This will be THE major issue at the next election

Greens, Labor sink Peter Dutton’s citizenship crackdown:

Immigration Minister Peter Dutton’s overhaul of Australian citizenship laws have suffered a major setback with his reforms unable to pass the parliament ahead of a Senate imposed deadline — an outcome hailed as a “major victory” by Labor and the Greens.

The proposed shake-up would have increased the permanent residency requirement for citizenship from one to four years and imposed a tougher English language requirement on aspiring Australians.

The changes — which would also have required applicants to demonstrate they had integrated into Australian society — were due to take effect from the date of their announcement by Mr Dutton on April 20.

Mr Dutton said the government remained “committed to strengthening citizenship”, and flagged that negotiations would continue with crossbench Senators, although no-timeline has been set on the passage of any revamped package.

“It’s a shame that Bill Shorten is so weak that he has to capitulate to the hard left of the Labor Party against the national interest,” Mr Dutton said.

And from the comments. The top 20 and not one supporting Labor and the Greens:

According to Green Senator Nick McKim “Peter Dutton tried to tear down multicultural Australia and remake it in his own hateful image.” Why is improving the quality of immigrants by showing they are willing and able to integrate “hateful”? Interesting that the Green’s loyalty is to foreigners over Australian interests. If the Greens had their way, by about Easter we would be overwhelmed by hundreds of thousands from the worst societies in the world and Greens would celebrate this apocalypse and victim factory as “compassionate”. Deranged.

Yes I can see why Labor and the Greens would not like the proposed citizenship test. You might actually need some intelligence and education to pass it.

Labor and The Greens working for Get Up!/ George Soros. Dumped files show influence of George Soros on Western politics

“Hailed as a “major victory” by Labor and the Greens.” The message here? Labor and the Greens get into power again its open borders and more boats. Its like ground hog day.

More damage done to this country by the left-leaning unrepresentative swill.

Just shows that if Labor get back into power it will be refugee-a-rama. Non stop boats from all directions.

When I applied for citizenship it was dependent on four or five years permanent residence. I believe that persisted throughout the Howard years. Presumably the one year requirement was another “progressive” move by the comrades.

There’s something strange and quite disturbing about Labor and The Greens show more allegiance to foreigners than they do Aussies. It’s an absolute disgrace.

FFS! Whose side are labor and greens on? Ours or some militant islamists?

The ALP/Greens veto of Dutton’s law changes is outrageous and my real thoughts to this bastardry would be unprintable. Beyond contempt.

Australian citizenship is a privilege, not a right. 1 year of residence is not enough to earn this!!

May as well call an election and get it over with. Labor and the Greens are already using the Senate to control the country.

The dreaded dysfunctional Senate strikes again. Making it very hard for the Government to Govern. Time to dispose of the Senate once and for all.

& the One Nation vote just jumped another couple of percentage points!

Labor and the greens will open borders and destroy this country. A big loss for Australia

What is so very wrong with what Dutton is proposing. I support him 100%. There are those in the Senate without a brain cell between them, and they usually vote as a bloc, so I guess we get just what we vote for.

Labor and the Greens consider Australian citizenship cheap.

People smugglers in Java will be checking that their boats are fueled up. (Seaworthiness not a consideration.)

This Bill Shorten is really a piece of work. The average Aussie supports Dutton on this as we have had enough of mass immigration and poor quality immigration. Bill you have it wrong big time!!!!

Labor and the Greens celebrate the continuing abuse of Australia. They will do absolutely anything to try and get the ethnic vote

We know all about the Greens but it’s now abundantly clear Labor doesn’t care about this country. It’s all about power at any cost. We have an energy crisis that will only get worse and it’s a threat to the health, wellbeing and lives of millions of Australians but Labor would rather play cheap politics than work towards a long term solution. Massive growing debt – don’t look to Labor to help resolve it. Now Dutton tries to sharpen up citizenship laws and Labor says no to that too. They are despicable.

Might also mention that Dutton has the right idea on climate change as well.

This entry was posted in Australian Story, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

117 Responses to This will be THE major issue at the next election

  1. Sinclair Davidson

    Good – unfortunately this ill-thought proposal by the xenophobe has already cost Australia talent.

  2. Phill

    I heard Di Natalie speaking on radio today, calling it a “white Australia policy”. What a fool.

  3. candy

    I’ll go against the grain here and say the proposed legislation went too far. For better or worse we are a multicultural society and many of use have relatives who could not speak much English but made a good productive life. We come from them.
    This is aimed against Muslims, there’s reasons for that, but it affects other cultures too. Not good.

    Also detaining 10 year olds for terrorism. quite wrong.

  4. Sinclair Davidson

    I heard Di Natalie speaking on radio today, calling it a “white Australia policy”. What a fool.

    Yep. The proponents of the White Australia Policy were at least honest in their xenophobia. Dutton needs to come to the realisation that racism/stupidity at the border is no substitute for rubbish economic policies.

  5. MPH

    A proposal, that isn’t even law, has cost Australia talent? How about the existing law that has cost Australian lives?

  6. Snoopy

    Good – unfortunately this ill-thought proposal by the xenophobe has already cost Australia talent.

    How so?

  7. Ƶĩppʯ (ȊꞪꞨV)

    Fabian marxists are disingenuous, dishonest, treasonous filth and should be dispatched as such.

  8. Sinclair Davidson

    I know fine correct thinking people, disadvantaged by this law, who have already made plans to leave. Now that the democratic process has rejected this law – good – I doubt they are going to change their minds and stay.

    Here is the thing: Dutton introduced a law that had retrospective impact on people already in the system. This is becoming a feature of this government. Now I realise that you lot keep blaming Turnbull for this sort of thing, but here we are talking about the great white hope of the conservative side, Herr Dutton himself. This is the same guy who thought it a good idea to have immigration authorities scouring Melbourne asking people to prove they were legally in Australia. If we wanted shit like this in the English speaking world we could have surrendered at any time during the Napoleonic wars or either one of the first or second world wars.

  9. Snoopy

    I know fine correct thinking people, disadvantaged by this law, who have already made plans to leave.

    Assuming they will be unable to gain citizenship, how will they be disadvantaged apart from not being able to vote or get a passport ?

  10. Sinclair Davidson

    People who were months away from being eligible to apply for Australian citizenship suddenly became years away from being eligible to apply.

    Immigration decisions don’t just impact the main applicant – very often they have partners who are materially disadvantaged by not being able to work etc.

  11. Sinclair Davidson

    Anyway – back to the main topic of the thread: if illiberal immigration laws are the topic of the next election (I suspect not) I can, in good faith, not vote for Liberals in the House. If, however, they abandon their racist tendencies and focus on issues, such as over-priced energy, that impact the hip pocket I reckon they stand a good chance to win. Not that they will win, but they can win.

  12. Snoopy

    You have to be an Australian citizen to work? The APS isn’t the nation’s only employer.

  13. Sinclair Davidson

    You have to be an Australian citizen to work?

    You’d hope so – but so many Australian citizens choose to live on welfare. Spouses of migrants very often cannot work.

  14. Sinc, you’re right, this will be the major issue at the next election. Just don’t assume that it’s going to go in the direction that you think it should.

  15. Bruce in WA

    Never thought I’d read such trite crap from you, Professor. And what do you mean by “fine correct thinking people”? People who think like you? You want this country to take on all and sundry from wherever? Fine. Now tell us how you’ll sort the wheat from the chaff.

    Took my BIL 18 months and $10k to gain just a residency permit. And both he and I thought that was fine and fair.

    I know I should shut up and delete this, because I’m angry and had two glasses of wine … but I’m not going to.

  16. Sinclair Davidson

    Time will resolve uncertainty I suppose. Yet I suspect if all the Liberals have at the next election is xenophobia on the borders they should lose. In an environment where living standards are falling and job security is precarious and utility costs rising, I would go to the electorate with a tad more than “remember we stopped the boats six years ago”.

  17. Snoopy

    In an environment where living standards are falling and job security is precarious and utility costs rising, I would go to the electorate with a tad more than “remember we stopped the boats six years ago”.

    Don’t forget that Malcolm will have SSM as well. I’m sure our “potentially great” PM can pull it off.

  18. Sinclair Davidson

    People who think like you?

    Yes Bruce. People who think like me. People like me who host free speech forums where numpties can mouth off rubbish even though I think they are numpties mouthing off rubbish but that’s okay because free speech. Would you rather have a whole bunch of people who don’t think like me?

  19. Sinclair Davidson

    The problem you have Snoopy is that I entirely approve of SSM – so good on Malcolm for delivering.

  20. jonesy

    You could say there will always be collateral damage resultant from broad border protection laws. The left do want uneducated/able swill to enter, become full citizens and vote left for their entire lives. I have already seen the insidious actions of wholesale change of the demographic to the electorate where I used to live just by the addition of government provided accommodation units. From blue to staunch red in under a decade. Imagine what could be done with a few hundred refugee/immigrant new Aussies in maybe a dozen selected seats…. Balance of power.

    Sinc, if you asked your friends if the citizenship laws were relaxed to not only let them in but the very people they were emmigrating from…would they think the same?

  21. I know fine correct thinking people, disadvantaged by this law, who have already made plans to leave.

    You wouldn’t advocate for a nation to base its economic policy around individual circumstances, no matter how fine and correct thinking those people were.

    So why should immigration laws be any different?

  22. Snoopy

    The problem you have Snoopy is that I entirely approve of SSM – so good on Malcolm for delivering.

    I realise that. It’s why your overlooking that triumph surprised me.

  23. Bruce in WA

    Yes Bruce. People who think like me. People like me who host free speech forums where numpties can mouth off rubbish even though I think they are numpties mouthing off rubbish but that’s okay because free speech.

    Thank you. I totally enjoy being called a numpty because I disagree with your views of the way things should be.

    If you think the only thing that gets “mouthed off” here is “rubbish”, I suggest you shut the forum down … now.

  24. Sinclair Davidson

    jonesy – the people I’m talking about are Americans. Now I’m the first to allege that Americans don’t really speak English but I’m talking about English-speaking white anglo-saxon protestants.

    Adam – I also don’t believe that laws should be changed retrospectively. People who come to Australia on the understanding that after x years they can move from visa restriction y and apply for citizenship should have that deal honored by the government. Now the government itself claims that its policies are designed to attract good migrants – now I know that the change in policy is repelling good migrants – it’s not unreasonable to ask for an explanation.

  25. Sinclair Davidson

    Bruce in WA – or you can leave.

  26. Fisky

    People who were months away from being eligible to apply for Australian citizenship suddenly became years away from being eligible to apply.

    That’s very strange! I thought libertarians were AGAINST giving away citizenship cheaply (after all, Dutton’s proposals do not affect permanent residents at all). It was one of their selling points I believe.

    It turns out, that was not true. Libertarians LOVE giving away citizenship, to as many people as possible. Because Bahnisch.

  27. Diogenes

    No. The election will be fought on electricity.

  28. Fisky

    I know fine correct thinking people, disadvantaged by this law, who have already made plans to leave. Now that the democratic process has rejected this law – good – I doubt they are going to change their minds and stay.

    But that’s not true at all. They lose absolutely nothing if they are already permanent residents, so they cannot possibly be “disadvantaged”. No one is going to be deported as a result of this law. The only thing they aren’t granted additionally, is citizenship.

    So I think the “libertarian” position on citizenship (10 years! No welfare!) has not been entirely straight up.

  29. Fisky

    I’ll go against the grain here and say the proposed legislation went too far. For better or worse we are a multicultural society and many of use have relatives who could not speak much English but made a good productive life. We come from them.

