 |
Asian Immigration
Adrienne Millbank
Social Policy Group
Contents
Major Issues
Introduction
Source Countries And Migration Streams
- Source Countries
- Migration Streams
Settlement Issues
- Unemployment And Welfare Dependency
- Settlement Patterns
- Residential Concentrations
Demographic Impact
Population And Ethnicity Projections
Public Opinion
Conclusion
Endnotes
List of Tables
Table 1. Asia-born resident population: Top 10 source
countries, 1995
Table 2. Settler arrivals: Top 10 source countries
of birth, 1965-66 to 1995-96
Table 3. Net permanent gain:
Table 4. Unemployed persons: Region and selected country
of birth,
Table 5. Distribution of population: Major urban, Other
urban and Rural areas,
Table 6. Attitudes to the ethnic composition of the
intake, June 1996 (per cent)
Table 7. Attitudes to different migration program components,
June 1996 and Nov. 1981 (per cent)
List of Figures
Figure 1. Overseas-born population: Region of birth,
June 1995
Figure 2. Australia's population: Projected ethnic
composition in 2025, compared to 1987
Figure 3. Attitudes to the immigration intake, 1961
to 1996
The maiden speech by the Member for Oxley on 10 September 1996 provided
the catalyst for renewed debate on Asian immigration and its significance
for Australia. This debate has expanded to countries in the region, and
has involved reassertion of the principle of non-discrimination in Australia's
migration program through a bipartisan Parliamentary motion, which was
unanimously passed. It is likely that over the coming months attention
will shift from 'Asian immigration' to the immigration program itself,
and its relevance to Australia's needs in the 1990s.
People from Asian countries (which are defined on page 2) comprise the
bulk of the most recent or 'third wave' of migration to Australia, following
migration from the UK and Northern Europe in the 1950s and from Southern
European countries in the 1960s. The most recent wave commenced in the
late 1970s with large-scale refugee intakes from Vietnam following the
end of the Vietnam War. Migration from a number of Asian countries has
increased rapidly over the last 20 years, and, since 1990, Asians have
comprised about 40 per cent of settler arrivals and more than half of
our annual net permanent settler gain.
As at June 1995, only 4.8 per cent of the estimated resident population
of Australia was born in an Asian country, and, with their Australia-born
children, first and second generation Asians comprised only about 6 per
cent of the population. Population projections, based on recent source
country balances, suggest that if the permanent immigration program is
maintained at recent levels, by 2031 people born in Europe (including
the UK and Ireland) will decline to 6-7 per cent of the population, and
those born in Asia will increase to 7-9 per cent. The Asia-born will comprise
a much larger proportion of the population of Australia's largest cities,
and especially of Sydney, Melbourne and Perth, than of regional centres.
Projections based on ethnicity suggest that by the year 2025 people of
Anglo-Celtic background will make up 62 per cent, people of European background
15 per cent, and people of Asian background 16 per cent of the total population.
Asia-origin migrants fall into two categories, with quite different settlement
experiences, depending on the migration stream under which they have entered.
Migrants in the economic stream (independent, business and employer-nominated)
are in general highly educated, English speaking, young (under 45 years
of age), middle class, in higher status jobs and on higher than average
incomes. They have come especially from Hong Kong, Malaysia, Singapore,
Taiwan and India. Humanitarian and family reunion migrants have in general
been low-skilled and (except from countries such as the Philippines and
Sri Lanka) non-English speaking, and some have experienced high and continuing
rates of unemployment and welfare dependency. They have come particularly
from Vietnam, the Philippines, and in recent years from Mainland China.
Recent research has shown that unemployment rates for recently-arrived
humanitarian and family migrants have been higher and persisted longer
than previously thought. The first results of the Longitudinal Survey
of Immigrants to Australia showed last year that of recently arrived migrants
in the business stream, under 3 per cent were unemployed, compared with
85 per cent for humanitarian entrants, 39 per cent for preferential family
and 36 per cent for concessional family migrants.
Surveys of public opinion polls over the last 40 years show that public
support for immigration has steadily declined as economic conditions have
become less favourable, as the balance of the program has moved towards
low-skilled family reunion and humanitarian migration, and as source countries
have become more diverse. Opposition would appear to have intensified
during the 1990s, with concern over unemployment rates, with the migration
program heavily balanced in favour of family migration, and with large
numbers of some groups of recently-arrived migrants dependent on unemployment
or other benefits. The most recent polls show a majority of two-thirds
or more of respondents opposed to the current rate of migration, including
Asian migration, and especially family reunion migration.
There has been a consensus among researchers and commentators that much
of the resentment towards Asian migration that has been expressed in recent
years has been a more general opposition to the impact of all immigration
in the context of high unemployment. It has also been anticipated by researchers
that, as with previous waves, initial suspicion or hostility in the host
community will disappear as the new groups merge with the broader society.
