failures on our borders remain a priority in restoring the integrity of our immigration program. However, we must also start to deal with the growth in temporary migration that is now the dominant source of net overseas migration to Australia. We learned many years ago that capital was mobile and we adjusted our system of financial regulation and policy frameworks to take advantage of this change. Today, people are mobile, for study and employment in particular.
We need policies that can embrace this opportunity, while ensuring we retain the integrity of our immigration program, and ensure that those who come to Australia as workers or students can fully participate in their Australian experience and engage our way of life.
A further challenge is to acknowledge the new fault line for social cohesion in Australia. This was once defined by race, nationality and ethnicity; it is now becoming religion.
This new challenge is different. We are dealing with the borderless, non-racial, ethnically non-specific and non-language-dependent realm of personal beliefs and values. Our response should be the same - remaining true to the values, systems and institutions that have served our nation well. These include freedom of religion. The only constraint Australia places on the practice of religion is that believers respect the rule of one law, the institutions that uphold this law and the values that we live by and aspire to as a nation.
In my experience religion should not be an excuse for separation. People of faith are typically committed to the welfare of others, the primacy of family and the importance of community. We need to focus more on these commonalities. We also need to avoid making exceptions for the differences and encourage a one-rule-for-all approach.
For example, I am opposed to the banning of any form of religious dress. Equally, religious dress should not be afforded any special status or exemption under the law, especially for identity or security purposes. Common sense should prevail.
For the past 60 years we have found a better way to make Australia work as an immigration nation. It is not perfect, but it's better than most.
Our liberal democracy; our merit-based, skills-focused immigration program; the primacy of English as our only national language and the universal embrace of accessible and enduring Australian national values constitute our better way.
We must not drift from this path in the face of new challenges or policy fashions.
Source:http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opinion/rule-of-law-for-all-migrants/story-e6frgd0x-1226250755565
No comments:
Post a Comment