- Migration and Nation Building
- The term ‘nation building’ in Australia is commonly associated with grand infrastructure projects or unifying events. Yet a longer assessment of that term’s use would also acknowledge the arrival and successful settlement of migrants as a nation-building exercise. As early as 1862, a discussion of the development of the colony of Victoria recorded that:
…whatever other qualities the individual who crosses the ocean in search of fortune may possess or lack, the fact that he has emigrated is primâ facie evidence of energy and enterprise, the primary materials in the work of nation building—the bone and nerve by which a community progresses and becomes great.
3.2Typically, when tied to migration, nation building has been a policy objective framed to guide, encourage, and control the flow of people. The policies have often arisen at moments of change or disruption—Federation was soon followed by the introduction of the White Australia policy intended to consolidate desired national characteristics by limiting the migration of those from a non-British background, while casualties and perceived national vulnerabilities in the wake of the Second World War saw the establishment of the Postwar Migration Program that sought to relocate displaced persons from allied nations and to entice British migrants (the so-called Ten-Pound Poms).
3.3Recently, the COVID-19 pandemic, with the resulting closure of borders, brought existing failings and vulnerabilities of Australia’s migration system into sharp focus. As the then Minister for Home Affairs, Hon Clare O’Neil MP, observed ‘COVID is presenting us, on a platter, a chance to reform our immigration system that we will never get back again’; Australia has the opportunity to review and reset migration in a nation-building framework.
Sturdy foundations
3.4As outlined in Chapter 2, Australian society has long been underpinned by a diverse and multicultural population. The Government’s Multicultural Statement: United, Strong, Successful affirms that the nation flourished in part due to its cultural diversity:
We owe our accomplishments as a nation to the contributions of more than 300 different ancestries—from the First Australians to the newest arrivals.
3.5This view is shared by the wider population. In recent years there has been growing recognition of the value and contribution of migrants, and diminishing support for the view that multiculturalism undermines national identity. The 2022 Mapping Social Cohesion report assessed that Australians’ support for diversity is ‘high and growing’. They found an increasing proportion of people agreed that multiculturalism has been good for the nation (88 per cent), that immigrants make Australia stronger (78 per cent), and that immigrants are good for the economy (87 per cent). The 2023 report recorded similar proportions, reinforcing ‘the impressive upward trajectory’ in the face of social and economic challenges.
3.6The Committee heard from Dr Andrew Theophanous, former member of the House of Representatives (1980–2001) and Chair of the Joint Standing Committee on Immigration Regulations (1989–1993), who argued that multiculturalism is also consistent with social justice principles embedded in Australia’s identity.
3.7He observed that Australia had been a ‘trailblazer in the implementation of ideas of fairness and equality of opportunity’ and cited as examples the early extension of the right to vote to women, the adoption of a minimum basic wage and unemployment benefits, and the universal access to health care and education. Theophanous also pointed to an observation made by former Prime Minister Paul Keating that:
…tolerance of cultural difference is ultimately a necessary condition for a successful new world country; and that those traditions of egalitarian democracy which emerged in the last half of the Nineteenth Century had the seeds of multiculturalism in them.
3.8There was widespread acknowledgement among submissions received by the Committee that migration has played a significant part in building Australia as a successful multicultural nation. For many, the positive role of migration was an unquestioned assumption whether the submitter was:
- A refugee advocate—‘Migration has always played a central role in Australia’s prosperity’;
- A government agency—‘Migrants are, and will always be an essential part of Australia’s economy and social fabric’; or
- A business peak body—‘To be clear, we believe that migration is fundamentally a positive for the nation’.
- And while concrete examples, such as the crucial role of refugees and displaced migrants to the completion of major infrastructure projects like the Snowy Mountains Hydro-Electric Scheme were noted, most sought to also acknowledge the broader, less tangible, contributions made by migrants:
Australia’s creativity, dynamism, interconnectedness and stability are largely a product of its modern migration and multiculturalism policies.