The immigration and settlement context confronting the most recent wave
of migrants, however, is different from that experienced by earlier waves
of settlers. Unemployment levels are higher than in the 1950s and 1960s,
and structural changes in the economy have eliminated many of the unskilled
jobs that earlier non-English speaking migrants went into soon after arrival.
There is no longer a labour shortage, the need to increase the population
is no longer unquestioned, and the permanent migration program no longer
has an overriding or straightforward rationale.
Hugh Mackay in his qualitative research in the late 1980s and mid 1990s,(1)
found Australians to be highly confused and mistrustful of the objectives
of both the immigration program (and particularly of family reunion migration)
and multiculturalism, and shaken by the impact of Asian migration to the
extent that they perceive their identity to be under threat. While his
focus groups expressed pride in having peacefully absorbed so many different
people, and perceived themselves as Australians to be tolerant, hospitable
and easygoing, he found them to be doubtful as to whether the permanent
immigration program was any longer serving the national interest, and
cynical regarding politicians' motives and rhetoric.
Regardless of the size of the permanent immigration program, people from
Asian countries are likely to comprise a significant proportion of both
its skilled and family components. Also regardless of the size of the
permanent migration program, there is likely to be an increasing Asian
presence in our cities. People from Asian countries comprise a growing
proportion of the rapidly increasing temporary movements (including of
business people, professionals, specialist workers, students and visitors)
in our region. If present trends continue, these sorts of movements will
be of more economic significance to Australia than the permanent migration
program.
Over the last two decades, Asian countries (defined under 'Source countries'
below) have become world centres of investment, development and trade,
and rapid economic growth has seen the emergence of expanding, educated,
highly skilled and largely English speaking middle classes in many Asian
countries. Asia is also a region containing more than half of the world's
population and over 70 per cent of the world's poor, with countries such
as China, Indonesia and India experiencing increasing population pressures.
In an age of globalisation and unprecedented international population
movements, Asia has emerged as a major source of the world's migrants
and temporary workers, as well as a major source of illegal and asylum-seeking
movements.
Australia is competing with other official immigrant receiving countries,
Canada, the USA and New Zealand, for the new sorts of highly mobile business
investing and typically Asian migrants whose presence is associated with
economic growth and export development. People from Asian countries have
comprised the bulk of permanent business migrants to Australia. People
from Asian countries have also been disproportionately represented in
the non-economic humanitarian and family reunion migration streams, at
a time when the balance of the program is heavily tilted in favour of
these categories, and when many family and humanitarian migrants are experiencing
high and continuing levels of unemployment and welfare dependency. People
born in Asian countries have also comprised a large proportion of 'illegal'
visa overstayers and the bulk of 'boat people'.
Asians (along with people from the Middle East) comprise more than half
of the most recent, or 'third wave' of migration to Australia, following
migration from the UK and Northern Europe in the 1950s, and migration
from Southern European countries in the 1960s. The most recent wave commenced
in the late 1970s with large-scale migration from Vietnam following the
end of the Vietnam war. Migration from a number of Asian countries has
increased rapidly over the last twenty years, and, since 1990-91, Asians
have comprised more than half of our net permanent settler gain. It has
been anticipated by immigration researchers that, as with the previous
waves of immigrants, initial suspicion or hostility in the host community
associated with the unfamiliarity of the new groups will disappear as
they become part of the broader community and their contribution as recognisable
as, for example, that of the Southern European Greeks or Italians who
preceded them.
The immigration and settlement context confronting the new Asian migrants,
however, is different from that experienced by earlier waves of settlers.
Unemployment levels are higher than they were in the 1950s and 1960s,
and structural changes in the economy have eliminated many of the unskilled
or factory jobs that earlier non-English speaking migrants went into soon
after arrival. There is no longer a labour shortage, the need to increase
the population is no longer unquestioned, and the permanent migration
program no longer has a single, overriding or straightforward rationale.
(Somewhat ironically, the original reason for Australia's post-war permanent
immigration program was population and nation-building behind a wall of
protection, which included the White Australia Policy). And public support
for the permanent immigration program in Australia appears to be at an
all-time low.
Besides being the major source of our most recent permanent settlers,
Asian countries are our most important trading partners and a major source
of our increasingly important highly skilled, professional and business
temporary entrants. They provide the bulk of our full-fee paying overseas
students, and are major sources of our visitors and tourists.(2)
Immigration from Asia is obviously of symbolic as well as practical importance
to Australia, and the maiden speech by the Member for Oxley on 10 September
1996 has provided the catalyst for a renewed debate on its significance
for Australia. This current issues brief examines who comprises Asian
migrants, the migration categories under which they are entering Australia,
the demographic impact of 'Asian' immigration, settlement issues, and
public attitudes. It does not attempt to analyse policy decisions regarding
the immigration intake, welfare entitlements for new arrivals or community
relations.
Source Countries
'Asia' comprises countries as different as Japan, China, India and Singapore,
and a more diverse range of languages and cultures than does Europe. The
definition for migration purposes of 'Asian' arrivals used by the Australian
Bureau of Statistics before 1990 was based on the United Nations geographical
definition of the continent of Asia: thus the Middle East was considered
to be part of Asia. From 1 July 1990 the ABS and the (then) Department
of Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs jointly adopted the
Australian Standard Classification of Countries for Social Statistics
(ASCCSS), a new classification based on the concept of geographical proximity.
This classification moved away from the concept of a single Asian region
in favour of three distinct sub-regions: Northeast Asia (Mainland China,
Hong Kong, Japan, Korea, Taiwan); Southeast Asia (Brunei, Cambodia,
Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Burma (Myanmar), the Philippines, Singapore,
Thailand, Vietnam); and Southern Asia (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India,
Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Nepal). Since 1990, arrivals from the Middle East
(including Lebanon, Turkey, Iran and Iraq) have not been counted as 'Asian'.
In terms of numbers of arrivals since 1975, the countries of Southeast
Asia (especially Vietnam, followed by the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia)
have been the most significant, contributing more than half Australia's
Asia-born population. Northeast Asia (China, Hong Kong and Taiwan) has
been the next most important and the fastest growing in recent years,
followed by Southern Asia (India and Sri Lanka). In 1995-96 Northeast
Asian settlers outnumbered Southeast Asian for the first time, reflecting
recent surges from Mainland China (11.3 per cent of all arrivals) and
Hong Kong (4.4 per cent).
Total % of
Birthplace population overseas-born
Vietnam 146 600 3.6
China 92 700 2.2
Philippines 91 800 2.2
Malaysia 91 500 2.2
Hong Kong 91 300 2.2
India 79 000 1.9
Sri Lanka 46 700 1.1
Indonesia 42 200 1.0
Singapore 36 400 0.9
Japan 25 300 0.6
Source: ABS.
The shift in source countries has been one of the most significant features
of Australia's 50 year old immigration program. The 'Asian' proportion
of the program has increased rapidly since high level intakes of Indochinese
humanitarian migrants following the end of the Vietnam war, while the
proportion of migrants from the UK and Europe has declined. By 1985, Asians
comprised 35 per cent of settler arrivals, and since the early 1990s Asians
have comprised about 40 per cent of settler arrivals.
1965-66 1975-76
Country of birth No. % Country of birth No. %
UK & Ireland (a) 74 749 51.9 UK & Ireland (a) 17 343 32.9
Greece 15 153 10.5 New Zealand 2 921 5.5
Italy 11 420 7.9 Cyprus 2 855 5.4
Yugoslavia 8 081 5.6 Chile 1 905 3.6
Malta 4 298 3.0 Yugoslavia 1 804 3.4
Germany 3 751 2.6 Lebanon 1 519 2.9
USA 2 326 1.6 Greece 1 489 2.8
New Zealand 2 200 1.5 USA 1 432 2.7
Netherlands 2 146 1.5 Italy 1 365 2.6
Lebanon 1 625 1.1 Malaysia 1 201 2.3
Total arrivals 144 055 Total arrivals 52 752
1985-86 1995-96
Country of birth No. % Country of birth No. %
United Kingdom 14 709 15.9 New Zealand 12 265 12.4
New Zealand 13 284 14.3 United Kingdom 11 268 11.4
Vietnam 7 168 7.7 Mainland China 11 247 11.3
Philippines 4 128 4.5 Hong Kong 4 361 4.4
Mainland China 3 138 3.4 India 3 700 3.7
South Africa 3 132 3.4 Vietnam 3 567 3.6
Hong Kong 3 118 3.4 Former Yugoslavia 3 405 3.4
Lebanon 2 757 3.0 Philippines 3 232 3.3
Malaysia 2 284 2.5 South Africa 3 190 3.2
India 2 135 2.3 Iraq 2 617 2.6
Total arrivals 92 590 Total arrivals 99 139
Source: DIMA Immigration Update June quarter 1996.
More importantly in terms of effect on the population, since 1990 Asians
have comprised over half of our net permanent settlers.(3) The high proportion
of Asians in the net gain in the early 1990s (over 66 per cent in 1991-92)
reflects the large number of Mainland Chinese students and their families
who have been taking up permanent residence in Australia since the Tiananmen
Square incident in 1989, following decisions made in November 1993 to
allow Chinese students in Australia to remain.
Year %
1990-91 65.3
1991-92 66.5
1992-93 62.7
1993-94 59.4
1994-95 48.7
1995-96 51.6
Source: Immigration Update DIMA June Quarter 1996 & June 1996.