    Candy, the English requirements for the law are the absolute minimum required to get into a Bachelor’s course. Anyone who comes here on a student visa for tertiary study (assuming they aren’t on an intensive make-up course) already meets the English language requirements.

    Those who are disadvantaged by the law are mainly in the humanitarian and family streams, but even then, it doesn’t stop them having permanent residence at all. There are a handful of entitlements that permanent residents are not eligible for (not too many though), and of course they cannot vote. Otherwise, they have the same rights as citizens.

  30. Snoopy

    Non-citizens are generally ineligible to join the APS and the ADF. Maybe these restrictions could be eased. I’m sure the ALP would agree?

  31. Oh come on

    No. The election will be fought on electricity.

    Diogenes, yep, it should be. Abbott is right to want to start a great big argument with the ALP over coal. Pity he wasn’t so keen when it counted.

    OTOH, we have Turnbull, who is such a political flibbertigibbet that he seizes upon an election-winning position – ‘a government’s first priority is to keep the lights on’ – before abandoning it as soon as the next innovative squirrel grabs his attention.

    We’re boned.

  32. Oh come on

    Snoopy, why wouldn’t it? Why would you think the modern ALP would put the national interest above its own?

  33. Did I read it right, the residency requirement for Australian citizenship is One Year?

  34. Snoopy

    I was being sarcastic OCO.

  35. max

    In Hong Kong permanent residency is granted after 7 years continuous residence.

    Even then certain groups are excluded – Filipinos, Indonesians …

    This is not discussed, just accepted.

    Only in Australia would four years be seen as unreasonable.

  36. Oh come on

    TBH, I don’t think non-citizens should be barred from employment in the APS. Certain sensitive positions should obviously be restricted. I can’t see why non-sensitive civilian positions within the ADF should be restricted to Australian citizens, too.

  37. Tweak it so it’s not retrospective. For new arrivals who are serious about becoming Australian citizens for themselves, their children, their grandchildren – there’s really not much difference between one, two, four or five years. Functional English to catch public transport, shop for essentials, communicate to execute their trade or job – that should be enough.

  38. Oh come on

    Herr Dutton

    I’m invoking Godwin’s Law. That’s a bit OTT. I am a bit perplexed about Dutton’s elevation from useless chinless wonder back in 2013 – we used to bag the shit out of him on the rare occasion he was noticed – to conservative great white hope today. It’s a strange shift indeed, but these are strange days.

    That being said, the “Herr Dutton” inference is going too far. I remember that dunderheaded Melbourne visa sting – IIRC, it was all over before lunchtime as the failsafes of a still relatively free society kicked in and the feds were stood down from that particularly wrongheaded duty. Thing is, why assume malevolence when incompetence and/or stupidity could explain it?

  39. DM of WA

    Good – unfortunately this ill-thought proposal by the xenophobe has already cost Australia talent.

    The “talent” argument, like the “xenophobe” argument, is phony since the number of foreign geniuses (of uncertain value) who will be adversely affected by this scheme is obviously small. We would still continue to welcome very wealthy businessmen and suitably qualified foreign students. The inconvenience for the tiny number of foreign geniuses we lose is vastly outweighed by the benefit to us of denying entry to hundreds of thousands Third World schemers and dreamers (aka future Labor voters) of no economic or cultural value to this nation. Do you actually have a sensible argument for admitting huge numbers of low-skilled or unqualified or bogus-qualified non-English speaking migrants and their families is a benefit to this country?

  40. MPH

    Fisky – between you and Arky you’ve convinced me that ‘muh open boarders’ is the iceberg to the libertarian Titanic. There really is no way back as long as they continue implying that all incomers are equal and add value, and that the ‘costs’ and ‘benefits’ of immigration are shared equally and universally amongst those already here.

  41. Now the government itself claims that its policies are designed to attract good migrants – now I know that the change in policy is repelling good migrants – it’s not unreasonable to ask for an explanation.

    But you’re not asking for an explanation. You’re celebrating the fact that the government is unable to legislate as it was requested to do by the Australian citizens who voted for it.

  42. rickw

    Good – unfortunately this ill-thought proposal by the xenophobe has already cost Australia talent.

    I don’t think that experience fucking goats is generally considered a “talent”.

    If you think Australia is being massively enriched by third world immigration with little control or requirements, then you clearly aren’t visiting the right places in Melbourne and Sydney.

    I would suggest that any real talent from Europe, for example, will be looking for a country that checks the “tough immigration” box, as after all, the lack of this is one of the fundamental reasons that many of them are seeking a new home.

  43. A Lurker

    Cats – it must be remembered that the Doomlord is not a Conservative. Not by any stretch of the imagination is he one. His posts have made that abundantly clear.

    Conservatives are leery of change, and approve change only after much checking, carefully considering consequences to actions, looking back to see if the past holds a better vision for the future, and then moving forward with small and careful steps.

    At this point it must be said that certain Libertarians mouth platitudes about protecting our freedoms, but when push comes to shove, don’t do anything tangible about actually protecting them. Certain Libertarians don’t understand that culture is the most important thing of all (even more important than the economy), and when you change a nation’s culture – forcing change from within or without – then the society is radically transformed, and usually not for the better. History throws up endless examples of cultures decaying before they are destroyed. Certain Libertarians don’t understand that. All that matters is that they are seen to hold to virtues of tolerance, equality and compassion (much like the Greens), whilst at the same time urging us all to join them in their lemming-like dash over the cliff of social destruction.

    Dutton was right, especially if you remember that Diversity + Proximity = Conflict. The Balkanisation of Australia must (in the eyes of the Left) continue apace. Divide and Conquer.

  44. Tel

    Good – unfortunately this ill-thought proposal by the xenophobe has already cost Australia talent.

    The people I know who came in on 457 visas have been happy to get PR status and not particularly interested in citizenship. At least one was working in Australia nearly 10 years but then got a better opportunity back home and left without ever making the slightest attempt at Australian citizenship. As far as I could tell, didn’t really care about Australian politics either.