Who we are
3.10Australia’s character and identity is dynamic. Among other things, it has and continues to be shaped by the environment, the people who live on that land, and external forces that impact the nation.
3.11The 2017 Final Report of the Referendum Council identified three parts that made up the Australian story:
- Our ancient First Peoples’ heritage and culture;
- Our British institutions; and
- Our multicultural unity,
and called for a Declaration of Recognition to bring them together. Noel Pearson, a member of the Council, characterised it as an ‘epic story’ and, recognising the complexity of the intertwined streams, acknowledged that ‘[n]o epic is pure happiness and light’.
3.12The Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee’s 2021 inquiry into Nationhood, National Identity and Democracy, found the idea of the Australian nation being composed from ‘three great streams’ to be compelling, offering a new model that is ‘uniquely inclusive, respectful and optimistic’. They added that:
As well as lifting up Australia’s First Nations peoples to take their rightful place as equals in our national story, the model of three great streams provides proper acknowledgment of the nation-building role played by waves of immigrants who have settled here over the decades.
3.13As the three great streams model recognises, those who migrated to Australian shores both in the distant past and in recent times have helped to craft the nation of today.
3.14‘[W]e are part of the cultural furniture’ asserted Mrs Di Mezza, Chief Executive Officer, Loddon Campaspe Multicultural Services, of her own ethnic heritage. The daughter of post-World War II Italian migrants, she grew up on the northern beaches of Sydney at a time ‘when the only spaghetti eaten was that which came in a can’ and ‘pizza was a foreign concept’. Her father, a builder, although initially considered an outsider by some, was aware of the contribution he made to the nation and that he earnt his right to remain. The migrant experience of her family, she observed, had much in common with recent arrivals:
I see the newly arrived migrants and refugees going through a similar journey. They work hard like our ancestors did. They build and buy houses. They do the backbreaking work, pouring all of their funds into educating and building brighter futures for their children. Eventually, they will be understood and accepted, as happened with the Italo-Australians. This does not happen overnight; it is a long road of discovery and connection.
3.15People—be they migrants, first generation Australians, or First Australians—make up our communities and in turn build our nation. Co.as.it Community Services agreed that nation building is ‘concurrently an individual and collective model’. They suggested that an individual’s reasons for migration—for work, to better themselves financially, to attain personal security and make their home in a society that values their contributions—combine to create ‘engaged nation builders at a micro and macro level’.
3.16As Noel Pearson acknowledged, the epic story of migration encompasses ‘in fact millions of such stories’.
Fostering a dynamic economy
3.17Submissions made to the Committee rightly point out that migration is ‘not just an economic issue’. Yet this does not diminish the significant contribution that migration and migrants make in helping to advance economic aspects of the nation. As the Tech Council observed ‘[m]igration has played a critical role in making Australia the vibrant, dynamic and outward looking society that it is today’. Indeed, it is that interplay between the social, cultural, and economic attributes of migrants that shapes their contribution and amplifies their impact in the economy. Or, as Talent Beyond Boundaries put it, ‘Australia’s economy is turbo-charged by migration’.
3.18Leading forward plans released in 2023 identify migration as an essential ingredient to Australia’s economic growth and more broadly to the nation’s long-term success. The Productivity Commission’s (PC) 5-year Productivity Inquiry: Advancing Prosperity recognised immigration as ‘a key economic asset, which should be used to good effect’.
3.19More recently the Treasurer, the Hon. Jim Chalmers, in the forward to the Intergenerational Report 2023: Australia’s future to 2063, observed the imperative to take ‘a big picture view of the forces that will shape our economy and fiscal position over the next 40 years as we work to create prosperity, expand opportunity, and build a stronger, more sustainable and more inclusive nation’. Growing the workforce and building skills was one of the levers that the report identified as necessary for planning and investing in Australia’s future. In this sphere, they noted that ‘a well targeted migration program can help ensure Australia is well positioned for future structural changes’.
3.20Successive Intergenerational Reports (IGRs) have predicted that population growth will slow as Australians live longer and bear fewer children. The 2023 report recognises the role of migration in augmenting the demographic composition of Australia’s population. It notes that as migrants are generally younger and are of working age, they can help to offset population ageing. This impact was apparent during the COVID-19 pandemic when international borders were closed to migrants (and other travellers) resulting in the 2020–21 median population age rising 0.9 years higher than had been predicted.
3.21Indeed, contributors to the inquiry emphasised the crucial role migration plays in insulating Australia from the serious socio-economic impacts of an ageing population. The Migration Hub at ANU, for one, noted that the ‘basic problem of population ageing is that fewer working-aged people must support more elderly people’. As highlighted by the Migration Hub, this is a long-term trend underpinned by a gradually declining fertility rate: between 1981 and 2019, Australia’s ‘total fertility rate declined from 1.90 to 1.58, far below the rate of 2.1 required for the population to remain stable’. This trend is expressed in Figure 3.1, below.
Figure 3.1Australia's Total Fertility Rate, 1960-2020
Source: Migration Hub at ANU, Submission 70, p. 6.
3.22As noted by VETASSESS, this trend is also caused by an average increase in the life expectancy of Australians. While a welcome trend, combined with a declining fertility rate, the ageing of the population works to skewer Australia’s demographic profile meaning that a smaller number of working-aged people are supporting an increasing number of retirees. VETASSESS provided population pyramid graphs indicating that in the ‘space of 15 years, Australia has lost weight around the middle’—i.e., a decrease in the number of young people (Figure 3.2, below).
Figure 3.2Australia's Demographic Profile, 2006 and 2021
Source: VETASSESS, Submission 89, p. 3.
3.23As emphasised by the Migration Hub at ANU and VETASSESS, among other contributors, it is vital that migration be deployed to strategically counterbalance the negative demographic trends associated with the ageing of the Australian population. In this sense, migration forms an essential foundation to the country’s nation building endeavours.
3.24The Committee heard that in some industries Australia’s ageing population had already taken a toll on their capacity to undertake and complete projects. The construction industry, for example, gave evidence that they were ‘up against a demographic problem’ as the nature of their work predominantly called for young workers who were in short supply. For Mrs Alex Waldren, National Director Industry Policy, Master Builders Association, the solution was not simply increasing migrants numbers, but ‘fixing the ecosystem’ to make Australia ‘a more attractive place for broader cohorts and for young people to move into’, a destination that offers ‘a safe and comfortable workplace’.
3.25The PC, while acknowledging the existing benefits that migration brings to the Australian economy, also highlighted the potential for migration to have a greater impact on productivity following targeted reforms to the skilled migration program. They recommend changes that would improve productivity and wellbeing via ‘better job matching and lifetime fiscal outcomes’.
3.26More broadly the PC called for the adoption of a ‘productivity lens’ that ‘sees the role of human capital differently’. In respect to skilled migrants it required a ‘shift of emphasis’, recognising that migrants are necessary not only to fill a particular occupational gap, but also as ‘an essential source of new ideas and information’.
3.27The productivity uplift that migrants provide, VETASSESS remarked, is transmitted by education, entrepreneurship, innovation, and diffusion. Working aged migrants, they add, are far more likely to hold a degree- or higher-level qualification than the locally born population. They contribute to innovation in domestic businesses as they bring with them new knowledge, ideas, skills, and practices, that is transmitted in their new environment. Further, migrants are more inclined to be entrepreneurial and are overrepresented in the small business sector. A 2018 report commissioned by CGU Insurance finding that more than 620,000 small businesses—a third of Australia’s small businesses—are owned by migrants. Their small business spokesperson adding that:
Our research helps challenge perceptions that our migrants are taking more than they’re giving, and we’re keen to share this story – one of successful, hardworking and innovative migrants and the positive impact they have on our business community.
3.28As early as 2015 the then Department of Immigration and Border Protection’s fact sheet on post-war migration reported research that ‘overall, migrants contribute more in taxes than they consume in benefits and government goods and services’. More recently, the positive economic impact of permanent migrants was assessed using The Treasury’s Fiscal Impact of New Australians (FIONA) model. It found that the fiscal impact of the average migrant was $127,000 per person more positive than the overall Australian population. They note that these migrants typically arrive at a relatively young age (between 25 to 35), spend a large amount of time in the work force, and tend to have stronger labour market outcomes. The report particularly highlighted that among migrants, it was those in the skilled stream that, on average, yielded the highest positive fiscal impact.
3.29Migrants also help to embed regional and global connections. Census data from 2021 records the global interconnectedness of Australia’s population. It reveals that almost a third (27.6 per cent) of the population was born overseas, and roughly half had at least one parent who was born overseas (48.2 per cent).
3.30While most overseas born Australians continue to be drawn from England, there has been a sharp increase in the proportion of the population who were born in our region, particularly India, China, the Philippines and New Zealand. VETASSESS’s submission was one of several which pointed out the positive impact of migrant connections. They observe that Australia’s migrant community and workforce, not only have networks back into their home and neighbouring countries, but they also have ‘the cultural and linguistic skills necessary to extend them’.
3.31The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, similarly, affirms that ‘[c]ultural diversity in the business setting fosters the development of global linkages, opening up new markets for Australian businesses’.
A Soft Landing for Success
3.32The Migration Institute of Australia (MIA) maintained that ‘[n]ation building and social cohesion concepts are inexorably linked’. They add that ‘nation building promotes the foundations of social cohesion with social cohesion in turn strengthening nation building efforts’. The intertwined nature of these concepts, along with cultural diversity, is recognised in the inquiry’s terms of reference. The Committee acknowledges that for nation building to be a success, measures need to be put in place to promote social cohesion and to ensure a respectful embrace of cultural diversity.
3.33The 2023 Sense of Belonging Among Multilingual Audiences in Australia report observed high levels of belonging among the five language groups—Arabic, Cantonese, Italian, Mandarin, and Vietnamese—that were most spoken at home in Australia at the time of the 2016 Census (apart from English). They found 73 per cent of respondents agreed that they felt ‘at home in Australia’. Delving deeper, the survey identified a positive correlation between a migrant’s sense of belonging and the longevity of their time in Australia. Likewise, those with greater levels of proficiency in English were far more likely to feel at home.
3.34Taking a longitudinal perspective, the 2022 Mapping Social Cohesion report noted that while historically their survey had recorded ‘a very strong sense of national pride and belonging’, the report warned that this had declined over time. Significantly, that the sense of belonging was markedly lower amongst migrants for whom English was not their first language. Further, the report observed that the World Values Survey recorded a similar drop in the proportion of Australians who were ‘very proud’ of their nationality from 71 per cent in 2012 to 57 per cent in 2018.
3.35Australia has been the beneficiary of a long-standing high sense of belonging among migrants. Yet these surveys suggest that the nation faces a turning point where the sense of belonging is waning, entangled in a complex relationship between English proficiency and time spent in Australia. The Federation of Ethnic Communities’ Councils of Australia (FECCA) attributed blame on a shift to a policy focused only on the economic benefits of migration, resulting in a existing ‘convoluted’ and ‘unfair’ migration system. This shift, they argue, has had a lasting detrimental impact on ‘communities’ sense of belonging and perceptions of their value to Australian society, which are foundational to building a strong and inclusive nation’. It is in this context that several settlement services providers cautioned that nation building policy and rhetoric will not yield favourable outcomes unless they are paired with appropriately funded and resourced settlement services.
3.36Ms Catherine Scarth, Chief Executive Officer, AMES Australia, called for a nation building strategy that hinged on ‘settling well in Australia’. The strategy, they believed, needed a whole-of-government approach that was underpinned by good data and analysis (an aspect that will be explored further in Chapter 11). Community Refugee Sponsorship Australia highlighted the importance of locally based support to securing positive settlement. The MIA pointed to the need to look beyond the individual skilled migrant for positive nation building outcomes. They maintain that families are ‘fundamental to developing social cohesion’ although the benefit of their presence is difficult to quantify.
3.37The higher education sector and advocates for humanitarian entrants called for a focus on retaining those migrants who had already established ties with the nation. The Refugee Advice and Casework Service (RACS) observed that in addition to enriching Australia culturally and socially, refugees are ‘an untapped resource of valuable skills, education, perspectives, and experiences that can drive innovation, job creation and growth of the Australian economy’.
3.38The Sydney University Postgraduate Representative Association (SUPRA) pointed out that Australia’s international students become ‘embedded’ in local communities and culture, developing attachments to ‘people and places within Australia across the life of their degrees’. They added that postgraduate students, offer a ‘group of mature, educated, and motivated people, who have already contributed substantially to Australia’s economy’. These sentiments were echoed by the Regional Universities Network (RUN) who noted that ‘regions are made more vibrant, inclusive and prosperous by the welcoming of students from all cultures’.
3.39Several organisations who appeared at a public hearing or made a submission pointed out the connection between belonging, citizenship, and nation building. The Tasmanian Government urged that pathways to permanency ‘must, by extension, include a focus on pathways to citizenship’. Research, they argued, demonstrated that ‘achieving citizenship is a prime factor in helping migrants feel like they belong and can contribute’.
3.40Citizenship, the Queensland Program of Assistance to Survivors of Torture and Trauma (QPASTT) told the Committee, ‘signals welcome, inclusion and belonging in Australia, allowing full rights of political engagement in our nation’. For them the attainment of citizenship is:
…a practical manifestation of nation-building, offering protection and belonging on equal footing with others who call this nation home.
Committee Comment
3.41Evidence heard by the Committee overwhelmingly acknowledged that a planned migration program has been, and remains, necessary for Australia to flourish. In submissions and at public hearings, witnesses called for measures that would support, streamline, and enhance Australia’s nation building project. The Committee is mindful, however, that nation building is a phrase that is overused by think tanks, politicians, and the media to the point of becoming almost meaningless rhetoric and even the subject of comedy and parody, such as the ABC’s Utopia.
3.42It is the Committee’s view, that a ‘genuine’ engagement with nation building as a strategy that moves beyond mere rhetoric and a sole focus on economics to encompass societal and environmental concerns, is necessary for a prosperous and successful Australia. Moreover, such an approach would entail a collective strategy that calls on all tiers of government to actively engage in and pursue shared goals.
3.43The Committee recommends that the Australian Government, through National Cabinet, works in collaboration with state and territory governments to devise an inter-governmental strategy that embeds nation building in forward plans, and acts to unify and guide the development of policy.
Maintaining a sustainable society
3.44A small proportion of submissions voiced concerns about the environmental sustainability of an increased migration program. They argued that such a program may yield results that diminish, rather than build, the nation. In their view, Australia’s population has already exceeded the carrying capacity of the country and they pointed to environmental degradation and resource shortages as evidence.
3.45Several of those submitters drew attention to the wording of the Terms of Reference for the current inquiry. Mr Peter Martin, for instance, remarked that the wording appeared to ‘assume that continuing high levels or immigration is excellent policy’ and he called for them to be ‘rewritten to allow us to challenge the basic assumptions of the entire immigration program’. Similarly Mr Ian Penrose wrote with concern that wording included ‘loaded sentiments’ that ‘run the risk of inhibiting critique of the migration program’. He questioned why the Terms of Reference mentioned economic and social issues ‘but not the environment’ and called for all government programs to be ‘viewed through an environmental lens’.
3.46Sustainable Population Australia (SPA) in their submission and their response to a question on notice called for the stabilisation of the population. While acknowledging that there are economic, social, and environmental aspects to sustainability, they argue that it is the latter—ecological sustainability—that ‘is the bedrock upon which the other aspects depend’. They noted that while Australia is a large landmass, the interior is largely arid or semi-arid and that the population is overwhelmingly distributed around the well-watered coastal fringe. As there are ‘no technologies on the horizon’ that will convert the interior into a place suitable for ‘large-scale human habitation’, they maintain that:
Australia’s population policy must therefore learn to live in balance with Australia’s fragile ecosystems as they are.