In 1995-96 the permanent migration (including humanitarian) program comprised
about 80 000 settler arrivals. There were in addition over 16 000 arrivals
from New Zealand, and over 2000 visitors who were granted permanent residence
while in Australia. There were about 29 000 departures, mainly from those
born in Australia, New Zealand and the UK.(4) Of the net permanent gain
of about 70 500, 52 per cent were from Asia and 29 per cent from Europe
(including the UK) and the former USSR. Mainland China was the top source
of net settlers (at 15 per cent), followed by the UK (11 per cent), New
Zealand (9 per cent), Hong Kong, Vietnam, and Bosnia-Herzegovina (each
5 per cent), the Philippines and South Africa (each 4 per cent), and Iraq
(4 per cent).
Migration Streams
Coinciding with the shift in source countries towards Asian countries
has been a shift in the rationale for and balance of the migration program.
The program now comprises three distinct components, with quite different
rationales and objectives. The skilled (or 'economic' or 'independent')
component is designed to contribute to Australia's economic growth, while
the family and humanitarian components have social and moral objectives.
The skilled migration stream comprises independent (those qualified by
skills including English language), business, 'distinguished talent' and
employer nomination (whereby employers obtain skills not available in
Australia) migrants. Business migrants are considered the 'elite' of the
program (expected to bring in $850 million into Australia in 1996-97,
along with their ideas, market awareness and overseas networks).
The family migration stream comprises people sponsored by a relative
who is in Australia. 'Preferential' family covers spouses, fiances, and
non-working age parents, and 'concessional' family covers non-dependent
children, brothers and sisters and working age parents. 'Immediate' family
migration (mainly spouses and dependant children) has traditionally been
viewed as an aspect of encouraging migrants to settle permanently as full
and equal citizens, and has from the outset been an integral part of Australia's
post-war immigration program. It is part of what has distinguished our
program from the discredited guestworker systems of European countries.(5)
Concessional family migration was introduced as a component of the immigration
program in the early 1980s.
The humanitarian program comprises traditional refugees (those determined
by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to be in need of
protection by a third country), humanitarian entrants who would not meet
UNHCR criteria but who may be in need and who have connections in Australia,
and a special assistance category, for those with family links in Australia
and who may be in need. As a traditional immigrant receiving country,
Australia is amongst the most significant refugee receiving countries
in the world, and is a member of United Nations and other international
and regional forums dealing with refugee and other population movement
issues.
Asia-origin migrants fall into two distinct categories, with different
settlement experiences, depending on the migration stream under which
they have entered Australia rather than on the country from which they
have come. In general, migrants in the economic stream are highly educated,
English speaking, young (under 45 years of age) and middle class. Humanitarian
and family reunion migrants have in general lacked transferable work skills
and (except from countries like the Philippines and Sri Lanka) been non-English
speaking.
Until recently, most migrants from Northeast Asia (especially from Hong
Kong, Japan, Korea and Taiwan) have come in the skilled independent and
especially business stream. Before the recent family reunion inflow from
China, 75 per cent of Northeast Asian migrants were entering under this
stream. Apart from settlers from Singapore and Malaysia who have overwhelmingly
been highly skilled professional or managerial entrants, Southeast Asia
has been a major source of family reunion and humanitarian migration:
over 80 per cent of settlers (mainly from Vietnam, the Philippines, Cambodia
and Laos) in the 1980s and early 1990s from Southeast Asia have entered
under these categories. Migrants from Southern Asia have tended to be
fairly evenly divided between family and skill.
In 1995-96 the family stream comprised about 70 per cent of the migration
(non-humanitarian) program, and the skilled stream 30 per cent. About
14 000 came under the humanitarian program, which comprised about 14 per
cent of the total intake. The family and humanitarian streams combined
comprised about 75 per cent of program migration. People from Asian countries
comprised 52 per cent of the skilled or economic stream (and over 85 per
cent of the elite business category), 55 per cent of the family stream,
and 17 per cent of the humanitarian stream (the bulk of which over the
last several years has been comprised of people from countries of the
former Yugoslavia).
Unemployment and Welfare Dependency
The new Asian migrants who have entered under the skilled stream on average
have a higher level of educational qualifications than the Australian-born,
are English speaking, have higher status jobs and are earning above average
salaries. The family reunion and humanitarian stream is less skilled and
educated, and some groups are experiencing high and continuing rates of
unemployment and welfare dependency.
