Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Could the US election result dent the 'Huge Australia' plan?

By Stephen Saunders - posted Monday, 11 November 2024


The only type of "dedicated" population planning that parliament and Treasury would readily countenance is a rubber-stamp for mass migration. Like Treasury's Centre for Population.

Finally, here's ANU "expert" Alan Gamlen. Never mind any population "agency", let's make one for immigration too.

His thought-bubble is a national migration institute. This "central, authoritative body" would counteract recrudescent "misinformation" and "moral panic" with reassuring "research".

Advertisement

Research? High minded academic propaganda, more like it. Taking at face value Treasury's "huge return" on investment, from mega-migration.

Gamlen, echoing former migration-mandarins Abul Rizvi and Peter Hughes, urges "better governance" of immigration.

As if, rearranging the deck chairs (sorry, organisation charts) at what used to be Peter Dutton's Home Affairs, that'll fix thing.

Instead of a corrupted agency, rooting for "migration agents" and international immigration, suddenly we'd have a squeaky-clean outfit, prioritising the welfare of Australians. Bingo.

And Dutton himself?

Don't buy, the hackneyed promise of "better planning".

That "conversation" is code for Labor-Liberal collusion on mega-migration. Instead of just supporting voters and their standards of living – via low migration.

Advertisement

This article takes me back to its predecessor. In our "democracy of stakeholders", Huge Australia can't be remedied by democratic process. Scarcely even, by "extraordinary developments". Political unicorns, such as an "environmental calamity" or "exceptional leader".

Is Dutton exceptional? Would he have the bottle, to defy the conventional two-party connivance? And make a dead-set commitment to beleaguered Australians, to slash the immigration numbers, and wind back the come-one come-all student-migration rort?

If Trump doesn't incline Dutton that way, nothing else will. But the likelihood still doesn't look all that great, running a line through all the latter's past immigration and political form.

 

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

5 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Stephen Saunders is a former APS public servant and consultant.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Stephen Saunders

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 5 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy