Dutton Fails To Lead.

LACK OF CLARITY ON THE RIGHT ISSUES

Peter Dutton has succeeded in softening his hawkish image, but he has made some peculiar campaign policy choices.

After three years of out-of-control immigration, the Liberals are going to the polls with a wishy-washy response to it and a policy of introducing nuclear energy.

Thanks to the Albanese government, immigration got ‘out of control’ after its 2022 Jobs and Skills Summit where Home Affairs Minister, Claire O’Neil declared, “We’re in a global war for talent!” The spike in numbers has made immigration a major issue, but the legacy media is playing it right down. Pro-diversity and multiculturalism organisations such as the Scanlon Institute, put out surveys that water down results by blurring the line between voters and non-voters. There are many people on temporary visas in Australia. But it’s worse than you think. In a recent Adelaide council election, a candidate who came to Australia as an international student, was caught vote-rigging with foreigners on student visas who are – incredibly – allowed to vote in local elections. The election was declared void (The Noticer).

Both parties are aware of the level of public outrage about immigration levels, so they’ve both been talking about reductions. But immigration is falling anyway as the post-COVID spike stabilizes back to the 21st century ‘new normal’ high of around 250,000 NOM (net overseas migration) per year. Treasury’s Centre for Population projects a NOM (net overseas migration) of about 230,000 all the way out o 2036 (CfP). That a million extra people every 4 years. The mainstream news has been highlighting the fall in numbers.

Not too long ago, Peter Dutton promised his government would reduce the intake to about 160,000. He has backtracked on that figure and the slogan now is ‘balancing immigration’ by a ‘25% reduction’. It is an estimate that cannot be anchored to any definitive outcome and in any case immigration will probably fall by that much following the extraordinary spike last year.

It might have been difficult for Dutton to soften his image and at the same time go hard against immigration after the reputation he developed as Minister for Immigration and Border Protection under PM Tony Abbott. On the other hand, it was an opportunity to make a clear distinction between policy and personality. He is skilled at measured responses under pressure in interviews. He never seems to lose his cool and always attempts to be reasonable. He’s had plenty of time in opposition to change public perception and he could have used it to argue persuasively for low immigration out of compassion for the whole range of ill effects its causes; homelessness, mortgage stress and environmental damage to name a few.

If immigration is pivotal to this federal election, as it most certainly is, Peter Dutton looks like letting it slip through his fingers, as the polls indicates.

Public opinion polls show support for nuclear power has grown, but sits between 45–60%. This is less than support for lowing immigration, which sits at about 60–80%. Nuclear is a fairly new and less urgent topic that would have been better introduced after winning the election. Injecting it into this election has muddied the waters. If it is an indication of conviction and their position on immigration is also one of conviction, it demonstrates how low immigration is on the Liberals’ agenda. Given it’s an obvious vote-winner, it’s strategically disastrous for them. The fact that Tony Abbott recently declared the Liberal Party the ‘party of migration’, and that Dutton openly espouses multiculturalism, clearly indicates which side they are on.

By doing so, the Liberal Party is leaving the Australian public with little choice but to go elsewhere. (The Noticer.)

Migration ‘Agreements’

One has to ask, how could the government ‘lose control’ of immigration in the first place? We stopped the boats, right? The borders aren’t porous.

One way they’ve done it – without public approval – is to sign up to trade deals such as the uncapped ‘Migration and Mobility Partnership Agreement’ with India. An ‘agreement’ that allows as many Indians into the country as they like, and that as many Australians can go to India, who wish to. No, it’s not reciprocal – it’s one-sided. Little wonder respectable organizations such as Sustainable Population Australia are calling it out.

Where To From Here?

The choices for the unrepresented at this election are a swathe of minor parties that unapologetically advocate lower immigration. I’ve listed them here.

The dog’s breakfast of issues at this election is typical in Australia because there is no clear path for voters to take their grievances to parliament. Unfortunately, our system doesn’t allow for citizen-initiated plebiscites, which would help separate important issues out and focus attention on the details. I’ve explained why we should legislate for citizen-initiated plebiscites that are binding on the government here.