June 1995 June 1996
No. Rate No. Rate
Region/country of ('000) (%) ('000) (%)
birth
Total Southeast Asia 36.5 15.8 37.7 14.7
Malaysia 3.2 7.4 3.5 6.9
Philippines 4.7 9.8 5.5 10.7
Vietnam 20.7 26.8 19.4 23.4
Total Northeast Asia 12.4 10.7 12.0 10.4
China 6.3 11.0 7.6 13.4
Total South Asia 19.1 11.7 19.3 11.5
India 2.5 5.5 4.0 8.0
Total Overseas Born 213.3 9.9 214.9 9.5
Main English speaking
countries 66.9 7.0 63.5 7.5
Other countries 146.4 12.2 151.4 11.8
Australian Born 511.5 7.5 515.7 7.5
Total Australia 724.8 8.1 730.5 8.0
Source: ABS. DIMA Immigration Update June Quarter 1996.
The Vietnamese are the largest and the most researched Asia-origin group
who have entered predominantly (over 80 per cent) through the humanitarian
and family migration categories. A 1992 study(6) showed that in 1989 the
Vietnamese-born were receiving unemployment benefits at five times the
rate of the Australia-born. When dependants of recipients were taken into
account, 43 per cent of the Indochinese community were dependent on government
benefits, and 43 per cent of these had been receiving these benefits for
more than one year. Over 25 per cent of Vietnamese-born were in government
housing, compared with 7.4 per cent of the Australia-born, reflecting
the economically disadvantaged status of the Vietnamese community.
Recent research has shown that unemployment rates for recently-arrived
humanitarian and family migrants have been higher and persisted longer
than previously thought. The first results of the Longitudinal Survey
of Immigrants to Australia (LSIA)(7) showed last year that, 5-6 months
after arrival, of immigrants in the business migration stream, under 3
per cent were unemployed, compared with 85 per cent for humanitarian entrants,
39 per cent for preferential family and 36 per cent for concessional family
migrants. In overall terms, around one third of recently-arrived adult
migrants depend on welfare payments soon after arrival and around 25 per
cent are still dependent in their second year here. Prototype results
from the LSIA in 1995 showed, as expected, that unemployment rates drop
most quickly for economic migrants: by the end of their third year those
who entered under the skilled (including concessional family) category
have unemployment rates below the Australia-wide average.(8)
Settlement Patterns
Migration has affected in particular the character of Australia's capital
cities, and the tendency of migrants to settle in major cities has been
particularly pronounced with the latest wave of Asian and Middle Eastern
migrants. In 1992, 58 per cent of people born in Australia lived in cities
of 100 000 or more, compared with 80 per cent of people born in a European
country and 90 per cent of Asia-born groups. The proportion is particularly
high for some: 98 per cent of Vietnamese and 94 per cent of Mainland Chinese
live in major cities, mainly Sydney and Melbourne.(9)
Proportion (%)
Birthplace Major urban Other urban Rural Total number
Australia 57.6 25.5 16.9 12 725 163
China 93.7 4.4 1.9 78 866
Hong Kong 93.3 5.0 1.7 58 984
India 87.7 8.1 4.2 61 606
Malaysia 89.5 7.1 3.4 72 611
Philippines 83.0 12.1 4.9 73 660
Vietnam 97.6 1.3 1.0 122 347
Source: ABS 1991 Census.
Asian immigrants have tended to settle disproportionately in NSW, followed
by Victoria and WA. In 1991 these States accounted for 82 per cent of
the nation's Asia-born population, but only 66 per cent of the Australia-born.
An increasing proportion of new settlers have been settling in Sydney,
reflecting both this city's emergence as a centre of international finance,
and chain migration processes through earlier refugee settlement and family
reunion. In 1995-96 about 45 per cent of the total migrant intake settled
in NSW, nearly all in Sydney, and about 30 per cent went to Victoria,
nearly all of whom went to Melbourne. WA has also attracted a disproportionate
share of Asian settlers. Other States, particularly SA and the NT, are
trying to attract a greater share of the business and skilled migrant
intake.
Residential Concentrations
The skilled and business stream of Asian migrants are settling in middle-class
suburbs and are becoming a presence in Australian business and professional
life. They have tended to cluster in North-shore suburbs in Sydney and
suburbs such as Kew and Balwyn in Melbourne with little or no adverse
attention. However the very high level of residential concentration of
the Vietnam-born, especially in the poorer outer western suburbs of Sydney,
has been a continuing focus of immigration research, because of the association
of residential concentration with unemployment or low occupational status
and incomes and with migrants entering under the family reunion program.
The Vietnamese have settled in the western suburbs of Sydney (Fairfield,
Marrickville, Bankstown, Auburn and Canterbury) and to a lesser extent
in Melbourne (Sunshine, Springvale and Richmond). The biggest cluster
is in Fairfield, particularly in Cabramatta. In 1993 the Vietnamese-born
comprised 20 per cent of the population of Cabramatta: with other Asia-born
groups they comprised 35 per cent, not including their Australian born
children.(10)
Some researchers have argued that like former waves of immigrants who
clustered for initial settlement support, the Vietnamese will disperse
as their economic situations improve, and that ethnic clusters in Australia
are in any event more representative of vibrant multiculturalism than
racial 'ghettos'. Others have pointed out that the residential concentration
of disadvantaged Vietnamese has increased rather than decreased over time.(11)
At the time of the 1991 census, 39 per cent of the Vietnam-born NSW population,
and over 47 per cent of the unemployed NSW Vietnamese population, lived
in Fairfield.(12)
Nancy Viviani(13) has described the Vietnamese 'enclave' of Cabramatta
as the symbol of public fears and anxieties about recent immigration:
people leading apparently different, disadvantaged lives, failing to learn
English or to integrate, adding to the pool of unemployed in already depressed
urban areas, introducing new sorts of street crime, and changing the social
and political nature of Australia for the worse. She has also pointed
out that even though these residential clusters are growing in size, there
is also an increasing flow out into surrounding middle class suburbs,
with Vietnamese settlers achieving social mobility despite their initial
disadvantage. Second generation Vietnamese youth are disproportionately
represented in higher education. However there is concern regarding those
who remain in 'Vietnamatta', and the possibility that in the current employment
environment their disadvantage may be extending into the second generation.
Vietnamese youth are also disproportionately represented in crime statistics
(unlike other Asia-born youth, who are underrepresented).
Since 1945, almost 5.4 million people have migrated to Australia. Over
the last 50 years the population has risen from 7 million to over 18 million.
While the intake numbers per capita have been somewhat smaller than in
comparable countries of migration in recent years, the impact on the population
of continuing large scale migration has been considerably greater. Twenty-three
per cent of Australia's population is overseas born compared with 15 per
cent of Canada's and 9 per cent of the USA's. Forty per cent of the Australian
population are migrants or have one or both parents who were migrants.
The Asian component of the population has grown rapidly from a small
base: in 1976, the Asia-born comprised 1.1 per cent of the population;
in 1985, 2.5 per cent. As at June 1995, 4.8 per cent of the estimated
resident population of Australia was born in an Asian country, and with
Australia-born children first and second generation 'Asians' comprised
about 6 per cent of the population. With regard to the overseas-born population,
the Asia-born comprised over 21 per cent.
Oceania comprises New Zealand, Melanesia, Micronesia and Polynesia.
Source: Population Flows DIMA Jan 1996.
Population and Ethnicity Projections
Bureau of Immigration and Population Research projections, based on recent
source country balances and net intakes of 70 000 to 100 000, suggest
that by 2031 the proportion of people born in Europe (including the UK
and Ireland) will decline from 13 per cent (in 1994) to 6-7 per cent of
the population, and the proportion of those born in Asia will increase
from less than 5 per cent to 7-9 per cent.
Projections based on ethnicity are more complex: they are based on ancestry
or ethnic origin rather than birthplace. Demographer Dr Charles Price(14)
has made projections based on a measure of 'ethnic strength', which tells
what percentage of the population is of each specific origin, and counts
people according to their proportionate contribution to the ethnic group.(15)
According to this measure, about 75 per cent of Australia's population
in 1987 were of Anglo-Celtic origins, the rest being of other European,
Asian, Middle Eastern, Aboriginal, Torres Strait Islander, Pacific Islander
and African origins.
In his latest set of projections, based on migration trends of the past
10 years, Dr Price(16) has estimated that in the year 2025, people of
Anglo-Celtic background will make up 62 per cent, and people of other
European origins 15 per cent of the total population; that is, a total
of 77 per cent will be of European background. People of Asian background
will make up 16 per cent. Among the Asians, the Chinese will be the largest
ethnic group at 7 per cent. Four per cent will be of Middle Eastern (including
Lebanese, Turkish and Egyptian) origins and 2 per cent of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander background.
Source: Siew-Ean Khoo and Charles Price Understanding Australia's
Ethnic Composition DIMA, 1996.
While interesting, the implications of such projections are unclear.
As the most recent wave of immigrants, Asians, along with people from
Middle Eastern countries, are currently the most 'different'. However,
by the second and third generations, most migrant groups have integrated
into the broader society, and the issue of ethnic ancestry has an individual
rather than a broader social focus.
Surveys of public opinion polls over the last 40 years show that public
support for immigration has steadily declined as economic conditions have
become less favourable, as the balance of the program has moved towards
low-skilled family reunion and humanitarian migration, and as source countries
have become more diverse.
In the 1950s and 60s, the majority of the population (90 per cent of
which was 'ethnically' Anglo-Celtic in the early 1950s) supported large-scale
immigration. However this support was highly qualified, with the majority
supporting restricted (that is British) migration only. Since the 1970s,
coinciding with high intakes from Asian countries, support has declined.
Since 1984, majority opinion, as measured through most opinion polls,
has been against the 'existing' level of immigration (regardless of whether
this has been relatively high or low), and against the level of 'Asian'
immigration. Opposition would appear to have intensified during the 1990s,
with concern over unemployment rates, with the migration program heavily
balanced in favour of family migration, and with large numbers of recently
arrived migrants dependent on unemployment or other benefits for prolonged
periods.
(per cent)
Adapted from Betts, K. 'Immigration and Public Opinion in Australia',
People and Place vol. 4 no. 3 1996.
The most recent polls show a majority of two thirds or more opposed to
the current rate of immigration and especially family reunion migration.
In the AGB McNair Poll of June 14-16 1996,(17) 65 per cent of respondents
thought that migration was too high, compared with 29 per cent who considered
it 'about right' and 3 per cent who thought it was 'too low'. In a Newspoll
survey of 1200 adults September 27-29 1996, 71 per cent indicated they
believed immigration was too high (52 per cent saying it was a lot too
high), 20 per cent said it was about right and 2 per cent too low. In
the AGB McNair poll, of those who wanted a cut in migrant numbers, 74
per cent gave 'unemployment' as the reason and only 7 per cent gave 'too
many Asians'. Seventy-seven per cent said they agreed with a non-discriminatory
immigration policy. However, of the 51 per cent who thought there were
too many from a particular region, the vast majority (88 per cent) nominated
Asia.
(per cent)
About right 35
Too many from regions 51
Don't know 14
Regions named by those who said 'too
many...'
Asia (includes all Asian countries) 88
Middle East (includes Turkey, Lebanon, 9
Egypt, Iran, Iraq) 5
all other Europe 5
UK Ireland 3
New Zealand 2
Pacific (excluding New Zealand)
(per cent)
1996: Humanitarian Family reunion Work skills
too high 41 61 25
about 48 34 47
right 7 2 25
too few 4 3 3
don't
know
1981: Attitudes to different sections of the program-'Australia should
accept........'
Skilled
Investors Refugees Family reunion migrants
19 23 32 44
Source: AGB McNair poll 14-16 June 1996.
Recent opposition to immigration has been stronger in Sydney (where the
bulk of new migrants settle) than in Melbourne, and stronger amongst those
on lower incomes (below $30 000), who possibly see themselves as competing
with the new arrivals for jobs and public resources.
Murray Goot(18) has pointed out that while the majority of the many polls
that have been conducted on the issues of immigration over the last 12
years suggest majority opposition to the level of immigration, including
Asian immigration, different polls have yielded different and often conflicting
results. In an Office of Multicultural Affairs poll in 1989, for example,
the majority of respondents said the level of immigration was about right
or too low. He has argued that such different conclusions reflect differences
in the way polls have been worded and the different contexts within which
questions have been asked, rather than actual shifts in public opinion,
which is 'soft' on the issue, 'created by the very attempt to measure
it', and able to be led.(19)
Hugh Mackay, however, in his qualitative research in the late 1980s and
mid 1990s,(20) found Australians to be highly confused and mistrustful
of the objectives of both the immigration program (and particularly of
family reunion migration) and multiculturalism, and shaken by the impact
of Asian migration to the extent that they perceive their identity to
be under threat. While his focus groups expressed pride in having peacefully
absorbed so many different people, and perceived themselves as Australians
to be tolerant, hospitable and easygoing, he found them to be doubtful
as to whether the permanent immigration program was any longer serving
the national interest, and cynical regarding politicians' motives and
rhetoric.
The 'positives' seen by his focus groups regarding the new Asian immigrants
were links with Asian countries, their cultural and especially culinary
contributions, their 'un-Australian' work ethic and strong family values,
and, at the individual level, the pleasure of new acquaintances and friendships.
'Negatives' included the fear that the new Asian migrants would not integrate
as quickly or as easily as earlier waves of migrants, because of their
more different cultures, values and patterns of behaviour, and because
of the different context of their migration (including the proximity of
source countries, increased family migration, and official multiculturalism).
They were angered particularly by a perceived failure or unwillingness
of some Asian groups to learn English or 'mix', and thus by their perceived
lack of commitment to Australia.
Despite the apparently increasing level of public opposition, immigration
has not become the salient political issue in Australia that it has in
many European countries or the USA. Except perhaps at times of media focus,
multiple issue opinion polling does not show migration to be an issue
of major concern. For example, in The Bulletin Morgan Poll of 28
November 1995, which surveyed the issues voters believed the Government
should be addressing, the major concern was unemployment, followed by
health, the economy, education and law and order. Immigration rated fifteenth,
behind 'interest rates' and above 'child and youth issues'. Some commentators
have suggested, however, that concern regarding 'unemployment' encompasses
a more widespread and generalised fear and malaise at the range and speed
of economic and social changes affecting people in Australia, including
those caused by immigration.