    Very much depends on the person I guess, but I doubt that many people looking for money and jobs would avoid Australia because of these laws.

    That said, I also know a few excellent Australian workers who went overseas to work, and not all of them have ever come back, so possibly if we are deeply worried about “talent” we could think of ways to offer something better to people who were born here. Just a suggestion.

  45. Tel

    Diversity + Proximity = Conflict

    The citizenship situation is totally irrelevant to “Proximity” because the proposal only has any effect on people who have PR status and thus can already enter and leave Australia at will.

    Actually, if you are mainly interested in jobs, and your country of origin does not accept dual citizenship then often PR status is more convenient because it offers the ability to go back and forth provided you at least work in Australia for one year every so often (don’t ask me the specific details).

  46. Tel

    Anyone who comes here on a student visa for tertiary study (assuming they aren’t on an intensive make-up course) already meets the English language requirements.

    And you would think that anyone in a skilled job would either already meet the requirements or be sufficiently intelligent and motivated to fairly quickly get up to speed should they want to. There’s even apps for that, and books, and classes, and well everything you could possibly need.

  47. Tel

    jonesy – the people I’m talking about are Americans. Now I’m the first to allege that Americans don’t really speak English but I’m talking about English-speaking white anglo-saxon protestants.

    Yeah, fairly unusual case in as much as Washington keeps taxing American citizens who work overseas so there’s incentive to actively get rid of your US citizenship as quickly as possible. In that particular case they pay three extra years of US federal income tax, and Dutton is clearly the one to be blamed for what the IRS does.

    Here’s a tip for your wealthy Yankee friends… just buy a Vanuatu citizenship and pay very little tax. I’m not an expert but probably won’t even interfere with PR status in Australia, we are on good terms with Vanuatu. There’s a few other similar choices available.

  48. Sinclair Davidson

    My US friends are not tax exiles.

  49. karl

    Sinclair The problem you have Snoopy is that I entirely approve of SSM – so good on Malcolm for delivering””

    Au contraire-the problem YOU have is you entirely approve of Turnbull and he is going to deliver, Savva/PVO bleatings aside, an Shorten led government.

  50. Sinclair Davidson

    Karl – maybe, maybe not. Change of government is something that happens when you live in a democracy.

  51. Northshore Redneck

    Sinc,

    Agree that any form of retrospective changes by the government is evil and should be condemned.

    But how on earth does testing for the ability to integrate = racism?

  52. Crossie

    No. The election will be fought on electricity.

    I’m pretty sure the numpties in the electorate will be able to concentrate on two issues in the same election.

  53. Crossie

    Did I read it right, the residency requirement for Australian citizenship is One Year?

    I found this the most shocking. When was it reduced from five years and why? And without announcement. If it was going to be such an advantage for the country as a whole wouldn’t it be announced with a fanfare?

    When were we going to get a say?

  54. Snoopy

    So what you’ve got Sinc are some US citizen pals who:

    (a) are talented;
    (b) would be unable to pass the proposed English test even after being permanent residents for 4 years;
    (c) have spouses that cannot find any work because only citizens can join the APS and ADF;
    (d) were so offended by the prospect of an additional 3 years of PR before they qualified for citizenship that they went back to the US (to our everlasting detriment).

    Really?

  55. Rabz

    For the benefit of a particular personage here, foreigners’ problems are not my problems and I deeply resent parasitic collectivist political imbeciles continually attempting to make them so.

    Enough, FFS.

  56. bollux

    We should all want what the Sinclair Davidsons of the world want, and we would all be happy. I guess when he get’s tired of arguing against what Australians really want, he will skulk off to the last free democracy the world, the USA.

  57. Sinclair Davidson

    Snoopy – b and c are not correct.

  58. Sinclair Davidson

    Bollux – just bollocks.

  59. Dianeh

    I have no issue with changing citizenship requirements especially increasing the time for residence before a person can apply for citizenship.

    But retrospective legislation. No way.

  60. No. The election will be fought on electricity.

    Yes I believe that is a top issue but one would expect that also the subject of total immigration numbers including the unsustainable refugee intake that adds to the cost of welfare in this country should have a serious policy rethink. The taxpayers of this country cannot keep putting their hands in their pockets for immigrants who will not/ cannot work it is not sustainable.
    We have descended into third world standards on healthcare,roads,education and a whole raft of other areas. All funded by borrowing more into the future.
    It is time to place limits on numbers and stop importing people who have nothing to offer Australia by way of being employed and paying taxes instead of a lifetime of handouts. Personally I believe citizenship should not be granted under 10 years of residency and only then if strict standards are met.

  61. Snoopy

    …. c are not correct.

    So the following ‘observation’ is apropos of nothing.

    Immigration decisions don’t just impact the main applicant – very often they have partners who are materially disadvantaged by not being able to work etc.

  62. A Lurker

    Personally I believe citizenship should not be granted under 10 years of residency and only then if strict standards are met.

    Agreed – what is offered cheaply, is then valued lightly.

  63. bollux

    May be bollocks to you Sinclair, but all these failures, power, SSM, safe schools, rampant borrowing, immigration, expensive housing, over the top welfare, multiculturism at any cost, political correctness, the HRC and it’s satellites, welcome to my own country ceremonies, sex changes in the ADF for goodness sake, are some the cancers attacking our society at once, symptomatic of a sick country, no longer willing to defend itself. Some of us don’t want to concede any more. Not that there is a lot left of this once great country. Good on Steve Kates, he sees the real world.

  64. Not happy with retrospective legislation.
    Not happy with being called a xenophobe just because I want tighter immigration/citizenship laws.
    Can I be a xenophobe if I’m a wog myself? Arrived in ’69, became a citizen in ’74.

