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.