[Decky]

No they aren't, they are famous for being drunkards and being good at sports.

[Rejn]

Rejn."Nearly all my relatives came to Australia with no money." I suppose your relatives are white??

Irrelevant.

Did they move to Australia when the White Australia Policy was in force??

No. They came in the 80s and 90s.

Are you a White supremacist??

No. What a ridiculous question.

It must be nice living in Rejn's completely detached black and white universe.

It is indeed nice.

[anarchist23]

Rejn.I will ask you again."Are your relatives whiite?"

[Plaro]

I thought this thread was going to be about how inhumane the current immigration policy is in Australia that allows millions of migrant to come to a country straining social framework of the society and producing much suffering for the natives there who have to deal with influx of massive amount of foreigners arriving to their land.

The I realized I was wrong.

[foxdemon]

I thought this thread was going to be about how inhumane the current immigration policy is in Australia that allows millions of migrant to come to a country straining social framework of the society and producing much suffering for the natives there who have to deal with influx of massive amount of foreigners arriving to their land.

The I realized I was wrong.

There is a strong wave of sentiment against immigration in the world today. This is particularly so in Europe. However, the situation in Australia is different. Consider:


- in 1900 the population was 3 million. By 1945, it was 6 million. So the population doubled in around 50 years, much through immigration.


- The population reached 20 million by 2000. So the population tripled in around 50 years, and much of it was due to immigration.


- the rate of population growth in Australia is the same as that in India. So the population has been rapidly expanding for decades, mainly due to immmigration as the birth rate is low.


So many Australians today are either immigrants or childern of immigrants. There are not so many pre WWII european Australians (the settler culture, the people who put the nation state in the history books and define the stereotype of an Australian). The social disruption to that original european colonial culture happened in the '50's through 80's. Even the 1990's One Nation party lead by Pauline Handson, was mainly composed of British immigrants. Handson herself was born in England.


When we look at these facts, it becomes clear Australia is, for better or worse, more of an immigrant country than is the USA. It would be difficult for further immigration to disrupt the current society. Having said that, water is the limited factor. Australia can't keep up a high immigration economy forever.

[OllytheBrit]

Layman. Usually immigrants from the developing countries are educated but poor.To say they are not productive is not true and the post is full of sweeping generalizations.I can smell a whiff of racism which is unlike you.

Romas are 'productive'! Very productive!! 2.4 children per family? Forget it.

[anarchist23]

Ollythebrit.I have 5 children and 7 grandchildren and I am not Romanian.Why single out the Romanians?

[Swagman]

Having an immigration policy and upholding it is not "inhumane" it's just commons sense management / governance. The Parliament debates the pros and cons of the legislation and the laws are put in place to the benefit of the Nation and protect its citizens.

The lady in the case described in the OP was allowed entry into Australia (as I understand) because she was the fiancee of an Australian citizen. The relationship subsequently broke up (they didn't get married) and she no longer fulfilled the requirements of her 'fiancee visa' and therefore had to return to South Korea where she is a citizen.

The minister has declined to make an acception here (IMO) due to the fact that it would obviously set a precedent. How could he justify denying others in the same circumstances?

Such a precedent would set in place an easy means for fake engagements to take place so that applicants can avoid the usual immigration procedures. The result being that thousands of fake 'fiancee visa' applicants would surface and overwhelm the 'fiancee visa' policy. Con men would undoubtedly set up 'businesses' to exploit the precedent, in the same way as they have set up business to exploit 'asylum seeker' traficking. The legitimate applicants applying in good faith would then be disadvantaged or denied because of the actions of the fakers and the con men.

[GandalfTheGrey]

The minister has declined to make an acception here (IMO) due to the fact that it would obviously set a precedent. How could he justify denying others in the same circumstances?

Such a precedent would set in place an easy means for fake engagements to take place so that applicants can avoid the usual immigration procedures.

Thats ridiculous Swag. This "precedent" involves living with this "fake" fiance for 8 years, having a kid with them, then "pretend" to break it off. Thats 8 years of pretty darn good acting - especially as it includes conceiving and giving birth to a 'child of convenience' - all to rort the immigration system.

I know a much better way to rort the system - set up a fake marriage, then you get to stay as long as you want. Done.

[Swagman]

Thats ridiculous Swag. This "precedent" involves living with this "fake" fiance for 8 years, having a kid with them

Don't recall mentioning that her relationship was 'fake' GTG but yes the 8 year residency should be taken into account. I concede your point.