They also pointed to the 2021 Australia State of the Environment report’s assessment on the pressures on biodiversity that the ‘impacts from population growth are extensive and increasing in many areas’.
3.47In their submission, the SPA suggested that around 80,000 permanent migrants a year might be ecologically sustainable (depending on emigration relative to the return of expatriates, and stabilisation in the number of temporary migrants).
3.48Their submission cited a range of supporting research, including the 1994 recommendation of the Australian Academy of Science (AAS) Population 2040 Working Party that the population be stabilised at 23 million.
3.49Yet, it is also true that views among scientists on the connection between population and ecological sustainability vary, and are not static. For example, an AAS Think Tank of sixty early-to-mid-career researchers, in their 2012 report on Australia’s Population: Shaping a vision for our future, agreed that ‘no optimal population size should be sought’. They added that:
There is widespread recognition that no such (scientific) optimum exists and there are very few effective mechanisms that can be used to manage population size. There was also a consensus that continuous growth, either of population or the economy, will not in itself resolve the significant challenges facing Australia. Rather, growth was seen by participants as bound up with other complex and changing dynamics that need to be better understood.
3.50When asked at a public hearing for a figure of what a sustainable population level for Australia, the SPA agreed that ‘no single numeric estimate regarded as “optimal”’ and pointed to the complex range of factors that need to be considered. They advocated for stabilisation below 30 million people, a figure that, in their view, was an achievable target that was likely to reduce risk. Further, they suggested that to take a ‘fully precautionary approach’, stabilisation could be followed by a gradual decline in the population ‘at least until State of the Environment reports show predominantly improving trends in environmental health’.
3.51The Committee agrees that the relationship between population and climate change is complex, and not a simple linear connection. Yet, the issues raised by both sustainability advocates and scientists, remain a timely reminder of the need for Australia to be smart about its nation building programs. The PC argues that a carefully planned and managed approach to population growth that encompasses targeted migration, will, in turn:
help to deliver better outcomes on infrastructure, housing, service delivery, and the environment and can support rising living standards over time.
As will be explored in chapters 7 and 11, Australia’s approach to migration needs to be mindful that changes to the settings are well-planned and adequately resourced.
Committee Comment
3.52The Committee recognises that sustainability is a fundamental element of the Australian Government’s Migration Strategy released in December 2023. This aspect is addressed not by simply reducing migrant numbers, but via a conviction that growth needs to be:
principally driven by quality and a strong connection with our national interest.
3.53To that end, while the Strategy report tackles the growth in temporary migration (particularly in the higher education sector) with the aim of ‘returning migration levels back to normal’, it also recognises that a ‘better targeted migration system will support the Government’s broader climate agenda’, enabling Australia to identify and attract skilled workers needed for the nation to transition towards a ‘cleaner and greener economy’. While in support of these sentiments, the Committee considers that the impact of these changes—both gains and losses—should be evaluated at regular intervals to ensure they are on track to match expectations.
3.54The Committee recommends that the Australian Government considers the complex relationship between migration and the Australian environment and investigate measures that would help to ameliorate any negative impacts.
In the national interest
3.55The imperative to get the balance right, to address the needs of our nation at the same time as building local capacity, has also been the focus of considerable deliberation by the Committee. This inquiry recognises the skills that migrants and humanitarian entrants bring, and it values the contributions that they have made to Australia by enriching the nation and its citizens socially, culturally, and economically. It also acknowledges that the migration process is a two-way street.
3.56Existing citizens benefit from exposure to new ideas, different cultures and potential access to new markets. And Australia has an obligation to allow migrants (not filling a short-term need) to realise their full potential and formally acknowledge the connection that they have forged with the nation by providing pathways to permanent residency and ultimately citizenship.