At the Senate budget hearing on Tuesday, the issue of immigration was brought up for discussion again, because data showed that the number of skilled immigrants and family immigrants was far below the annual limit of 190,000.

An Interior Ministry official said at the Senate budget hearing that the number of immigrants in Australia is further declining and is far from reaching the predetermined annual limit.

Home Affairs Secretary Michael Pezzullo confirmed that Australia’s immigration intake is well below the fiscal year cap because the government has adopted a new security database and conducted stricter visa checks.

Michael Pezzullo said that visa applications for skilled immigrants, families and children are more complicated than in the past, partly because the visa processing process is more detailed and strict.

"When we connect the previously independent immigration risk system with the international intelligence database, all immigration information and data will be clearly displayed, making it easier for us to discover important issues that must be resolved."

Mr. Michael Pezzullo said that for security and sensitive reasons, he would not disclose the details of this database, only to mention that it is a "real-time, intelligence-related data inspection system."

"Once there are some unusual points in the applicant's information or past records, the system will warn, the examiner will spend more time reviewing and solving this problem, and the corresponding trial time will increase." Mr. Pezzullo Said.

Secretary of the department ofhome affairs, Michael Pezzullo

This more stringent plan started in the 2014-2015 fiscal year and will be further refined in the 2015-2016 fiscal year.

截至4月30日,2017-2018年度接纳的移民人数为138,086人,而2016-2017年则为183,608人。这意味着,到财政年度结束时,这个财政年度的移民数量将Approximately 20,000 less than the annual cap

Among the immigrants in 2017-2018, there were 91302 skilled immigrants, 44193 family visas, and 2591 children.

Regarding the issue of immigration quotas, there have been two voices within the Australian government. One supports the reduction of immigration quotas, and the other believes that immigration brings economic and employment development to Australia and the existing immigration policy should be maintained.

The editor compiled some of the views and expositions of the two opposing important figures, and discussed with you what the future immigration policy will be.

First of all, it is the party headed by Pauline Hanson who called for a reduction in immigration quotas.

Representative:

  • Founder and leader of the One Nation Party, Queensland Senator Pauline Hanson
  • Secretary of the Interior Ministry Michael Pezzullo
Michael Pezzullo

Secretary of the Ministry of the Interior

At the Senate budget hearing on Tuesday, Mr. Michael Pezzullo mentioned that more than 50% of Australia’s population growth is driven by immigration.

"It makes people feel strange that the country's population growth is affected by immigration, but your employment growth is not exactly that," Michael Pezzullo told the senator.

"It is illogical to think (the effects of immigration) operate in different directions."

At the same time, according to the Australian Associated Press report last month, Mr. Michael Pezzullo had provided the Minister of the Interior Peter Dutton with an alternative document to reduce the upper limit of the immigration quota, hoping that the Federal Cabinet would consider reducing the annual immigration quota limit of 2, but in the end this proposal did not Can pass.

Pauline Hanson

Founder and leader of the One Nation Party

Senator of Queensland

One Nation Party leader Pauline Hanson said that she refused to support the Tan Bao government’s business tax cuts, partly because the Tan Bao government has not resolved Australia’s high immigration issues.

“The large number of immigrants is what ruined the lives of local Australians. The city cannot accept more immigrants,” she said. "(Immigration issues) must be resolved."

On the other hand, it is the side that affirms that immigration brings economic and employment growth.

Representative:

  • Gladys Berejiklian, Prime Minister of NSW and Leader of the Liberal Party
  • Assistant Secretary Jason Russo, Ministry of the Interior

The Senate committee was informed that immigration has been a key driver of the creation of 100 million jobs in Australia over the past five years.

At a hearing in Canberra on Tuesday, Mr. Russo told the Senate that “data shows that more than 100% of the 50 million new jobs created in Australia in the past five years were created by immigrants.”

A recent joint study by the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of the Interior found that immigrants accounted for two-thirds of the net jobs created in the past five years, and the proportion of full-time employment was even more significant.

At the same time, the joint report found that immigrants did not replace Australian workers.

Jason russo

Assistant Secretary of the Ministry of the Interior

"In fact, this study found that there is no evidence that people born in Australia were harmed by immigration," Mr. Jason Russo said.

"Also, according to statistics, people born in Australia have a greater competitive advantage." A large part of the reason may be because local employers usually view immigrants as a supplement to Australia's local labor force.

"Some immigrants do not work or have limited working rights (for example, long-term tourists, students and holiday workers), but still consume goods and services, so they will increase employment opportunities."

On the 3rd of this month, Gladys Berejiklian, the current prime minister and leader of the Liberal Party of NSW, accepted an interview with the Sydney Morning Herald.

During the interview, Prime Minister Gladys Berejiklian statedAustralia should support immigration policy, And called on states to conduct national discussions on how to deal with the increasing pressure on infrastructure and local services.

Prime Minister Gladys Berejiklian is herself the daughter of Armenian immigrants. She mentioned that "professional ethics, skills, talents and energy from all over the world" will be the future advantage of New South Wales.

Prime Minister Gladys Berejiklian delivered an annual speech at the Sydney Institute dinner on the evening of May 5, and drew on her experience as an immigrant to Australia in the 3s, and gave her own views on the recent reappearance of immigration issues.

Some Federal Liberal Party members have called for a reduction in the share of immigrants to ease the pressure on excessive infrastructure and services. But Ms. Berejiklian does not support their views.

Gladys Berejiklian

Current Prime Minister of NSW

Liberal Party Leader

“In Australia, I believe that our existing immigration policy is correct-and we cannot ignore the reality that the community has an increasing demand for local services and infrastructure,” Ms. Berejiklian said in her speech.

"At the same time, if we want to continue the country’s prosperity, we must not underestimate the benefits of the continuous wave of immigration to our country."

Ms. Berejiklian said that instead of restricting immigration, increasing investment in infrastructure construction and community services is the advisable way, and said that New South Wales needs to "proactively prepare" in the next few years.

Ms. Berejiklian said in her speech: “Therefore, I suggest that next year’s Australian government’s entire city council meeting should focus on immigration and planning issues.”

There have always been discussions about immigration within the Australian government, and there is no conclusion on which is right and wrong.

However, the editor said that the government wants immigrants to bring economic development and employment opportunities while not increasing the population too much or affecting the employment of locals at all. This is simply a new topic.

While enjoying the benefits of immigration to the country, the government should also actively respond to the new problems brought about by immigration, balance China-China relations, and achieve mutual benefit and win-win results. Isn't it better than a one-size-fits-all immigration quota?

Of course, this is easy to say, but there are still too many problems to be overcome by the government.

What do you think? Write your thoughts in the comments and discuss it together!