Australia's immigration policies have long been a topic of debate, and a recent report suggests a novel approach to managing the country's population. The report proposes setting immigration targets to achieve a 'stable temporary population', addressing the concerns of public services and housing strain caused by a growing number of non-permanent residents. This shift in focus from net overseas migration to the 'scale of temporariness' is a crucial step in understanding and managing Australia's immigration landscape.
The report highlights a concerning trend: the proportion of temporary migrants in Australia's population has more than doubled in the past 15 years, from 2.7% in 2010 to over 6%. This rapid increase has led to a preoccupation with net overseas migration figures, which, according to Alan Gamlen and Peter McDonald, has distracted from a more critical discussion on the 'scale of temporariness'. The failure to manage the stock of temporary migrants has contributed to social cohesion issues and intense pressures on infrastructure and housing.
The authors argue that Australia should learn from Canada's recent migration reset, which aimed to lower the share of temporary migrants from 7.6% to 5% of the population. By setting a cap on temporary arrivals, Canada's population is now shrinking for the first time since the 1940s, and experts claim this policy has reduced pressure on housing costs. However, Gamlen warns against a knee-jerk reaction, emphasizing that Canada's approach had flaws. The 5% target was arbitrary, and the rapid reduction caused economic harm.
Instead, Gamlen and McDonald propose a set number of temporary migrants and a dynamic approach to managing long-term population growth. They suggest linking the number of temporary visa holders accepted into the permanent program to Australia's infrastructure capacity. This approach aims to prevent the 'metastasised population of guest workers' and their unintended consequences. The goal is a stable temporary population, not a simple reduction in migration.
The report challenges the notion that net overseas migration figures are the primary concern. Instead, it emphasizes the need to govern 'temporariness' effectively. The question, according to Gamlen, is not about the politically attractive net migration number but about the scale of temporariness Australia can sustain. This perspective shifts the focus from a numerical target to a more nuanced understanding of population management, one that considers the social, economic, and environmental implications of immigration.
