What's in Australia for

the non-white migrant

Australia’s rapid demographic and economic growth and extensive socio cultural changes since the 1950 s have in no small measure been due to immigration, promoted and consider ably assisted by the government.

About one in seven of the present population is foreign-born.

One of the pillars of federation in 1901, the White Australia policy has been modified in recent years and “Australia for the White Man” has become politically unacceptable rhe toric. Tens of thousands of Asians and other non-Europeans, including Chinese and ‘mixed race’ persons from Papua New Guinea, have settled in Australia each year during the last decade or so. Any non-European or Part-European can now become an Australian citizen after the same waiting period (three years) that applies to any other resident.

The Immigration Reform Group (IRG), formed by academics and other private citizens, which presents this book, Australia and the Non white Migrant (K. Rivett), wants to do away with what remains of the White Australia policy. It accepts that immigration must not be allowed to create racial friction or deprive developing nations of skills in short supply, but stresses that neither caveat is a valid argument against planned settling of non- Europeans, including some from de veloping nations. Problems of inte

grating immigrants would be mini mised if they were explained to prospective settlers and Australians alike.

Among the IRG proposals are that the intake of non-Europeans and part- Europeans should rise to about 20,000 a year; that the present occupational categories of non-Europeans eligible to immigrate be extended; and that political refugees have a strong claim to enter. IRG believes that Australia’s special links with the Pacific Islands warrant an immediate move to let in some migrants from that region, with a view to training and settlement.

In other words, some Pacific Islanders ought to be admitted even though they may not possess the occupational skills normally required of immi grants.

Anyone migrating to Australia from a developing country is likely to benefit economically. For the de veloping country, emigration of un skilled persons, particularly of those from overpopulated areas, is usually advantageous, but the opposite may be the case when skilled people leave.

In 1972 E. G. Whitlam, now Aus tralia’s Prime Minister, suggested that before the decade was out Aus tralia was likely to have agreements with Papua New Guinea, Fiji and other Pacific nations under which as many of their citizens could live in Australia as there were Australians living in those countries.

Fiji’s Prime Minister, Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara, has spoken in a similar vein and Sir Maori Kiki, Papua New Guinea’s Foreign Minister, who, believing that his country needs a larger population, is against emigra tion, also wants formalised agree ments. In Sir Maori’s case, it is a matter of controlling immigration, to prevent foreigners taking jobs where nationals are available.

A problem common to all Pacific countries with tertiary institutions of a standard comparable with those of, say, such institutions in Australia and New Zealand, is “brain drain”, that is, any move by their graduates to seek jobs in other countries. Wes terners who claim that an individual should be free to work anywhere in the world forget that it costs about 530,000 to turn out a BA, and more in the caes of, say, a doctor of medicine.

There can be no doubt that nations like Papua New Guinea must consider

all the effects on their economy and society of skilled or unskilled emigra tion, and it just does not seem practic able for them to allow individuals free choice where emigration is con cerned.

In this book, IRG does not put forward any judgment concerning the suitability as immigrants of people, taking them as groups, from any one country. Any such judgment would probably cause great controversy and earn accusations of racism and the like. Nevertheless, I would have liked to find some details, no matter how imprecise, of the manner in which the intake of Pacific Islanders, “war ranted by Australia’s special links”, ought to be implemented as part of the total immigration scheme. It is my guess that, like the vast majority of my fellow-Australians, the mem bers of IRG know almost nothing of the Pacific and its current prob lems, and that they are just as ignorant about the people who live in the Islands.

New Zealand’s experience has shown that Western Samoans and Tongans do not take long to become integrated, and there is no reason to believe that the same would not be the case in Australia.

Australian business interests have done very well in the Pacific during the last century or more, and it is therefore not merely on humanitarian grounds that people from overpopu lated islands—and Gilbertese and Fuvalu (Ellice) Islanders immediately :ome to mind—ought to be invited to settle ahead of other unskilled non-Europeans. In any case, the term “unskilled” denotes no more than temporary labour characteris tics, and the past performance of Islanders in the shipping industry, For instance, points to their adapt ability being at least as good as that )f people from the Near East, Asia ar developing European countries, Vl any of them do, moreover, have a working knowledge of the English anguage.

If nothing else, this book is to be welcomed because IRG has already uade a valuable contribution to the lemise of racism and the building of i harmonious multi-racial society in Australia. It would have been en lanced by much more detail in the proposals, especially where Pacific slanders are, or could be, affected. —Harry Jackman.

(Australia And The Non-White

MIGRANT, by K. Rivett. Published by Melbourne University Press, Carlton, 1975.

H 5.00.) • All book prices given, unless ffherwise stated, are in Australian urrency.