[ThirdTerm]

Ms Park should raise her daughter in South Korea and the Korean economy now rivals Australia with the rise of multinational corporations and Australia is no longer significantly better than South Korea in terms of living standards. She is a foreign national who could stay in Australia because of her previous relationship with an Australian citizen and she's partly responsible for the breakdown of the relationship and she should have got married with her partner for the sake of her daughter. Mr Duong was on an expired student visa and being a victim of a vicious racist attack does not give him the right to stay in the country on compassionate grounds. European citizens in similar circumstances would have been treated the same as those Asian nationals by Australia's immigration authorities.

Mark Littler, 30, faces deportation after being convicted for fare evasion when he claimed his faulty go card did not work on a trip from Morningside station to Fortitude Valley. Mr Littler, who does not hold an Australian passport, could be returned to Britain if the Immigration Department reacts to the conviction. This comes despite examples when more serious crimes have not attracted the same result. In September 2009, Gold Coast sisters who bashed two tourists at Surfers Paradise received 18 months' probation and no conviction, while a series of crimes against animals, including dragging horses behind cars and killing family pets, have not attracted convictions. Mr Littler fought the $200 fine for fare evasion because he believed he was acting in "good faith" when he reported his go card as faulty to a transit officer on board a train on December 12, 2009.
http://www.news.com.au/national/british-man-faces-deportation-over-go-card-fare-evasion-conviction-on-brisbane-citytrain/story-e6frfkvr-1226114242547

[foxdemon]

Ms Park should raise her daughter in South Korea and the Korean economy now rivals Australia with the rise of multinational corporations and Australia is no longer significantly better than South Korea in terms of living standards. She is a foreign national who could stay in Australia because of her previous relationship with an Australian citizen and she's partly responsible for the breakdown of the relationship and she should have got married with her partner for the sake of her daughter.

She has been living here for 8 years. She has a child who was born here. The child has grandparents who don't want her to go. I think any reasonable person would find nothing to object about Ms Park being able to stay in Australia.

Mr Duong was on an expired student visa and being a victim of a vicious racist attack does not give him the right to stay in the country on compassionate grounds. European citizens in similar circumstances would have been treated the same as those Asian nationals by Australia's immigration authorities.

Mr Duong needed to complete his studies. His visa should have been still valid. A person with a valid visa who has payed for their studies ought be allowed into the country to complete those studies. That was all he was asking. The matter of the attack was why he returned to Vietnam. He returned home while he was recovering from his injuries. A reasonable person would acknowledge he couldn't study while recovering from a serious assault and would also see the reason behind defering studies until the student was able to resume those studies.

Mark Littler, 30, faces deportation after being convicted for fare evasion when he claimed his faulty go card did not work on a trip from Morningside station to Fortitude Valley. Mr Littler, who does not hold an Australian passport, could be returned to Britain if the Immigration Department reacts to the conviction. This comes despite examples when more serious crimes have not attracted the same result. In September 2009, Gold Coast sisters who bashed two tourists at Surfers Paradise received 18 months' probation and no conviction, while a series of crimes against animals, including dragging horses behind cars and killing family pets, have not attracted convictions. Mr Littler fought the $200 fine for fare evasion because he believed he was acting in "good faith" when he reported his go card as faulty to a transit officer on board a train on December 12, 2009.
http://www.news.com.au/national/british-man-faces-deportation-over-go-card-fare-evasion-conviction-on-brisbane-citytrain/story-e6frfkvr-1226114242547

This case also should not have happened. I live in Brisbane and I also have a Go card. The card system can have problems at times and it is obviously quite unreasonable to expell a foreign national over such a trival matter. As I stated earlier on this thread, the Department of Immigration is extremely draconian is its policies.


Thirdterm, and also anarchist23, the issue is not about race, rather it is about class. Those with means don't experience these problems. Forexample, Chinese nationals who are able to invest large sums of money, have no problems obtaining visas. Another angle is that 'skilled workers' who might help a business increase profits, are a significant part of the immigration program overseen by the department. Family immigration, such as spouse visas or reunions, are sidelined. These are policies aimed to meet the interests fo the wealthy, not the interests of ordinary folk such as Ms Park or Mr Littler.


What I am wondering is how can the 'Sir Humperies' who run these departments be held accountable for their actions? Is this a failing of the Westminster system? Do we need to replace that system?

[anarchist23]

Foxdemon.Yes.Replace the system.

[Plaro]

There is a strong wave of sentiment against immigration in the world today. This is particularly so in Europe. However, the situation in Australia is different. Consider:


- in 1900 the population was 3 million. By 1945, it was 6 million. So the population doubled in around 50 years, much through immigration.