  65. Botswana O'Hooligan

    I thought that it was one year for permanent residency and two for citizenship when my wife came here seventeen years ago but it took two years to get her permanent residency and a bit over five years to get citizenship.

    Mind you, she didn’t have any of the qualifications needed apparently in that she was white, Christian, spoke English as a second language, had a couple of Uni degrees, and a job to start immediately. Immigration took an extremely dim view of that and wrote abusive and demeaning letters to us both that would have had Triggs salivating had we been of a different colour and religion. The administrative appeals tribunal did the trick but immigration weren’t bowed in the slightest hence the long interval for residency and citizenship.

  66. By the way, I hope the hopeless Liberals will not go to the next election on this issue. Labor will win anyway and they will claim a mandate on immigration issues.

  67. mareeS

    Sinclair, the citizenship proposals may be over the top in your opinion. They affect my family too, but they must put Australia first.

    Our son has an Indonesian wife. There is no dual citizenship for Indonesians, so she cannot take Australian citizenship without renouncing hers. Likewise, our son cannot take Indonesian Citizenship without renouncing Australia.

    Therefore, they live between two countries, he works in the Pilbara, they own a home businesses that she operates in Indo, lord knows what will happen if they have children.

    Further, our niece is daughter to my Australian sister and her Kiwi husband, she was born in Australia, never had NZ citizenship but is engaged to a pommie lad, and he is having problems getting residency here so they have taken out dual citizenship in NZ, live and work there, and visit here.

    Citizenship is very complicated in this world.

  68. Boambee John

    Doomlord

    I suspect that your attitude to this issue is coloured by the reality that the immigrants with whom you interact are not the same demographic as those with whom the general community interacts.

  69. May be bollocks to you Sinclair, but all these failures, power, SSM, safe schools, rampant borrowing, immigration, expensive housing, over the top welfare, multiculturism at any cost, political correctness, the HRC and it’s satellites, welcome to my own country ceremonies, sex changes in the ADF for goodness sake, are some the cancers attacking our society at once, symptomatic of a sick country, no longer willing to defend itself. Some of us don’t want to concede any more. Not that there is a lot left of this once great country. Good on Steve Kates, he sees the real world.

    Now if a CONSERVATIVE party were to stand on a platform to redress all those problems they would have my vote, and further if they kept their promises I would vote for them again. Abbott had the mandate but not the backing by the socialists that infest the liberal/labor lite party.

  70. stackja

    Arthur Calwell

    Basing his programme firmly on the concept of assimilation, Calwell coined the term ‘New Australian’ for immigrants, particularly ‘displaced persons’ from the Baltic states and Eastern Europe.

  71. Norman Church

    With due respect to the good Professor, these proposals do not sound like retrospective legislation to me. They appear to be no different from any other of the myriad circumstances in which a government of the day adjusts the bases upon which an entitlement is offered.

    To characterise anybody who has misgivings as to a qualification period for citizenship being limited to a single year as a xenophobe is the type of Alinskyite ad hom crap that one expects from the GetUp crowd. Frankly, Professor, it is grossly crass and totally unworthy of you.

  72. struth

    Sinclair does not take in to account the corruption in the immigration department.

    A white South African such as himself, would nowadays have much more problem getting into Australia than a Mussie from Pakistan.

    This proposal was to help control what an actual, racist, politicised, immigration department is getting up to.
    The only people I know that have ever had problems getting residency are Canadians and other whites from the Anglosphere.

    But I wouldn’t be stupid enough to draw conclusions from just my own circle of friends.

    Besides, it being plainly obvious that the majority of Australians have wanted an end to goat f…ers invading on mass through our immigration system and sat down in our welfare system with time enough to breed and make bombs on the tax payers dime, you only have to look at Australia today, to know it’s plainly obvious what the politicised immigration policy is.
    Anything but white.
    Anything but Christian.
    Anything except the skilled.
    Anything except conservative.
    How naïve would you have to be to not see this?
    How naïve when it is the stated goal to give us multiculturalism (mussies) everywhere.
    How naïve not to understand the corrupt money (Saudi, etc) behind this.

    Quoting your own circle of friends and experience in an insulated little world of the individual, surely must be embarrassing, and a stupid way to come to a political opinion on such a matter.

  73. old bloke

    Good – unfortunately this ill-thought proposal by the xenophobe has already cost Australia talent.

    The bill was ultimately defeated by that British subject, Nick Xenophon.

    Perhaps your post should have been titled “Xenephon sinks Xenophobe”.

    I don’t think that this will be a major issue at the next election, this was just an attempt by the LNP to display their “True Blue” colours to get some street cred with One Nation voters, and to take some wind out of Cory Bernardi’s sails.

  74. struth

    This blog exists so that Sinclair is seen as the alternative argument amongst the elites.
    The “go to man” for an economic conservative view point.
    The social, not so much.
    He’d have to be careful there.
    As the years pass, and the indoctrination of Sinclair continues at a pace, he probably continues the line for free speech but must show some of his peers that he isn’t as over the top “redneck” as those he fully supports the right to have an opinion.
    I totally understand that you can achieve more inside the devil’s lair than outside, sometimes.
    But as they go from petty crime to outright insane criminality, you must chose your side.
    You can’t just keep giving in to minor transgression to keep in with the mafia.

    At the risk of getting barred from your blog, I believe you are a conflicted man, because your academic world has moved way too far to the left, and without conceding on most social matters you would be made irrelevant.
    It was always going to happen.
    Here’s to you regaining the strength of your convictions.
    I say that because,
    You weren’t so left wing when I started on this blog years ago.

    God bless you Sinclair.
    I am not being condescending.
    I really mean it.
    We are all grateful for this blog.
    Good luck to you.

