source : the age
The political parties have submitted their bids in the great Australian migration auction. Low, lower, lowest.
But numbers are just a sidebar to the real cause of unease over the way immigration is changing society – both in Australia and in other countries grappling with popular revolt after decades of suppressed debate. Numbers are a crude proxy for anxieties over culture.
Australia is a clear illustration of why: 26 per cent of Australian citizens – not residents, but passport-holders – were born overseas. Regardless of how few newcomers we bring in, we will still have to deal with cultural misunderstandings in the naturalised population after decades of laissez-faire integration policy.
Now the multicultural bargain is fraying. Call it social cohesion, call it what you will, new Australians and Australian-born citizens are not living together as easily as we would all like.
We have to change that. Talking about our differences seemed too hard. Now the nation needs some serious marriage counselling. Because taking on citizenship of a new country is like getting married. It is not a gift or a transaction. When Australia takes in a migrant and a migrant becomes fully Australian, the two become bound – for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health. We expect new Australians to make an emotional commitment that goes beyond what they can gain from joining their future to ours. Their cares become ours and, as in any marriage, they take us whole – trillions of dollars of debt, as well as sunny skies.
At least that’s the ideal. As I say, this is a marriage that needs some remedial help.
In new research conducted on behalf of the Centre for Independent Studies, I asked Australian citizens born here and abroad about their hopes and anxieties, and what it means to be Australian. Analysing quantitative polling that delved into the views of Australians along religious as well as ethnic lines, I discovered many useful insights that can guide us in repairing the fabric of our union.
I discovered that, while new Australians are strongly committed to their adopted country, many do not feel their contribution is fully recognised or their backgrounds fully accepted. At the same time, Australian-born citizens are increasingly questioning whether the migration bargain is delivering for them. Both sides currently feel they are giving more than they are getting. Both can’t be right, but the mental ledger won’t be settled by trying to use economic data to settle a disagreement that is, in part, cultural.
The good news is the marriage is not beyond saving. There are many sources of agreement among new Australians and Australian-born citizens. One of the most important is an argument we should immediately put to bed over what multiculturalism even means. I asked whether migrants should fully adopt Australian culture (assimilation), adopt Australian culture while keeping parts of their own (integration), or whether Australia should adapt to include many different cultures equally (a transformational vision, of an Australia fundamentally changed into something new).
A majority of new Australians and Australian-born citizens prefer the integration model. Support ranged from 50 to 66 per cent for this approach. Sure, some groups prefer complete assimilation and some people want Australia to transform. But the democratic majority can be our guide.
There’s more good news: we’re very aligned on what Australian culture is. Both new Australians and Australian-born citizens believe treating people equally, regardless of wealth, status or background is the most important characteristic of Australian culture and identity. There are also similar levels of agreement over the qualities that make up Australian culture and identity, including a willingness to work hard and contribute, personal freedom, and everybody having an equal say in who their elected representatives are.
There are some amusing differences that emerge over why migrants come to Australia. New Australians overwhelmingly believe it’s for economic opportunity, while Australian-born citizens think it’s to escape conflict or persecution. Australian-born citizens also overestimate the appeal of our welfare system, while underestimating the pull of our lifestyle, values and customs, weather, cleanliness and environment. If only Australians born here could take what we have less for granted, and wake up each morning with the gratitude of a migrant.
Where there is a more serious discrepancy – and therefore more need for deliberate discussion – is on the subject of values. Culture and values are often described interchangeably. But there is an important difference: culture is how we behave. Values are the attitudes or principles that shape our behaviours. Which makes productive debate over values crucial to achieving the shared culture we agree we want.
Unsurprisingly, a government website stating our national values and the multiple choice test migrants have to pass to obtain citizenship doesn’t transform existing beliefs into those of the new country. There are significant differences in attitudes to free speech, gender equality and religious practice between Australian-born citizens, new Australians from an Anglo-European Judeo-Christian background and those from the Middle East and North Africa/South Asian/South-East Asian (Muslim) and South Asia and SE Asia (Hindu/Sikh) backgrounds. The gap between what new Australians sign up for and what they continue to believe regardless demonstrates the need for a citizenship process that goes deeper than a quiz, as well as an ongoing national conversation about values.
We should also examine how money is currently spent on multiculturalism. The government has allocated $171 million from 2025-28 to the Supporting Multicultural Communities program. In fractious times, the money is increasingly used to keep communities safe from one another. That’s a failure of integration. We are coming apart and the government is buying Band-Aids.
Government can’t manufacture belonging. But it can state the terms of membership plainly, apply them consistently, and ensure its own spending and settings support the integration model that a majority of Australians, new and Australian-born, say they want.
It’s time to shift the focus from numbers to upholding reciprocity and integration. No migration number will ever satisfy Australians until both new Australians and Australian-born citizens see the multicultural bargain as honoured.
Parnell Palme McGuinness is an insights and advocacy strategist. She has done work for the Liberal Party and the German Greens and she is a senior fellow at the Centre for Independent Studies. She is also an advisory board member of Australians For Prosperity, which is part-funded by the coal industry.
Parnell Palme McGuinness is an insights and advocacy strategist. She has done work for the Liberal Party and the German Greens and is a senior fellow at the Centre for Independent Studies. She is also an advisory board member of Australians For Prosperity, which is part-funded by the coal industry.