- The population reached 20 million by 2000. So the population tripled in around 50 years, and much of it was due to immigration.


- the rate of population growth in Australia is the same as that in India. So the population has been rapidly expanding for decades, mainly due to immmigration as the birth rate is low.


So many Australians today are either immigrants or childern of immigrants. There are not so many pre WWII european Australians (the settler culture, the people who put the nation state in the history books and define the stereotype of an Australian). The social disruption to that original european colonial culture happened in the '50's through 80's. Even the 1990's One Nation party lead by Pauline Handson, was mainly composed of British immigrants. Handson herself was born in England.


When we look at these facts, it becomes clear Australia is, for better or worse, more of an immigrant country than is the USA. It would be difficult for further immigration to disrupt the current society. Having said that, water is the limited factor. Australia can't keep up a high immigration economy forever.

Fox, I'm going to have to ask you to provide some proof of this. It is hard to believe what you are saying, that the original British settlers are not really all that presentable in Australia today.

Also, I'm curious as to how you do not see, that the current immigration policy of bringing people from all over the world of different culture and ethnicity to live in one place, does not strike you right away as a bat shit crazy idea. Although I do not blame you for not listening to your common sense, since a lot of people are misguided by the government these days, who claim it is the most benevolent idea that has befallen upon mankind.

[foxdemon]

Fox, I'm going to have to ask you to provide some proof of this. It is hard to believe what you are saying, that the original British settlers are not really all that presentable in Australia today.

Also, I'm curious as to how you do not see, that the current immigration policy of bringing people from all over the world of different culture and ethnicity to live in one place, does not strike you right away as a bat shit crazy idea. Although I do not blame you for not listening to your common sense, since a lot of people are misguided by the government these days, who claim it is the most benevolent idea that has befallen upon mankind.

Here are some links to wiki articles.

Australians


Far more Australians are descended from assisted immigrants than from convicts, the majority were British and Irish.[51] About 20% of Australians are descendants of convicts.

[..]


Almost one Australian in four was born elsewhere. In 1981, around 50 percent of immigrants were from Europe, and 2.7 percent were from Asia.[68] In 1998 about 40 percent of all immigrants to Australia had been born in Asia.[69] People from the United Kingdom remain the largest group amongst those born aboard.[70] In 2001 were 51 percent from Europe, 29 percent from Asia, 11 percent from Oceania, and 4 percent came from the Americas.


[..]

In 1996, over 8 million Australians had at least three ancestries, and over 3 million had four or more.[72] 28 percent of the Australian population reported mixed or multiple ancestries in the 2006 census.

Other wiki pages:

Immigration history of Australia

Demographics of Australia


An artical about the future:

Squeeze is on as Australia's populations boom

Almost 10 million migrants over the next 50 years will swell Australia's population to more than 40 million by 2060 and more than 50 million by 2100, under dramatically higher new projections by the Bureau of Statistics.

The projections, the first for five years, envisage tens of millions more people crowding into Australia's capital cities over the next 50 years, overwhelmingly due to migration.

[...]

Official stats

[GandalfTheGrey]

I'm guessing the percentage of Australia's population that have British and Irish ancestry is probably not much more than 50% - and quite possibly less.

Plaro:

Also, I'm curious as to how you do not see, that the current immigration policy of bringing people from all over the world of different culture and ethnicity to live in one place, does not strike you right away as a bat shit crazy idea.

It is not a "current" immigration policy. Australia has been inviting immigrants from different ethnicities and cultures since the very beginning - despite the WAP. immigrants from places like Turkey, Syria, Armenia, Russia, Eastern Europe were accepted - all with different cultures, but with one commonality - the colour of their skin.

Also, this "bat shit crazy idea" of ours doesn't seem to have affected our prosperity and stability.

[Swagman]

I'm guessing the percentage of Australia's population that have British and Irish ancestry is probably not much more than 50% - and quite possibly less.

Your guessing wrong.

The 2010 estimate was 74%

[foxdemon]

^

But how many of those Anglo-Saxon and Irish can trace their heritage to pre WW2 Austalia? I better the number is 50% or less. If we ask which can trace their heritage back to pre WW2 with both parents, the number will be much smaller. Those Anglos that came out after WW2 aren't in anyway different from those of other ethnic backgorunds, surely. That is, they aren't any more Australian than non Anglo post war migrants, are they?

What of dominace of ethnic groups? It might be that those old Anglo-Saxon families dominate the halls of power. People like Downer 'the fat so' would fit that catagory.