Research into community relations in Australia has identified the Asia-born
(along with Moslems the most visibly different of the most recent wave
of migrants), as, apart from Aboriginal people, most frequently at the
receiving end of racist behaviour.(21) This behaviour has most often taken
the form of name-calling or graffiti, has been interpersonal and sporadic
in nature, often 'inter-ethnic' and with causes difficult to disentangle
from wider social, economic or political tensions.(22) Any sort of comparative
study has concluded that Australia is among the most harmonious societies
on earth, by any standard of behaviour.(23)
As part of the most recent wave, however, the new Asian migrants face
the dual problem of making their way in a new environment in an economic
context that is far more inhospitable than in the past. The social climate
may also have become less hospitable, with belief that immigration is
serving the national interest less widely held.
There has been a consensus in the early 1990s amongst researchers and
commentators that much of the resentment towards Asian migrants is a more
general opposition to the economic and employment impacts of all immigration
in a context of high unemployment.(24) This opposition would appear to
be hardening, at a time when family reunion migration has come to dominate
the program and it has become clear that many new arrivals cannot obtain
jobs because they lack skills and English.
Regardless of the size of the permanent migration program, people from
Asian countries are likely to comprise a significant proportion of both
its skilled and family components. Also regardless of the size of the
permanent migration program, there is likely to be an increasing Asian
presence in our cities. There were 82 500 places in the permanent migration
program in 1995-96. In 1995-96 there were also nearly 61 000 overseas
students, over 250 000 temporary residents (including 183 000 business
entrants), and over 2.7 million tourists. People from Asian countries
comprise a growing proportion of the rapidly increasing temporary movements
(of business people, professionals, specialist or temporary workers, students,
or working holiday-makers) in our region. If present trends continue,
these sorts of temporary movements will be of more economic significance
to Australia than the permanent migration program.
- . Mackay, H. Being Australian, March 1988; Society Now,
July 1995; and Multiculturalism, September 1995; Mackay Research,
Sydney.
- These issues are explored in more detail in PRS Background Paper No.9,
1996-97. Australia's Asian Connections: A Stocktake.
- Net permanent migration takes account of the number of people permanently
arriving in Australia and the number permanently departing. 'Settler
arrivals' is the number of people entitled to permanent residence actually
arriving.
- Departures and temporary movements are examined in more detail in
PRS Research Paper no.13, 1994. Global population movements, temporary
movements in the Asia-Pacific region and Australia's immigration program.
- For a comparison of Australian with European countries' immigration
and settlement policies see Castles, S. Multicultural Citizenship.
PRS Research Paper no. 16, 1995-96.
- Hugo, G. 'Knocking at the Door: Asian Immigration to Australia' Asia
and Pacific Migration Journal, vol. 1, no. 1. 1992.
- See Williams L. & Murphy J. 'Unemployment Rates Among Recently
Arrived Immigrants: data from the first wave of the Longitudinal Survey
of Migrants to Australia' in DIMA Immigration Update, December
Quarter 1995.
- Murphy, J & Williams, L. 'Do unemployment rates among immigrants
improve? BIMPR Bulletin August 1995.
- Hugo, G. Understanding where Immigrants Live BIMPR, Canberra,
AGPS, 1995.
- Viviani, N. From Burnt Boats to Barbecues: The Indochinese in Australia
1975-1995, Melbourne, OUP, 1996.
- Including Hugo, G. op. cit. and Healy, I. 'Welfare benefits and residential
concentrations amongst recently arrived migrant communities' People
and Place, vol. 4 no. 2 1995.
- Hugo, G. op. cit. 1992.
- Viviani, N. op. cit.
- Charles Price is Emeritus Professorial Fellow in Demography at the
ANU and Director of the Australian Immigration Research Centre in Canberra.
- That is, someone who is or English would be counted as or
person of English origin.
- Dr Price was commissioned by the BIMPR in 1995 to prepare the monograph
Immigration and Ethnicity. DIMA, 1996.
- A telephone poll of a nationwide sample of 2063 people aged 18 and
over.
- Murray Goot is Associate Professor of Politics at Macquarie University,
and has specialised in analysing public attitudes to immigration.
- Goot, M. 'Public Opinion as Paradox: Australian attitudes to the rate
of immigration and the rate of Asian Immigration 1984-1990' International
Journal of Public Opinion Research vol. 3, no. 3, 1991.
- Mackay, H. Being Australian, March 1988; Society Now,
July 1995; and Multiculturalism, September 1995; Mackay Research;
Sydney.
- HREOC Racist Violence in Australia Canberra; AGPS 1991.
- See for example Cope, B., Castles, S. & Kalantzis, M. Immigration,
Ethnic Conflicts and Social Cohesion (BIR) Canberra; AGPS, 1991.
- ibid.
- Hugo, G. op. cit. 1992.
|
 |