  75. Tator

    Doomlord,
    What would you consider a suitable qualifying period of permanent residency before citizenship.
    For comparison, the USA requires you have 5 years of permanent residency via a green card before you can apply for US citizenship.
    The UK has 5 years of residency before you can apply
    Canada has 5 years of permanent residency with up to 1 year discount for time lived in Canada prior to permanent residency.
    NZ has 5 years as well.
    Ireland is 5 years out of the last 8,
    India has 12 years residency.
    China, basically impossible to become a Chinese citizen without direct descendants being Chinese.
    So basically the nations where most of our immigrants come from have much more onerous PR requirements than Australia. Even with the new regs, the PR requirement is still less than all of them by 20% or more

  76. notafan

    Sounds like some progressives were offended and went back to the US where Trump’s new laws are so much less offensive.

    Whereas I look around me in the burbs and see evidence, again and again of the current immigration rules being flaunted, especially in the bogus business visa classes.

  77. test pattern

    I always suspected Les Patterson was a dual Soviet citizen. He attended Tupperware parties ‘Tupperitzki’ organised by the Soviet Ambassador’s wife and wore a Stroganoff Circle diners club tie pin. You don’t see many of those.

  78. Tator

    Struth,
    just had a look at some immigration stats, did you realise that immigrants from islamic nations such as Pakistan, Afghanistanand Saudi Arabia are predominantly male with the minimum percentage being 125 males to every 100 females.
    Pakistan was 150 to 100
    Afghanistan 134.9
    Bangaladesh 123.7
    Saudi Arabia 125.8
    The only none islamic nations with discrepancies anywhere near that are Israel, India, Ireland and Nepal

  79. Sinclair Davidson

    tator – pick a number and stick to it. But don’t chop and change the number on a regular basis and deprive people (especially on spouse visas) from earning a living.

  80. Sinclair Davidson

    I suspect that your attitude to this issue is coloured by the reality that the immigrants with whom you interact are not the same demographic as those with whom the general community interacts.

    I live in the western suburbs of Melbourne.

  81. test pattern

    ‘In an environment where living standards are falling and job security is precarious and utility costs rising’

    Australian elections are won and lost in the wallet. If the forthcoming election coincides with a recession or something close to it [enough people hurting], Govt will lose regardless of who’s leader and opposition leader. Absence recession Turnbull will win despite what polls say. Govts are always blamed and never given credit. Fighting an election on a social issue is a premature admission of defeat.

  82. Kneel

    Yeah, OK – drop the English language requirement, I can live with that providing that all forms, interviews etc are in the official language only and that all “official” translators are never allowed for citizenship interviews.
    You can get help to fill the form out, but if you can’t hold a conversation with the interviewer, you will have a very hard time interacting with the majority of Australian businesses, governments and permanent residents. If you can only interact with these entities via an intermediary, it will be very difficult for you to contribute to society as a whole. And if you don’t contribute, you are a net burden on existing citizens – on what basis does this make you a “desirable” person to become a citizen?

    But all this is crap anyway – it’s much more important to reduce our intake of migrants (permanent residents and citizens) back to sane levels. 200k p.a. is way too many. Get it back to 70k p.a.

  83. Stimpson J. Cat

    I know fine correct thinking people

    Correct thinking people hey?

    You make me laugh sometimes.

    Bravo.

  84. stackja

    Section 44 and restricts who can be a MP. Why allow just anyone to become a citizen?

  85. max

    In short, where the welfare state is deeply entrenched, a nation will no longer be willing to serve as a sanctuary. It costs too much.
    If the welfare state ever becomes universal, locked-in populations will also become universal. There will be no escape from tyranny because of the border guards who keep would-be refugees from crossing the border into greater freedom.
    A nation’s voters may seek to vote themselves wealth from their fellows, but in doing so they create an engine of plunder that evil men will seek to control.

    When civil covenants become covenants of plunder, then the threat to the right of voluntary contract escalates. When a war against property begins, those who command the plundering troops seek new recruits. Immigrants who are struggling hard just to get by economically make very good potential recruits.

    So, in a democracy, the immigrant becomes a political issue. (This includes those other unwashed would-be immigrants who sometimes face determined border guards: unborn babies.) Who sets the standards? Who says which moral heritage is valid and which must be resisted? Who predicts which immigrants will threaten the system, and which will not? Immigration quotas that discriminate against the people of any nation are public testimonies:

    “Your kind are not what we want.”

    This is why immigration quotas are matters of foreign relations as well as domestic policy. Discrimination that would not be tolerated by a domestic court system is inherent in the very existence of a national immigration quota system.

    The issue of “them” vs. “us” is an inescapable one in civil affairs. The politics of plunder makes this issue a matter of compulsion. When “they” can vote their way into “our” wallets, “we” begin to reconsider the possibility of finding ways to re- strict the number of “them.” The welfare state inevitably extends to the international scene the domestic political battle over the distribution of the plunder.

    The main problem, however, is not the statist welfare system as such, but the doctrine of the civil covenant.

    https://mises.org/library/sanctuary-society-and-its-enemies-0

  86. Tator

    Doomlord,
    You will find that it is different governments with different ideologies and migration policies being the reason for the changes. Current requirements were imposed by the ALP in 2010, prior to that it was the Coalitions 2007 Migration act that set the requirements. Dovetails with the open borders policy of the left compared to the Coalitions policies. Different parties want different migration outcomes. It isn’t one party changing its mind. Not much that can be done about that as these two parties are about as polar opposite when it comes to migration as it comes.

  87. Snoopy

    But don’t chop and change the number on a regular basis and deprive people (especially on spouse visas) from earning a living.

    It’s hell out there for spouses. Apparently.

    What you can do on the Partner visa (subclass 820)

    The temporary Partner visa (subclass 820) lets you:
    – stay in Australia until a decision is made on your permanent Partner visa (subclass 801)
    – work in Australia
    – study in Australia (no government support)
    – travel outside Australia as many times as you want
    – access up to 510 hours of free English language tuition provided by the Adult Migrant English Program
    – enrol in Medicare, Australia’s national health scheme.

