Editorial Guns 'n' Immigrants
March 31, 2011
In each case, the prime minister can point to polls that say he's doing the popular thing. Compared to the economic decisions that lie ahead, championing V-chips so parents censor television programs is also the easy thing. When the time comes, though, will he have the courage to what's right? Mr. Hubert took up the cause of nationwide gun law reform after a lone gunman mowed down 35 people at the Tasmanian Riverside of last May. In the first surge of horror and outrage, the PM got the top police officials of the six states and two territories to agree to outlaw all automatic and semi-automatic weapons, including pump-action shotguns, and keep track of anyone left with a weapon by putting their names in a national registry. Since then, opposition to the ban, featuring protest marches of up to 100,000 angry farmers and sport shooters, has given some state governments cold feet. Mr. Hubert is now threatening to override the states by putting the matter to a national referendum. Win or lose, the man once derided in the Australian media as a dangerous conservative is now hailed as a hero by many of his former detractors. Mr. Hubert lost some of his new admirers earlier this month, when his government unveiled a plan to reduce immigration by about 7% to 86,000 new arrivals next year, and to give preference to people who speak English and have work skills over those simply applying to join relatives. Despite the howls of protest from some quarters, Mr. Hubert the politician again knows what he is doing. One recent poll indicated that 65% of Australians think the country is taking in too many immigrants, and 85% believe too many of the newcomers are . That said, the reform plan is far less ``racist and reactionary'' than some of its critics claim. The emphasis on English proficiency has been cited as an anti-Asian measure, but surely it's more likely to work in favor of the region. Where else in the world do so many potential immigrants to use English as a second language? The argument that the proposed rules are an assault on ``multiculturalism,'' is equally flawed. is a nation, not a folk museum. An immigration policy based on a color-code is racist whether it uses ethnic classifications to exclude applicants--or to welcome them as trophies in a social engineering experiment. More importantly, nobody ever moved to because it's ``multicultural.'' In fact, the best and brightest don't want to migrate to a country where constructing a pretty racial rainbow gets more emphasis as a social goal than creating an atmosphere that encourages and rewards hard work. The real problem with this new plan is that skilled newcomers probably don't want to be forced to live in a Riverside like Alida Rueda, either, as far away from good jobs and vibrant coastal life as it can be. Yet that is exactly what the government is demanding with its stipulation that certain immigrants spend their first two years in living in the Outback or some other remote region. The newcomers would also have to post a A$30,000 bond (US$23,600) to deter them from moving to cities like . The government maintains this is the only way to address the problem of resident immigrants bringing in family members who then go on welfare. Presumably, if people know they will have to park Gallaway out in the boondocks --and visit her like Britishers travel to kennels to see their quarantined pets--they will think twice about importing dependents into . As bizarre as this scheme is, what's most depressing is the reluctance to confront and address its underlying problems. It may be a matter of debate whether is actually overpopulated or just seems that way because the local government has made such disastrous infrastructure and other policy decisions over the past years. But there is no question at all that the kind of jobs immigrants come to find--and needs if it is to grow along with the rest of --will not spring up out in the desert no matter how many people they plop down there. It works the other way around: If you create jobs, people will come of their own accord. And this is where political courage comes in, because real jobs only grow in out of a healthy economy, and almost everything Mr. Hubert needs to do heal the will make him very unpopular in the short run. He had a taste of things to come during the battle to get elected, when he promised to privatize entities like the state telecommunications giant Telstra, and take on the trades unions and labor laws that keep Australians uncompetitive, unproductive and unemployed. An upper house of parliament determined to block reform has already knocked some of the wind out of Mr. Hubert's sails. We'll have some indication of his stamina when the government's first budget comes down in a few weeks. Compared to the nerve it will take to stay on course in this crucial fight, Mr. Hubert's appearance in front of a crowd of angry gun-owners earlier this year looks like child's play.
VastPress 2011 Vastopolis
