Immigration in the election campaign

Contributed article

AustraliaIsFullIt is amazing that there has been next no mention of immigration in the election campaign, even after the Brexit vote. However, the issue of immigration numbers has been covered in the article “The elephant in the election room that nobody wants to mention – Immigration” published in the IndependentAustralian.com.au.

Recent polls show a majority against current immigration levels. The major parties have a bipartisan policy of admitting 220,000 people next financial year. There are a lot of minor parties going to contest the Senate and one needs to pick out those with strong policies on low immigration. One Nation was once the only choice for low immigration, but for those that for whatever reason do not want to support other One Nation policies, Sustainable Australia is now an alternative with the same policy of lower immigration. Sustainable Australia was formerly Stable Population Party and was pretty weak on promoting low immigration. It has dramatically changed tack and has adopted a lower immigration logo, which is displayed on Senate voting papers. They are only standing in Qld, NSW, ACT and Victoria.

There is no preference allocation by the parties this time, so you must do your own. Put either Sustainable Australia or One Nation first, then the other second. The Australian Democrats argue strongly for lower intake overall but with an increase in refugees. The Greens refuse to face up to talking numbers. The Australian Liberty Alliance are only against immigration from the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, so if you vote ALA, be sure to have Sustainable Australia and One Nation in your preferences. If your vote may end up with a major, remember Bill Shorten has proclaimed he is in favour of a ‘Big Australia’, but has refused to debate it at the National Press Club.

References:
The elephant in the election room that nobody wants to mention – Immigration”, The IndependentAustralian, 1 June 2016
Survey: 59% think immigration levels in the last ten years “too high””, SBS, 18 May 2016

Comments

  1. Len Davis says:

    Voting in the Senate now requires every person to have an understanding of all competing parties, otherwise it is simply a case of guessing which party to vote and would explain why motorist and sex parties can and sometimes do get a seat in the Senate.
    On top of this, this preference system of voting is ludicrous, it unnecessarily hugely complicates what should be a simple exercise.
    If we had a system, like most democracies around the world, that simply works on First past the post – we would get what we vote for and not have all the enormous problems of preferences where the winner does not necessarily win. I would like to know who thought up this crazy system and why it was put in place.

Leave a Reply