“Call to respect migrant rights”, The Age, 21/3. If there is one topic that arouses my ire these days, it is being lectured to by the pro-immigration/multiculturalism lobby. Their self-righteous moralizing ignores the fact that as job opportunities decline, increased competition for those which remain will incite resentment, no matter how politically-incorrect this may be, and it is thus irresponsible for the Government to keep increasing immigration numbers. Australia cannot continue to import huge numbers of people without serious damage to the environment and social structure. (I sent a modified version of that view to the Letters section, so I’ll see if it gets published.)
On the eve of Harmony Day, Laurie Ferguson also attacked employers who discriminate against new migrants because they lack local work experience. “Some employers think that someone who worked in an Australian factory for five weeks five years ago is a better guarantee than someone who has worked for 15 years in another country,” Mr. Ferguson said. “That’s just an incredible attitude and I hope it’s changing.”
Possibly because the first person is a citizen who speaks English and the second isn’t/doesn’t? That would be a reasonable “discrimination” in my view.
A similar article from earlier this week is “Welcome no longer”, The Age, 17/3.
The economic argument for maintaining a high level of immigration is that immigrants bring assets, and skills and education that improve the quality of the labour force. More migrants also help meet employer demand for skilled labour.
Maybe the Government should provide funded training programs for its own unemployed citizens instead? (I’d be one of them willing to take up such training!)
An example of the extremes invoked by such resentment were the riots in South Africa in May 2008 last year against the influx of refugees from Zimbabwe into already-impoverished communities. One cause given was “relative deprivation, specifically intense competition for jobs, commodities and housing”. (Wikipedia article) Those lecturing about “racism” totally missed the point.
“Booms in migrants and babies”, The Age, 19/3. Dismaying news! Australia’s population has jumped to 21.5 million, fuelled by the highest migration boom in almost 40 years, and population growth was the highest it had been since 1970. Victoria’s population is now 5 340 000, so no wonder the roads and public transport are not coping.
“Global crisis ‘to strike by 2030’ ”, BBC News, 19/3.
Growing world population will cause a “perfect storm” of food, energy and water shortages by 2030, the UK government chief scientist has warned. By 2030 the demand for resources will create a crisis with dire consequences, Prof. John Beddington said. Demand for food and energy will jump 50% by 2030 and for fresh water by 30%, as the population tops 8.3 billion, he told a conference in London.
Predictably, not a mention of reducing population growth, but only somehow accommodating the surplus numbers.
This letter (21/3) concerning IVF really aggravated me also as it is a blatant example of entitlement whinging:
Help to start family
I am writing to express my concern and dismay at the potential changes to means-testing of the Medicare safety net, which will affect IVF funding.
My husband and I are IVF patients trying to conceive our first child. We did not choose to take this path. No one chooses IVF, it is not a luxury, it is a need – a need to have a family.
There are two parts to our concern for all those who require IVF treatment.
Patients should not be required to undergo police checks to be eligible for IVF treatment and, second, means testing the safety net will put IVF out of reach for many people. This will result in only the rich being able to afford IVF.
– Lisa Campbell, Cranbourne West
I sent off a reply as a letter, also:
Lisa Campbell (“Help to start family”, The Age Letters, 21/3) needs to learn the distinction between needs and wants (hers is the latter). Infertility is not a disfiguring, painful or life-threatening condition. Before IVF was invented, people just had to deal with infertility and find other means of fulfilment. Taxpayers’ money should not be used to bring more people into an already-overpopulated world who would not otherwise be here – there are far more urgent social programs that need funding.
If it’s published, I wonder if I will get an irate phone call from her?
(I have a bit of PMT, so I am even more snippy and impatient than usual!)