  88. notafan

    Thank you Max

    I’ve been reading UK telegraph threads where ‘immigrants’ and progressives moan in congress about the evils of racist white people.

    Talent aside what makes one country better than another and why doesn’t the talent stay where it is and make country x a better place to live, then they wouldn’t have to put up with evil whiteys and their xenophobic ways.

    I don’t care who comes that much, though I think islam is inherently a dangerous ideology but fluent English ought to be a no brainer, and all in all less of it unless we can have a couple of duplicates of Melbourne and Sydney and that isn’t going to happen. The energy freaks talk about demand management at the same time adding a hundred thousand or so people to Melb/Sydney every year.

    If Australians want to live cheek by jowl in multi story apartments as the norm then please let us make that an election issue.

    If Dutton wants to change the rules after the fact then I suspect there has been widespread visa fraud (remember the sudden axing of the 457 visa scheme) and this is how some plan to try to clean up that mess.

  89. Fisky

    Struth, faculty lounge politics may be a part of it, but this has been a problem with the libertarian movement as a whole, not just one individual.

  90. karl

    Nice deflection Sinclair-we cant debate if Abbott would or would not have done a better job than Turnbull at the last election as obviously there would be no agreement. One thing we can agree on is that hundreds of thousands (possibly over a million) of non university educated private sector taxpayers knew that Turnbull would be a walking disaster as PM while apparently every smart university educated journalist and uni lecturer thought he would be potentially the greatest PM EVER!!!

    James Allen was right-the only way back for this country is to vote in Turnbull on roids (that be Shorten)so we may get back to a two party state where at least one of them is somewhere right of centre.

  91. Stimpson J. Cat

    My US friends are not tax exiles.

    Australia has legal obligations towards refugees under the UN convention.
    If they are genuine refugees escaping the despotic regime of God Emperor Trump, then we have a duty to accept them, even if they are white.

  92. Tel

    If the welfare state ever becomes universal, locked-in populations will also become universal. There will be no escape from tyranny because of the border guards who keep would-be refugees from crossing the border into greater freedom.

    You can see how bad the lock-in has become already when you consider that in 2013 the percentage of Australian population growth due to migration was a tiny 60%.

    Just 60%, can you believe that? I mean, why can’t this be 100%, or preferably even more?

    Back in the 1950’s when the Welfare State was getting underway around 10% of the population of Australia was foreign born; but now that we have a generous and growing system of government handouts, that figure is a microscopic 28% !

    “He is going to put y’all back in chains.”

    … and locked in as well.

  93. Tel

    Snoopy #2527384, you Sir can take your facts right out of this discussion; there’s no place for that sort of thing around here.

  94. notafan

    Tel are you suggesting what I think you are suggesting?

  95. Senile Old Guy

    …while apparently every smart university educated journalist and uni lecturer thought he would be potentially the greatest PM EVER!!!

    Well, no. Having some facility with data collection and analysis, it was easy to project from Lord Waffle’s performance as Opposition Leader that he would be a useless PM. The surprise, to me, was Abbott, who folded when he won.

    But I very much anti- the libertarians immigration policies: nightmare stuff.

  96. Viva

    If, however, they abandon their racist tendencies and focus on issues, such as over-priced energy, that impact the hip pocket I reckon they stand a good chance to win.

    Disappointing to see this sort of language at the top level of CatWorld.

    It’s sad to see the race obsession which distorts every issue on the Left has percolated through even here.

  97. stackja

    Viva
    #2527490, posted on October 19, 2017 at 2:37 pm

    Australians are racists. Every first Tuesday in November.

  98. A one-year residency requirement for citizenship is tawdry and cheap. At the very least 10-years residency should be the case.

  99. Andrew

    Actually, noone will care about this issue at the election. Noone will care about anything except what GetUp tell them to care about. People are so stupid that, having watched power prices quadruple since we stopped using coal, they demand that we use less coal! Unreliables have been polling 70% approval rating these days, and even subsidies for Unreliables!

  100. Andrew

    [Comment deleted. Sinc]

  101. notafan

    A one-year residency requirement for citizenship is tawdry and cheap. At the very least 10-years residency should be the case.

    Especially when attached to that citizenshhip comes the right to import your aged parents for the the princely sum of $50,000 who get immediate access to free medical care and then after ten years residency the age pension and all other ancillary benefits.

    That is shooting ourselves in the foot right there.

  102. Mitchell Porter

    Earlier this month at John Quiggin’s blog, I asked a few questions about the philosophy behind Australian immigration policy – what it is and what it should be. I could have asked here first, but I know that people here aren’t afraid to talk about restricting immigration, having citizenship tests, and so on. I was more interested to see if I could get coherent answers from people on the left, but was disappointed by the lack of response.

  103. Andrew

    I’ve been reading UK telegraph threads where ‘immigrants’ and progressives moan in congress about the evils of racist white people.

    The obvious solution would be for both to move to a country that has few or no evil racist white people. I hear Somalia is almost entirely white-free. DRC, Rwanda. Wait a couple of years and Zimbabwe might achieve white-free utopia. Bugger-all ERWP in Saudi Arabia, and the few they have are kept behind bars in locked compounds for the safety of the Arab majority.

  104. Fisky

    I asked a few questions about the philosophy behind Australian immigration policy – what it is and what it should be.

    Their philosophy is to import as many Labor voters as they can get away with.

  105. Senile Old Guy

    Actually, noone will care about this issue at the election. Noone will care about anything except what GetUp tell them to care about.

    Sigh, yet again this meme that voters will just do what they are told. That worked out well for Mark Textor, didn’t it? Well, no, a significant percentage of the “stupid” voters said “no, we won’t vote for Lord Waffle because he is in the big chair, we’ll park our vote somewhere else”. And the LNP hung on to power by one seat.

    Time and time again we were told that Abbott was unelectable…and then he won in the biggest landslide in recent political history.

