A call for the big picture

Chatter around immigration at the moment is rather banal. It is focused on the humanitarian efforts and refugee issues. This constitutes but one section of the breadth of the Australian immigration policy.

Australia has an active and intricate immigration process that has historically worked very well serving both the national interest and been responsive to humanitarian issues.

Arguably, the conversation is stagnant. We could be reflecting on what immigration policies have served us well, and which haven't. Why are we not talking about the suitable level of immigration? We seem to be avoiding it.

This focus on asylum seeker issues is frustrating – it seems as if nobody is terribly happy. While some Australian's would like to open our borders others want them closed and locked with the key thrown away.

It is a policy area that evokes strong emotions and opinions. It has magnified attention because boat arrivals to Australia constitute a very minor number, less than 1.5% of new migrants.

Australia is not carrying a global burden in the slightest when it comes to maritime arrivals.

When the Fraser Government instituted a policy increasing migration from Vietnam, out of the Vietnam War, it has been viewed as a positive thing. We now have vibrant Asian communities in primarily Sydney and Melbourne.

We rose to the call of duty then, and I think we can do it again. The numbers of Vietnamese people coming by boat weren't high or excessive but it was politically controversial.

What Australia lacks is a solid idea of what our immigration should look like. We are very focused on the minute rather than the big picture.

I am a product of European migration to Australia, and many of you will be too. My father's family comes from Greece and my mother from the UK. Many of my friends wear their family's migration proudly - Europe, the Americas, Asia and Africa.

For Australia to continue to be the great melting-pot of multiculturalism, which we used to wave so proudly, we need to think beyond one asylum seeker boat.

In her last QandA performance, Judith Sloan correctly noted that Australia has a well-functioning migration scheme. For a long time we have benefitted from the huddled masses yearning for freedom and those who long for liberty and acceptance.

Australia, by and large, is a conservative country. We had issues with Asian migration, held onto the White Australia Policy for far too long and now can marginalise migrants from backgrounds which we don't always favour.

I fail to hear a cut through of the discussion which asks us: what do we want Australia to look like? We can be proudly accepting of our diversity as it stands.

We have boundless plains to share and a solid migration system is important. We are the country that has long-benefitted from immigration – Arthur Calwell made the call in the 1940s following World War Two that Australia must populate or perish.

This government must be careful not to confuse their rhetoric to a more deep-seeded issue. Their campaign, and the broader media curiosity, on Operation Sovereign Borders is a challenging one for our region. We are amongst developing nations that have a terse history with colonialism. We must be careful not to be excessive in our demands.

Scott Morrison has acknowledged that the infamous Sri Lankan asylum seekers are now moving onshore. Good, I say. If we need to have detention, it should not be out of sight or out of mind.

Compare the Ukraine plane tragedy with this asylum seeker issue. We're dealing with a similar number of people and comparable media interest. What's the difference? I cannot turn a corner without seeing the faces of those lost in the Ukrainian tragedy.

Asylum seekers are shrouded in mystery and secrecy.

When hard-pressed neither the hard nor the soft can answer a simple question on immigration "what should our intake level be?". Obviously, we cannot take everyone and there shouldn't be an expectation to do that.

I think it should be higher than what it currently sits at; I look at our communities and the bevy of small business operators around our cities and can see the benefits of immigration.

We are currently avoiding any rationality in the debate. We cannot continue a discussion focused on micro issues when we are evading a macro conversation.

This is one of the more testing policy issues of the time as political parties are only going harder than softer and are more intrigued by the next boat than anyone else. We must have the conversation amongst ourselves.

Immigration brings with it too many opportunities for us to assume it has but one dimension.