    People are so stupid that, having watched power prices quadruple since we stopped using coal, they demand that we use less coal!

    This is coming from an opinion poll run by a lefty institute which asked a very leading hypothetical question.

  106. Mother Lode

    No. The election will be fought on electricity.

    Or, rather, the election will be fought in the dark.

  107. I’ve been reading UK telegraph threads where ‘immigrants’ and progressives moan in congress about the evils of racist white people.

    Now I would like everyone to reflect a moment about the “evils of racist white people”
    Have you ever heard “evil racist comments from non white people? I see them in print nearly every day not to mention on TV and there are certain areas of this country where the abuse is both foul and threatening from a large body of people all based on race. Some people need to stop being paranoid and get on with their lucky to be an Australian lives. The exit door is unlocked.

  108. Tel

    The exit door is unlocked.

    No ask Max, everyone is locked in. Border Guards… everywhere, like some kind of Fortress Australia.

    I’m serious!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Tel are you suggesting what I think you are suggesting?

    Why are you thinking that Max is totally over the top? Who could have put that idea into your head?

  109. Linden

    Which party has the best hurricane lamp lol

  110. Linden

    apparently the most sort after consumer product in SA is a portable power generator!

  111. Robber Baron

    Last l looked, Dutton is a senior minister in a Turnbull government, so Sinc’s criticism is also of the PM and his cabinet.

    It is time for new leadership in Australia.

  112. Robber Baron

    My daughter is mixed blood; European (me) and Asian (wife). Because l am very fair skinned with blonde hair and blue eyes, our daughter has very fair skin and brown hair. I guess she has white privilege and is also a racist because she is not “brown” enough. Western civilization is being destroyed by evil morons.

  113. max

    Mr. Tel it is only 15 pages long –read it please:
    https://mises.org/library/sanctuary-society-and-its-enemies-0

    CONCLUSION

    The main problem, however, is not the statist welfare system
    as such, but the doctrine of the civil covenant.

    The state possesses the power of coercion. It is not established by a voluntary contract
    enforceable by law; it is itself the enforcer. There is a difference
    between adherence to the terms of a voluntary contract
    and obedience to civil law. There is a difference between voting
    with your money and voting with your ballot.

    A consumer’s legal authority to withhold his financial support from a seller of
    goods and services affects him, the seller, and the agent who
    may be holding the cash, e.g., a banker and his clients. A citizen’s
    decision to support or not support a candidate or a proposed
    constitutional revision affects others, but in an all-or-nothing
    way. The shunned seller in an economic transaction can legally
    seek another buyer. A defeated special-interest group after an
    election may no longer possess this legal option. The all-or-nothing,
    winner-take-all aspect of civil law places it in a different
    category from a voluntary contract.

    When the immigrant can soon gain access to citizenship, but
    without any confession of faith other than his promise to obey
    the law and the Constitution, he thereby gains the authority to
    participate in the changing of both the law and the Constitution.

    He can seek to make the law and the Constitution conform to his
    confession of faith. This is the heart of the matter; this is the
    heart of the problem.
    In Mosaic Israel, the immigrant could not become a citizen
    until he became a member of the congregation by confession and
    circumcision—major barriers to entry! The nation of Israel tested
    the commitment of the immigrant family’s confession of faith before
    it granted to the grandson the right to declare the law as a
    civil judge. In short, he had to grow up in a family that was under
    the national covenant before he could declare the law and
    legally enforce it in the name of God.

    In the United States today, the waiting period for citizenship
    is as short as five years. The waiting period is similar in
    other democratic nations.

    This, not the threat of economic competition,
    is the problem of immigration for the free society. Because
    the citizen authoritatively declares the law and seeks to
    impose it on others, he can become a threat to the free society.

    The problem is the moral content of his confession of faith and
    his possession of civil sanctions, not his productivity and his possession
    of economic sanctions.

    Mises was short-sighted here:
    a nineteenth-century, anti-clerical, would-be value-free analyst,
    i.e., a liberal. It is not the welfare state as such that creates the
    problem of immigration; rather, it is the confession of faith of
    the would-be immigrants.

    If their confession inherently threatens
    the moral and judicial foundations of the free society, then
    immigration is a problem, with or without the presence today of
    a welfare state.

    Freedom is based on more than private contracts.
    It is based on a moral vision, which includes a vision of the moral
    boundaries of the state.
    For a society to continue to serve as a sanctuary, it must preserve
    its commitment to both economic freedom and the rule of
    law.
    If it transfers the judicial authority of citizenship to recent
    immigrants who came seeking economic benefits—the fruits of
    liberty—apart from their steadfast commitment to the moral
    and judicial bases of economic freedom, then it risks losing its
    economic freedom.
    This is far worse than inviting a would-bethief into your home, for the thief has a limited ability to carry
    off your wealth. It is more like granting the thief the power of
    attorney over your estate and your children’s trusts, and then
    inviting in the neighbors and encouraging them to do the same.

    Free trade in goods—the output of labor—is not the same as
    free trade in labor itself. Things may cross borders, but men are
    not mere things. They make confessions, and often seek to extend
    the influence of these confessions by means of state coercion.

    Citizenship is more than consumership. In an age of democracy, when
    all who dwell inside the borders of a nation are assumed to have
    a moral right to seek to implement their confessions through coercive
    state action, granting a person citizenship is like leaving
    your cash-filled wallet in the street. You had better find out in
    advance to what degree the would-be citizen is committed to the
    philosophy of “finders, keepers; losers, weepers.” If you don’t,
    you should prepare yourself for a lot of weeping.

  114. True Aussie

    Good – unfortunately this ill-thought proposal by the xenophobe has already cost Australia talent.

    Thanks for reminding me why immigrants should not be allowed to vote.

  115. True Aussie

    I know fine correct thinking people, disadvantaged by this law, who have already made plans to leave

    Tell them to make sure the door doesn’t hit them in the arse on the way out.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *